Support NeoGAF

[nib95]

Lol damn. That's pretty hilarious.

 

[shinra-bansho]

But this and the reagen aids thing are huge defining things of her life, not some random factoid she got wrong (maybe she wasnt as aware about the reagen aids thing, but she sent a postcard thinking sanders and should remember who supported her life's greatest struggle). Unless she is really letting the years catch up with her, these are things you remember.

There are 103 co-sponsors on the 1993 Hillarycare bill in the House introduced by then Rep. Gephardt, and 29 for the equivalent in the Senate by then Sen. Mitchell (not among them then Rep. Sanders, who was apparently doing his own thing, although I still can't find what CNN is referring to, only something earlier.)

I actually rather doubt she remembers every single one of these people as working with her on it over 20 years later. Although she might I suppose. It still seems tangential to the point that the campaign seems to want to make.

I can't find the relevant legislative record for CHIP right now, so I'm not sure what role if any he played in that though.

 

[Risette]

Not true. Clinton laid a substantial amount of political ground work that helped Obama Administration pass health insurance reform. The reason the ACA primarily targets the uninsured and is not as broad in scope as Hillarycare was in the 90's was because of the obstruction and difficulty of getting Hillary's more ambitious plan passed through Congress. Obamacare leaves the current private insurance system largely unchanged for the majority of people who get coverage through their employers. Hillarycare would have required most people to switch their health insurance coverage to new health insurance alliances, with caps on how fast premiums could rise. So, Obama pivoted to get Health Insurance companies on board - which would have been much more difficult without the work done by the Clinton's in the 90s.

Fair enough. Either way, it doesn't sit well with me to attack Sanders for his bills being unsuccessful. He's been a consistent advocate on this issue for a long time and trying to take that away because he was unsuccessful still doesn't make sense.

 

[Arkeband]

God damn, Bernie is probably the most consistent politician ever. Why would she even think to say this without quadruple fact checking.

Why she would say this when his campaign dug that photo months ago and it was being shared on social media, no one will ever know. Her campaign is probably too busy bothering newspapers to run negative stories to actually pay attention to what his campaign is actively doing.

 

[ugaboga232]

There are 103 co-sponsors on the 1993 Hillarycare bill in the House introduced by then Rep. Gephardt, and 29 for the equivalent in the Senate by then Sen. Mitchell (not among them then Rep. Sanders, who was apparently doing his own thing, although I still can't find what CNN is referring to, only something earlier.)

I actually rather doubt she remembers every single one of these people as working with her on it over 20 years later. Although she might I suppose.

I guess when you send a postcard and then have been running against him for the last year, its generally something you remember. Now if she meant he didn't do enough back then, fair enough but then why the postcard.

 

[sc0la]

Why she would say this when his campaign dug that photo months ago and it was being shared on social media, no one will ever know.

Yep the photo was posted on his Twitter in January.

 

[Cipherr]

Shang Tsung yourself brehs.

 

[border]

You need to have the closing parenthetical to make the point that it is out of context though. If you are claiming it is being taken out of context, it is up to you, as the one making that claim, to provide the context. You can't say people are taking it out of context but admit that all we can judge is the context given thus far.

Context may or may not change how one would interpret her, but at this moment one can pretty objectively say the statement has no context. As of the moment, there's no way to retrieve the statements surrounding her "I don't know where he was" phrase.

 

[Tesseract]

This is some Tom cruise mission impossible spin

Duh naaaaaaaaaaaa

 

[ampere]

So I think this will be time I vote a write in candidate for President

That only helps the awful awful GoP candidates, so please don't do that.

 

[Psychoward]

I can understand your point of view, but I don't believe that Hillary is distorting history here, because I don't think she meant what people are saying she did. She's defending her record with that statement more than she's trying to erase his. But that's my interpretation, and other posters have shared similar sentiment, so I agreed.

Avatarquote.jpg

"Where was Bernie?"

He was supporting health care reform along with standing literally right behind her. Sorry he didn't get the exposure she did because he didn't have the luck to be married to the current POTUS.

 

[Ekai]

"I don't know where he was when I was trying to get health care in '93 and '94,"

That's not a defense. That's an attack.

Well, considering the poster you're talking to has been quite fine with attacking Bernie and his supporters over absolutely nothing numerous times in various political threads, I don't think they want things to be on a fair ground here. They have consistently argued for us to not criticize her when she screws up like this/worse. So them interpreting what is frankly a blatant attack like this as something else, while pushing for us to not criticize her, doesn't surprise me at this point.

 

[DOWN]

She could be implying he didn't stick with it like she needed, or she simply made a mistake because she doesn't recall his involvement since he was 1 of dozens and dozens aligned with her bill.

