Election 2016

Democratic Primary Debate: Do Democrats Want an Impossible Revolution or More of the Same?

|

The debate within the Democratic primary can be boiled down to this: Bernie Sanders is calling for a revolution. Hillary Clinton is defending the current regime.

That debate, long lurking below the surface in the Democratic contest, was displayed more clearly than ever in tonight's primary debate, which feature Clinton and Sanders repeatedly clashing over whether to build on President Obama's legacy or to cast it aside in favor of more radical change.

This divide was particularly apparent in the back-and-forths over health care and financial reform. The Sanders and Clinton camps have been arguing all week over the merits of single-payer health care, with Sanders making the case that only a single payer system can truly provide the sort of guaranteed universal coverage that Democrats have long promised, and Clinton arguing that even attempting a single-payer system would jeopardize all of the gains that Democrats have made with Obamacare.

Asked about the squabble, Clinton said that with Obamacare, "we finally have a path to universal health care…I do not to want see the Republicans repeal it, and I don't to want see us start over again with a contentious debate. I want us to defend and build on the Affordable Care Act and improve it."

Sanders responded by accusing her of ducking the question—tonight, and, implicitly, throughout the week. "What a Medicare-for-all program"—his shorthand for single-payer—"does is finally provide in this country health care for every man, woman and child as a right." Throughout the night, Sanders rejected Clinton's incrementalism in favor of pursuing goals that were both more immediate and more grandiose.

The same divide was apparent on the subject of financial reform, where Clinton defended the Dodd-Frank regulatory overhaul signed under president Obama, and hit Sanders for not being more supportive of the current administration.

"Where we disagree," she said, "is the comments that Senator Sanders has made that don't just affect me, I can take that, but he's criticized President Obama for taking donations from Wall Street, and President Obama has led our country out of the great recession. Senator Sanders called him weak, disappointing….Now, I personally believe that President Obama's work to push through the Dodd- Frank… [LAUGHTER] The Dodd-Frank bill and then to sign it was one of the most important regulatory schemes we've had since the 1930s. So I'm going to defend Dodd- Frank and I'm going to defend President Obama for taking on Wall Street, taking on the financial industry and getting results."

I'm going to defend President Obama. Those were not only the most important words in Clinton's answer on the topic of financial reform, but the most important and telling words she uttered at any point during the debate. Clinton's entire argument for her presidency in the primary is that she will defend President Obama, and build upon his legislative and political victories. She is explicitly the candidate of the status quo.

And Sanders is, just as explicitly, the candidate of something bigger, something more dramatic, something that goes far beyond what he views as the timidity and smallness of the current administration—and, arguably, of American politics.

"This campaign is about a political revolution to not only elect a president but to transform this country," Sanders said early in tonight's debate. The word "revolution" came up several times during tonight's event, and it is key to his pitch to Democratic voters who are frustrated, disappointed, and even angry about the state of affairs at the end of the Obama presidency. He is promising something wildly different, in contrast to Clinton's promise of more of the same.

The biggest problem for Clinton is that, as a glimpse as the polls, which show Sanders running close to or ahead of Clinton in both Iowa and New Hampshire, indicates, many Democratic voters clearly long for the revolution that Sanders promises. The biggest problem for Sanders is that the revolution is easier imagined than accomplished. Asked about the failure of single-payer health care in his home state of Vermont due to the burdensomely high tax increases that would have been necessary, Sanders essentially dodged the question, but effectively admitted that his plan would require higher taxes on most everyone, including the middle class. 

And that, in some sense, is the essence of the debate within the Democratic party primary—whether to throw in with am expensive, vague fantasy that has no real chance of success, or whether to accept a thoroughly disappointing status quo.

Martin O'Malley was also at tonight's debate, and he frequently reminded people of his time as governor of Maryland.

NEXT: Bernie Sanders Calls for "Automatic" Federal Investigations of Deaths in Police Custody

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Even if you believe the provision of certain services to be a right, why does it follow that it is the government that must provide that service?

    1. Because government is the only agency with enough power to *enslave* the people that will provide you with those service to which you have a ‘right’.

      I can choose to not work for a private service provider and if enough people do so then a citizen can not get the services that are his ‘right’. But government can give me the choice between providing that service and eating a bullet and make it stick.

      1. Exactly! Government is seen as providing security to a program as people aren’t going to stop paying taxes en masse.

      2. More bullets! Because no child should go hungry.

        -Sanders 2016

        1. Oops my bad I forgot I am a bourgeoisie pig not a communist radical. Let them eat deodorant.

          1. Plus 2 for you, sir!

        2. Few deodorant brands! Because no child should go hungry.

          -Sanders 2016

        3. Actually, it would be more like this:

          Reporter: “Mr. Sanders, you called for trade restrictions with China to protect American jobs. What about all those poor Chinese that rely on those factory jobs that provide cheap goods for poor Americans?”

          Sanders: “Let them eat bobble-heads.”

    2. The reasoning: If it’s a right, then it would be immoral to have profit involved, so no business would do it.

    3. Ultimately, if it is a right, then someone else is obligated to fulfill it, and the rights-holder is legally permitted to demand performance from that party. So the law and coercion would be involved one way or another.

  2. Democratic Primary Debate: Do Democrats Want an Impossible Revolution or More of the Same?

    More of the same.

    Because there’s no real difference between the two under the rhetoric. Get Sanders into office and he, like Obama before him, will suddenly find that Gitmo can’t be closed, that we can’t pull out of the quagmire dujour, and *this* intervention is super-important will go swimmingly unlike all the ones before.

    In between that he will use the unilateral authority Obama (and Bush) usurped to legislate from the Oval Office and work with Congress to increase the scope and power of American Government.

    Even in his rhetoric there is precious little difference – its all about how he will make things better if you give him more power.

    1. No no –

      *this* time it will be totally different. Because socialism. And Vermont.

      1. Fear not Comrades, THIS time it will be run by our TOP. MEN.

        1. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

          Open This Link For more Information………

          ??????? http://www.WorkPost30.Com

          1. I find the spambot more credible than Bernie.

            1. Awhile ago there was an internet scandal when Google mistook Bernie’s campaign ads for a scam. Google wasn’t wrong.

      2. Exactly. This time things will be different. It totes works in Vermont..

  3. Would someone *kindly* explain what “taxing Wall Street speculation” means?

    1. ‘Roll the die Bernie, let’s see what the tax rate on Wall Street ‘fat cats’ will be today!’

      1. If it’s their “fair share” he’s after, shouldn’t Bernie spin the big wheel like at the county fair?

        1. Easier to hide the numbers if they don’t like what rolls up.

          1. That’s why he’s going to install a big Dungeon Master screen on his desk in the Oval Office.

    2. It means “here’s some psychobabble to make my base drool”

      Kinda a low hurdle.

    3. It ostensibly refers to taxing these sorts of markets.

      Markets like this provide an economic benefit by giving humans a predictive idea of what the future for a given good might be. Taxing these trades would probably give us a lot less foresight.

      1. Also, if you think about it, running speculate markets into the ground would push the economy closer towards one of a centrally planned style.

        1. *speculative

          Fuck you lack of edit function.

          1. I wonder if that is because there’s an administrative attitude of “check your work before you turn it in, students!”
            But I love that they don’t get stupid about profanity! Go Reason!

        2. You know what else is funny? Socialists love a certain kind of speculation: government programs. I mean, they praise the supposed benefit of the government being able to “experiment” with our tax dollars. How often do you hear “but this investment will provide everyone with generous returns!” or some other bogus claim?

          1. +1 Bedford-Stuyvestant – Etc, etc, etc

        3. Feature not bug, from their perspective.

      2. Speculation is the practice of engaging in risky financial transactions

        So, am I to understand that Bernie would in effect charge a fee to engage in risky behavior? Sheesh, why not tax skiing, say, or overeating — risky behaviors that many more people engage in?

        1. Funnily enough – pretty much *every* financial transaction is risky to one extent or another. Paying my electric bill is speculating that the electric company will not collapse in a couple of days and I could get out of having to pay.

          1. Right. But socialists don’t like risk?or as Mises put it:

            “The avowed aim of all utopian movements is to put an end to history and to establish a final and permanent calm.”

            1. Which means a final and permanent poverty; there can be no way that stasis produces other than that.

              1. 23 brands of deodorant are 22 brands too many

                1. In Soviet America, deodorant uses you!

                2. “23 brands of deodorant are 22 brands too many”

                  23 brands of deodorant are 23 brands too many. /ecowarrior

            2. “The avowed aim of all utopian movements is to put an end to history and to establish a final and permanent calm.”

              Socialists produce this, it is called “death”.

              1. Comply or die. Go ahead – your choice

                1. If you don’t choose compliance, it’s because you’re a racist homophobe cisgendered shitlord anyway.

        2. So, am I to understand that Bernie would in effect charge a fee to engage in risky behavior?

          Yeah, risky investment behavior anyhow. The natural consequence of this would be an even more rigged and stagnant system where only the big players will be making bets, and only on relatively certain outcomes.

          1. That’s because Sanders is a central planner in the mold of Tugwell.

          2. and this is because, in their perfect world, they see themselves as being closely allied with the big players and thus able to share in their profit from the rigged system. Unfortunately for them and everybody else only a very few people end up closely allied enough to make any difference in their lives and risk is about all we do get to share.

        3. Sheesh, why not tax skiing, say, or overeating

          Just wait until Bloomberg enters the race.

          1. Chris Christie alone could be used to pay for the single payer system!

            (I also considered saying, “he’d put a big dent in the national debt”, but that seemed a bit too much)

            1. If launched from a large enough catapult he could put a dent in just about anything.

            2. Indeed, The Great Grumpy Wampa’s corpulence could feed many starving children!

    4. Well, he used “Wall Street,” “speculation,” and “taxing” in a presumably complete sentence. Who cares about the details?

      1. ‘Cause, so far, he’s been too busy to get to that?

        1. The above was supposed to be under the comment from Rich @ 12:14 AM

          1. Still works, I think.

    5. It means continuing to prop them up with endless bailouts, while simultaneously demanding they “pay their fair share.” In other words, it’s meaningless doublespeak.

    6. Can someone with artistic ability please draw a cartoon with Sanders dressed as a knight, jousting at a calculator?

      1. “how much did it take to teach a calculator to joust?”

        “not as much as you’d think.”

  4. I’m a little concerned, because my poop has been a bright, solid green for a month now. Solid, not diarrhea, but Crayola green. I mean when I wipe, it looks like grass stains on the toilet paper. I’m going to have to speak to a doctor about this.

    The above paragraph contains more information of substance than the entire democratic

    1. huh, cut off the last word. That sentence ended with the word, “debate”, in scare-quotes, because it was really more of a love-fest of people largely agreeing with eachother.

    2. Green stool often indicates that food has passed through the intestines faster than normal (called decreased bowel transit time), before it could be changed from green to brown.

      Conditions that can cause green stool include:

      Laxative use (e.g. OTC laxatives, insoluble fiber or senna, cascara sagrada, rhubarb)
      Food poisoning
      Celiac disease
      Watery diarrhea due to Clostridium difficile (e.g. after antibiotic use)
      Medication side effects (e.g. ciprofloxacin, lexapro, nyquil, zantac)
      Ulcerative colitis
      Crohn’s disease
      Malabsorption
      Irritable bowel syndrome
      Bacterial overgrowth
      Infectious diarrhea – especially Salmonella and Giardia

      Traveler’s diarrhea
      Cancer
      Graft versus host disease
      Alcohol consumption – ethanol stimulates bowel motility

      1. Oh, and unless you’ve actually been eating crayons or drinking lots of food coloring the color is from bile.

        1. Cheap black licorice.

      2. I would add Fruity Pebbles? to that list.

        1. Yup, or any other breakfast cereal that’s brightly colored, like Trix or Fruit Loops.

          1. My friends and I – when we were about 15 years old – went through a few bottles of cheapass vodka that we mixed with several gallons of Hawaiian Punch… The next morning, my shit was bright pink.

      3. Yeah I’ve read all that, but none of it seems to fit. I had no lifestyle change at all. It just…looked like St. Patrick’s Day one morning, out of the blue. Very strange.

        At this point I do at least hope it lasts until St. Patrick’s Day, so I can be “in the spirit” and post photos of it all over the place (including here).

        1. and post photos of it all over the place (including here).

          You better.

        2. Eating lots of leafy green vegetables like spinach or collards will also cause that color.

        3. Maybe you have mutated ahead of the rest of us and are beginning to photosynthesese due to AGW?

        4. It just…looked like St. Patrick’s Day one morning, out of the blue.

          You mean out of the brown.

          1. Well, if it was blue *before* then maybe you’re getting better?

      4. What about gamma rays? They turn things green sometimes. Dr. Bruce Banner told me so.

  5. Democratic Primary Debate: Do Democrats Want an Impossible Revolution or More of the Same?

    It would seem that there is little difference between the two in that the one is not going to work any better than the other – except that one will turn us into a third world shithole a bit faster.

    1. Sadly, I’m not sure which one you mean. Sanders, probably: nationalization of health care, confiscatory tax rates, massive flight of wealth from the USA.

      But Hillary: expansion of the ACA, gender bullshit, and war-war-war!

      1. Yeah. With Her Retched Thighness in the white house I wonder if the last couple years of my military career will offer me an even better chance to earn some posthumous combat action badge.

        1. It will be an honor to die for the glory of Commander-in-chief Hildabeast, no?

      2. I meant Sanders in the sense that his proposed “revolution” would ruin the country faster.

      3. Hillary would actually get things done, so you should be more worried about her.

        If you want a glimpse of a major political party headed up by Bernie Sanders, take a look at the British Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn right now. It’s a hilarious disaster.

  6. “Where we disagree,” she said, “is the comments that Senator Sanders has made that don’t just affect me, I can take that, but he’s criticized President Obama for taking donations from Wall Street, and President Obama has led our country out of the great recession. Senator Sanders called him weak, disappointing?

    Oh heaven forbid that anyone should criticize the Light Bringer!

    1. I’m surprised that Mr Sanders hasn’t had a close encounter with a drone by now.

      1. Or the IRS…

      2. Perhaps he’s Barack’s kind of guy.

    2. i saw an obit in the paper this morning about a woman who just died at 99, so i dont have to list what she lived through. the next article over was something about hillary complaining about “the great recession”. someone who lived through both world wars and the real great depression probably didnt even notice

    3. i saw an obit in the paper this morning about a woman who just died at 99, so i dont have to list what she lived through. the next article over was something about hillary complaining about “the great recession”. someone who lived through both world wars and the real great depression probably didnt even notice

  7. In the snippet I watched (until thr threat of ralphing on the floor made me change the channel) Bernie came across as an unhinged uncle you hadn’t seen in 20 years.

    1. … and you now realize exactly why you had avoided him that long…

  8. OT: Children’s book publisher Scholastic pulls book depicting George Washington’s slaves as “happy.”

    1. I always find this sort of thing weird. Slavery’s nothing to brag about but people are people and can adjust to any situation – even to the point of actually finding things to be happy about. Not every day of a slave’s life is rape, flogging, and back-breaking labor and its patently obvious that people can live, even thrive, under threat of instant destruction.

      And happy is a relative term. I’m sure they imagine that they’d be happier as free people – doesn’t mean they can’t find some modicum of happiness while enslaved.

      1. A history professor of mine called it the taco theory, but basically if you’ve never experienced something and you don’t know what you’re missing, it essentially has no effect on your happiness. He really, really liked tacos.

      2. As a psychological/philosophical exercise, I sometimes wonder what the ranges of emotional high-to-low might have been for people living in the Nazi death camps. Taking that as about as painfully low an example of the human condition known to contemporary history ( I would cede that NORK prisons may be worse still) I still cannot believe that it would be an endless litany of totally bleak, inescapable agony. One would have to find some way to get through or you would mentally fold up at some point (which I’m sure many did).

        1. Man’s Search For Meaning by Viktor Frankl touches on this idea pretty heavy if you’re looking for a quick read.

          1. noted – Thanks!

        2. Although they were never explicitely designed to kill people like some of the more infamous Nazi concentration camps were, the daily lives of prisoners in the Soviet Gulag system were still pretty fucking miserable. Book suggestions: The Gulag Archipelago and Gulag: A History by Anne Applebaum. These two works should be required reading in highschool alongside all the Holocaust stuff.

          1. One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich would be a little more approachable for the Twitter crowd. It’s a short but brutal read.

      3. In the book “Thomas Jefferson’s Creme Brule” there are stories of slaves out hunting for turkeys in their free time which they then sold to Jefferson. Count the shockers there: 1) slaves were allowed to be armed, 2) the were not working every single moment of their lives, 3) they had personal property which they could sell. Yes, they were still owned and not free, and certainly a system that I would not like to live under, but this is rather different from the common picture that we have in our minds.

        1. There’s a fascinating collection of articles from Yale University Press entitled Arming Slaves from Classical Times to the Modern Age that also talks about stuff like this!

        2. People have a hard time comprehending that people in earlier eras simply didn’t think about things the same way as modern Western people do. They impose 21st-century values on 18th-century people.

          A slave in the 18th-century simply didn’t view the social arrangement in which he found himself as an abomination in the same way a 21st century person does. That idea was very new at that time. Slavery was the way of the world back to pre-history. Just like the caste systems in India, or the feudal peasant-lord relationship of Europe until a few centuries earlier, it was just “the way things are.” I’m sure many women in Muslim nations just think that the way their husbands treat them is “the way things are.”

          We in the U.S. think that living in an ordered society were we are generally well-protected by a rule of law that is egalitarian in code and, quite largely in practice (except for the very elite), is just “the way things are.” It doesn’t occur to us that western society as currently organized registers as barely a blip on a timeline of human history and that if in a hundred years it is as dead and gone as the Roman Empire, that would not be historically unusual.

          1. A bizarre parallel of history – at the beginning of the Meiji period in Japan (1868) only the Samurai class (7% of the population) had last names (with a few irregular exceptions). At one bureaucratic stroke the rest of the Japanese we were required to pick and register a family name – much like the former slaves were doing in the US at the time.

      4. There were interviews with ex-slaves in the early 20th century in which they said they preferred being enslaved. And I don’t think they were all stuck in Reconstruction south, hounded by the KKK and all that. I’m sure a big part of it was that the slave life was what they knew, and they had found a way to live in that system. Part of it was, as the ants said, “Horrible, horrible freedom.”

  9. I can’t decide which Simpsons character bernie sounds more like: Rabbi Hyman Krustofsky (Krusty’s dad) or the Old Jewish Man who lives at Springfield Retirement Castle.

    1. Jasper, Grandpa Simpson’s friend.

      1. Jasper Beardley or the Old Jewish Guy?

      2. That’s a paddlin’!!!

  10. I think Sanders politics are more what Obama voters thought they were getting.

    Only he’s not as dreamy nor well dressed, so journalists aren’t wetting theirselves over him.

    OTOH, I’m not sure what most lefties in the US want is really socialism. They just want a big welfare state and higher taxes on the rich.

    Sanders is more Venezuela style socialism, sure you have the free stuff and high taxes, but you also have the government meddling in most industries. You don’t see that in most Scandinavian countries

    1. Except Venezuela style socialism – like all other styles of socialism – is pretty thin on the ground with the free stuff. Even during Chavez’ heyday, when they actually had the money to buy votes they didn’t get a whole lot of free stuff and, *now*, all that free stuff is gone and its long lines at the store guarded by soldiers.

      How can people not see this pattern? The only socialist place that hasn’t or isn’t in the process of collapsing into a shithole is *parts* of Europe – not the southern socialist states (Italy, Greece, etc) which are in the process of collapsing (and would have already if other countries weren’t pumping money from their economies in to support) but the northern ones. That’s it. Everywhere else has shown, repeatedly, that those people and their government simply do not have the self-discipline that socialism requires from a nation to have a chance of ‘working’.

      You have to be able to say ‘no’ to get socialism to work. The politicians have to be able to say ‘no’ to the temptation to promise more than they can deliver to buy votes and the people have to be able to say ‘no’ when a politician does promise more than they can afford.

      Humans, as a group, simply can’t do that. As is painfully obvious since even the northern European socialist states are sliding further and further into insolvency – just at a slow rate.

      1. “…The only socialist place that hasn’t or isn’t in the process of collapsing into a shithole is *parts* of Europe…”

        Those parts of Europe are also the most fascistic. Oh, to be sure, not in the wars of aggression/racial purity/genocidal way – just in every OTHER way possible.

        But hey, now that they’ve skewed their youth demographic heavily third world they be looking more and more like southern Europe in practically no time.

        The only real question is whether they will further slide into something resembling post-colonial Africa, or attempt to over correct via the tried and true European methods.

        1. *Socialism* is fascistic by nature – there is no difference between a fascist country and a socialist one other than a mild variation of who owns things. In a socialist state the state owns and controls everything, in a fascist state things are privately owned but the use of those things is still completely under the control of the state.

  11. A shit sandwich and an even bigger shit sandwich.

    1. “… you have to take bigger bites…”

    2. How would you like your sandwich sir, firm or soft?

  12. I prefer the Sanders revolution because I think it’s more likely to crash and burn and get no support from the American people.

    I take a great deal of comfort in the realization that the stupendously awful things that have been implemented over the last seven years (from the nationalization of GM to today’s Iran nuclear agreement) have been implemented by a charismatic black President at a time when everything in our society was judged as good or evil through the prism of race.

    I’m as against the stupidity of racism as I am against any other form of stupidity, but society looking at everything through the prism of a collective concept like race is a terrible thing to an individualist. That’s why I’m glad the next President, if he or she is a Democrat, will not be a living symbol of the fulfillment of the civil rights struggle.

    1. Unless that president is a woman – as the civil rights struggle encompasses feminism also.

      1. It just doesn’t resonate the same way.

    2. “it’s more likely to crash and burn and get no support from the American people.”

      I’ll not fall prey to that hope any more.

      These American people you mention elected a a hard core Marxist. That Marxist instituted government healthcare. Those American people were so upset, they elected that same Marxist again.

      We’ve crossed a line that we’ll never return from. If anyone thinks this crass, vulgar, ignorant dope named Sanders can’t get elected, you’re quite wrong. He is our Hugo Chavez, and a majority of the “American people” have absolutely no problem with him.

      1. These American people you mention elected a a hard core Marxist. That Marxist instituted government healthcare. Those American people were so upset, they elected that same Marxist again.

        Technically, it looks a lot more like Fascism than Marxism to me. But that’s just arguing over whether you like the little vanillia bean bits in your vanilla ice cream.

    3. The feminists would like to have word with you, however La Raza has suspended any contact with the public at this time.

    4. ANYONE is better than having Queen Hillary as president…..

  13. If and when American buys into President Hillary’s stream of neocon pro-war horseshit, it won’t be because she gets a free pass as a living symbol of the triumph of reason over rednecks. People will have to buy her horseshit in spite of her race. If America buys into St. Bernie’s socialist horse crap, likewise, it won’t be because of his race either–it’ll be in spite of it.

    They’ll have to sell their horseshit wholesale–not as the triumph over slavery, over the Confederacy, over Jim Crow, over the Klan, and over the privileges of modern crackers* everywhere.

    I think either Bernie or Hillary will have a much harder time selling horseshit than Obama did, and I think Bernie will have a harder time selling his horseshit to swing voters and the American people than Hillary–so, please Democrats, go full retard with Bernie.

    *I hereby reserve all rights to the name “Modern Cracker Magazine”.

    1. I dunno. I can see “because vagina” giving her a lot of glide distance. The MSM will be happy to cover for her just like they have during the campaign so far.

      1. Abuela doesn’t have a vagina.

        She lays eggs under a rock like a reptile.

        Hillary doesn’t have anything like the charisma or leverage that Obama has. It’s gonna be a big let down for progressives when they don’t have a black guy selling their used cars anymore.

        The sad story about the white girl from Wellesley and Yale Law School isn’t about to bring a tear to anyone’s eye.

        The biggest obstacle she’s had to overcome was getting busted trying to make off with the White House’s dishes and towels.

        1. The things I worry about a HRC in the white house are (just the top 5) :

          1) some level (a majority maybe?) of feminazis supporting her because “vagina” (right now they continue to support her while ignoring her hubby’s personal rapist habits)
          2) the Clinton political machine supporting her because she is cutting them in on deals and/or has dirt on them to maintain support
          3) her callous indifference to how the outcome might impact anybody outside her circles
          4) her total indifference to how negative her image will (continue to) be seen by her opponents
          5) her complete lack of any ability to conduct foreign affairs in a manner that could benefit the US

        2. Bernie Sanders won a debate.

      2. “I can see “because vagina” giving her a lot of glide distance.”

        +1 snail trail

        1. +1 Gag

      3. “…vagina” giving her a lot of glide distance.”

        Ew.

    2. Hillary Clinton is an establishment pig.

  14. Unfortunately, listening to Hillary defend Obama has the uncanny feel of a future textbook on the Obama Administration. He didn’t murder a normal economic recovery in its crib, he “got us out of” the “great” recession. He didn’t enshrine too-big-to-fail by endorsing the legislative product of two of the financial crisis’s greatest sponsors and abettors, he “reformed the system.”

    Fortunately, we don’t have to read those history books. Only those of you with children and grandchildren will have to hear them repeating it as if it were written under Barry’s image on Mt. Rushmore.

  15. I would have liked to seen more on the wars for oil and how we could have trillion$ for health care and infrastructure with the money. A real investigation into 9/11 ,would be nice.
    That’s where the wars began. A False flag.

    1. Please tell me you that you talk like a pirate!?!

    2. Somebody didn’t check to see what sort of board he’s commenting on.

      1. Bl4Ck Helicopterzz1!1!1!1!!!

        1. My roomate in undergrad went from firmly believing all that Truther bullshit straight to being a diehard Bernie Sanders supporter. Apparently it’s not much of a leap ideologically.

  16. Poor Suderman. He’s incapable of seeing what’s going on here.

    Hilary Clinton has gone after Obama as “not having gone far enough” most of the campaign season. Of course she’s going to change her tune when she both starts lagging at the polls and when she will need Obama’s AG to make a decision not to prosecute her and for her litany of crimes while SOS.

    1. Because she knows Obama is an egomaniac just like her, she knows what must be done to placate him so he gives her what she wants (a de facto pardon).

    2. Hillary for Prison 2016!

  17. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    http://www.Jobstribune.com

    1. Sounds like online webcam porn to me…..

  18. The impossible revolution IS more of the same. What was Obama’s schtick, except to promise an ongoing revolution that ultimately accomplishes none of it’s goals and changes nothing for the better?

    1. Because the American voters are stupid enough to continue electing the usual establishment cabal rather than THINK before they pull the lever.

  19. I think I’m now officially more scared of Bernie than I am of Hillary. As another commenter on here observed; he is Grandpa Gulag.

    1. Is it scary when young women are able to have their lives saved because they go to the doctor and a case of cervical cancer is found when it is still easily treatable?

      I don’t think providing people with the opportunity to get basic healthcare is scary. What I think is scary is letting cancer spread in a young woman because we want to save money.

      1. Did you have a particular person in mind or is this like ‘Bama’s make-up-an-anecdote-when-his-argument doesn’t-hold-water routine?

      2. Because that’s exactly what this is about…

        It’s always easier to provide “access” when you’re using other peoples money to do it.

        1. Not really. It may even be harder.

      3. Then spend your own money on it, fuckstick.

        1. But grandstanding about how noble you are for volunteering other people’s money is so much more fun!

          1. What a compassionate individual!

      4. If people should get health care ( a good and or service ) for free because a politician said it’s a right (even though it’s not in the bill of rights)…

        Then I should get a cache of weapons for free because self defense IS an actual right listed in the bill of rights.

        Pay up, sucka!

      5. Women can’t go to the doctor now? Lol whut?

        What will you say when single payer results in long wait times for the doctor?

        Appealing to emotion this one is.

    2. Oh really? Seems to me the French and Germans are hardly Soviet countries and they run health care systems that are half the cost and just as if not better than the US.

      Hillary is the problem. She doesn’t give a crap about anything except being president. She’s just another ‘more of the same’ bs politician like most of the rest in Washington. We’ll continue to get screwed by the 1%.

  20. Sanders responded by accusing her of ducking the question?tonight, and, implicitly, throughout the week. “What a Medicare-for-all program”?his shorthand for single-payer?”does is finally provide in this country health care for every man, woman and child as a right.”

    I remember the days were Obamacare was going to be awesome, and guarantee everyone the right to health insurance.

    Now, it’s barely been fully implemented for over a year now, and they’re already like “FUCK THAT BULLSHIT! WE NEED MEDICARE FOR ALL!”

    1. The same is true of every socialized medical system that ever existed. The proponents promise paradise, deliver the system they campaigned for, and then demand an entirely new system to replace the “inadequate” one they campaigned for.

      I remember having quite a laugh when San Francisco passed its “universal health care” law and lefties I knew complained ceaselessly about how it sucked. I reminded them that their need for health care was over now — they had “universal health care” — and no further programs were needed or warranted if they lived in SF.

      They didn’t like that very much. Oh well.

    2. If you recall, Brian, the Democrats were going to vote for Medicare for all instead of the Affordable Care Act. But a few stubborn Senators, such as Lieberman, made that impossible.

      Voting for the Affordable Care Act as being better than the status quo and the only alternative that is politically feasible at a given point in time is not the same thing as saying that future positive change will not happen.

      1. “If you recall, Brian, the Democrats were going to vote for Medicare for all instead of the Affordable Care Act. But a few stubborn Senators, such as Lieberman, made that impossible.”

        No, you’re thinking of the public option. Public option does not equal medicare for all.

      2. If you recall, Dems shoved this through without a single Republican vote by adjusting the rules. They could have passed anything they wanted including single payer. If they couldn’t get single payer, it’s because there were some Dems that didn’t want it. Your issue is with them, Lad.

      3. How is the ACA better than the status quo?

        1. ACA was and is a joke. It was a sellout to special interest groups.

          A single-payer system copied on the French or German model (from free medical school through negotiated federal pharmaceutical prices to small-co pay, no other bills for patients) is the most efficient system for society as a whole. It’s a national security issue, not a free market one.

  21. More of the impossible same revolution?

  22. I think it is interesting that Peter Suderman assumes that Medicare-for-all has no chance of success, when in fact, it is pretty much inevitable.

    Look at the criticisms of the Affordable Care Act. All in all, those criticisms would best be addressed by a truly universal healthcare system.

    As for the objection “but that would cost money!” that is not really a good objection. When it comes to money or health, then health wins every single time. Good things in life cost money. Whether it is a space program, or education, or a military, or health care.

    1. I think it is interesting that Peter Suderman assumes that Medicare-for-all has no chance of success, when in fact, it is pretty much inevitable.

      Actually it’s the Democrats that believe it has very little chance of success. Let me clarify: Hillary pointed out it has no chance of success because Democrats couldn’t get a public option in a democrat-controlled congress.

      It’s fair to assume that if America wants things like a military, a space program and roadz that spending 197% of GDP on healthcare might be a non-starter.

      Now, to be fair, we have what, an $18 trillion debt? So it’s conceivable that we could go into debt indefinitely and just print our way to single-payer and there will be no ill effects down the road.

      1. Eh, universal healthcare would probably go the way of universal education in this country: sure, it sucks, but, universal! You spend a lot for it, but not a ton. You know: like public education: everyone’s guaranteed some standard, basic, sucky education, not Harvard admittance and tuition. They’re not going to love everyone. They just want to talk like they are.

        And, like public education, we’d quickly reach a point where we just give up talking about how much it sucks because we know it’s never going to change or improve. We’re just going to have our sucky, standard public healthcare, and it will suck, and we’ll just shrug our shoulders while we wait for public food care, or whatever the next bullshit is.

        1. I for one look forward to my well-furnished jail cell.

    2. “Look at the criticisms of the Affordable Care Act. All in all, those criticisms would best be addressed by a truly universal healthcare system.”

      And by “all” he means only those criticisms coming from the leftists who think the ACA doesn’t go far enough.

      Aside from them, there are plenty of criticisms from people who were satisfied with what they had before the ACA came along and messed it up – you know those people who were told that it they liked their insurance that they could keep it.

      Single payer socialized medicine will most certainly not address those people’s concerns.

      1. With singlepayer you will get rationing, long wait times. Id imagine it will be like the VA but a rather large scale…yay???

        Progressives want singlepayer because they love the control…not because they are concerned about healthcare quality or cost

    3. But… I thought the problem was that we already spend too much money on health care…

    4. As for the objection “but that would cost money!” that is not really a good objection. When it comes to money or health, then health wins every single time. Good things in life cost money. Whether it is a space program, or education, or a military, or health care.

      I thought the point of singlepayer at least what progressives claim is because healthcare costs too much and needs to be saved?

    5. David why did Vermont scrap their single payer plan?

  23. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    http://www.Jobstribune.com

  24. I dont think slammy so so is going to like that very much dude.

    http://www.Full-VPN.tk

  25. Democratic Primary Debate: Do Democrats Want an Impossible Revolution or More of the Same?

    If the election is Trump vs. “More of the Same” or Trump vs. Socialist Revolution, Trump wins.

  26. $85 an hour! Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening?And whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids. Heres where I went,

    —————– http://www.richi8.com

  27. $85 an hour! Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening?And whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids. Heres where I went,

    —————– http://www.richi8.com

    1. Squirrels Vs Bots!

    2. Online webcam porn?

  28. I really don’t understand why liberals are so excited about Sanders. Regardless of whether or not any of his proposals are good, we already know that they are impossible to get through Congress. He is very honest about the fact that we would need a revolution to get the things done that he is talking about. Do any of his supporters really believe that revolution is possible? His proposals might be popular among the far left, but that isn’t enough for a revolution. Even with a Democratic majority in Congress, his proposals would be a non-starter. So either Sanders would waste time with a quixotic fight, or he will completely abandon his principles. Why would liberals want that? Sanders is also far less likely to win a general election. Nominating him seems like an unnecessary risk for no actual gain.

  29. only a single payer system can truly provide the sort of guaranteed universal coverage that Democrats have long promised

    Bahahahahahaha!!! Priceless.

  30. …the sort of guaranteed universal coverage that Democrats have long promised,

    People get that “coverage” isn’t at all the same thing as “treatment,” right?

    No, they probably don’t get that. They’ll just act incredibly shocked when the difference is explained to them when they’re sick.

    “Oh, yes, your single-payer, government-mandated health plan covers everything. Absolutely everything! But the IPAB has decided that the appropriate treatment for you is hospice. After all, you’re getting up in years, you know. What’s another decade or so? No, I’m sorry, there’s no appeal.”

    1. Yeah, but let’s be honest – that’s not too different than how it works here, only it’s the insurance company deciding on what treatments they will pay for or not.

      That exact scenario happened to my mother, the insurance company decided her cancer was no longer treatable and dumped her into a hospice, which the state government actually paid for.

    2. Sorry, but if we finally got off our high horse and looked across the Atlantic at how the French and the Germans run their health care systems, we’d be ashamed of ours.

      They have a single-payer system, organized from top to bottom. Free medical schools (so doctors don’t have outrageous debt), pharma costs that are negotiated for the whole country (so buying your med isn’t a nightmare of shopping; every pharmacy sells it at exactly the same price across the country); and you can’t go bankrupt because of medical bills. Yes, medical prices are controlled, but doctors are DEDICATED to the profession.

      With that, their life expectancy, probably the best measure of the efficiency of the system, is higher than ours.

      A proper and efficient health care system is a national security issue first and foremost. The ‘free market’ (which in this case has and never will exist) is an inappropriate solution.

      1. “(European life) expectancy, probably the best measure of the efficiency of the system, is higher than ours.”

        I don’t think this is correct. I suspect that longevity is a mediocre indicator of overall health, that a given American cohort’s longevity is quite similar to its EU counterpart, and that American median and average longevity are pulled down by somewhat unique American habits (grease, crack, weight, etc). For example, I seriously doubt that German two-pack-a-day guys live one week longer than American two-pack-a-day guys.

  31. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    http://www.Jobstribune.com

  32. Economic talking points from the Dems can be boiled down to “Barack Obama has done so much good for the economy that it’s worse than ever.”

  33. According to David Welker women can’t go to the doctor and get screened for cancer even with the ACA.

    Does anyone really believe progressives care about costs like they claim?

  34. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do,

    go to tech tab for work detail,,,,, http://www.onlinecash9.com

  35. Health care is a national security issue, not a free market one, and I am a die hard free marketer when it comes to just about anything.

    It is evident that the Europeans, especially France and Germany but also other Western European countries, spend half per capita on health care with equal or better results (just look at life expectancy). Such systems are a savings boon for families (all those premiums can go somewhere else).

    As a national security issue, we should allow the federal government to create a system, from free medical schools to pharmaceutical cost+margin pricing to organized medical systems and pre-determined medical costs. If any doctor wants to practice outside the system, they can at their own prices.

    Western European countries have shown that their health care systems, which covers everyone at all times. The outcomes they have achieved compared to the US certainly shows they have found a better way.

    1. What does it have to do with national security?

    2. You do realize our public slending per capita already exceeds those countries by itself? These savings arent going to magically appear and bring it in line with europe. Also lomg wait times and rationing plague their sytem

    3. You are recommending a govt takeover of healthcare…yikes

  36. “My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser…….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.Jobstribune.com

  37. my classmate’s mother-in-law makes $78 hourly on the computer . She has been out of work for 6 months but last month her check was $17581 just working on the computer for a few hours. view website

    [] ???????======== http://www.Wage90.Com

  38. “My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser…….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.Jobstribune.com

  39. With a large enough mob and the press in your back pocket, nothing’s impossible.


  40. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    http://www.workpost30.com

  41. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.WorkPost30.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.