 

[ampere]

There are 103 co-sponsors on the 1993 Hillarycare bill in the House introduced by then Rep. Gephardt, and 29 for the equivalent in the Senate by then Sen. Mitchell (not among them then Rep. Sanders, who was apparently doing his own thing, although I still can't find what CNN is referring to, only something earlier.)

I actually rather doubt she remembers every single one of these people as working with her on it over 20 years later. Although she might I suppose. It still seems tangential to the point that the campaign seems to want to make.

I can't find the relevant legislative record for CHIP right now, so I'm not sure what role if any he played in that though.

Sanders seemed to only want single payer and possibly was not willing to compromise. Politics is all about compromising though, so I'd say that was a mistake on his part and possibly what she refers to

 

[Aikidoka]

Seems like a petty line of attack there.

And to top it off, CNN

Clinton's knock against Sanders on Saturday came moments after the former secretary of state hit Sanders for "misrepresenting my record and his own."

"That is his choice," Clinton said of Sanders.

lol

 

[Ekai]

That only helps the awful awful GoP candidates, so please don't do that.

This.

As much I don't want to vote for Hillary, if she gets the nom., it's better her over something else. She's continued to show with these gaffes and with her general policies that I feel she won't go far enough on many important matters. But, hey, the two-party system is just working to screw over my voice anyway so. : / Might as well vote for the choice that screws me and the people of this country over less. Status-quo is better than regression.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I guess when you send a postcard and then have been running against him for the last year, its generally something you remember. Now if she meant he didn't do enough back then, fair enough but then why the postcard.

Is it? How many postcards and thank you notes as FLOTUS do you think she [or her staff] wrote as FLOTUS? Ballpark figure.

On the point, of running against him for a year, sure the campaign should have known about this. People are pointing out that the campaign did.

Which again largely leads me to the conclusion that it's tangential to the point that's being made... very very poorly... by the campaign.

 

[Draconian]

I had to do a double take when I first saw this to make sure I wasn't on the Onion. It seems like something you could only make up. Hillary seems like she's trying to sabotage her own campaign with the amount of gaffes she's had in the past week. The amount of spin and mental gymnastics trying to excuse this in this thread is hysterical though. Some of you guys couldn't be more transparent if you tried.

 

[ugaboga232]

Is it? How many postcards and thank you notes as FLOTUS do you think she [or her staff] wrote as FLOTUS? Ballpark figure.

On the point, of running against him for a year, sure the campaign should have known about this. People are pointing out that the campaign did.

Which again largely leads me to the conclusion that it's tangential to the point that's being made... very very poorly... by the campaign.

Haha good point, I can understand what she was trying to do (i would argue that sanders did help a bit from what I know but you are probably far better informed). Seems like both campaigns are sucking.

 

[kirblar]

Haha good point, I can understand what she was trying to do (i would argue that sanders did help a bit from what I know but you are probably far better informed). Seems like both campaigns are sucking.

This would be an accurate assessment.

 

[kaching]

Then honestly, the mature response is to point that out (highlight his legislative efforts, show him speaking out on it) rather than showing an image of him standing behind her at a public speaking event and saying "he was right there! Wow, can't believe you can't see that!"

The former points to his legislative accomplishments / efforts and makes it seems like he's taking his opponent seriously (and respectfully), the latter makes it seem like his campaign is being deliberately obtuse and juvenile as to what she meant and is just interested in scoring "points" by making a joke. The former might not be spread as virally, but comes off as more substantive.

Why do you guys keep acting so deliberately obtuse about the response? It's not a matter of simply showing his physical location at the time, it's a matter of why he was where he was, because he was there in support of her efforts for UHC!. Showing that image as response is simply the most effective, straightforward way to rebuff her implication that Sanders has not been working for UHC as long as she has.

And if your so concerned about "mature response" why not focus on how hamfisted it was for Hillary to try downplay Sanders' record on UHC in the first place?

 

[CrocMother]

She could be implying he didn't stick with it like she needed, or she simply made a mistake because she doesn't recall his involvement since he was 1 of dozens and dozens aligned with her bill.

You'd think she would know about his involvement considering it's a critical issue in the election, he's her only Democratic opponent in her White House bid and they've had numerous debates.

 

[Abounder]

Hillary's campaign, brought to you by Dan Quayle

 

[royalan]

Avatarquote.jpg

"Where was Bernie?"

He was supporting health care reform along with standing literally right behind her. Sorry he didn't get the exposure she did because he didn't have the luck to be married to the current POTUS.

He also didn't get the attacks that she did by placing herself in front of the issue and using her clout to attempt to get it passed. Hillary Clinton was beaten bloody by the right and by the health insurance industry for pushing universal healthcare. And this is important, because at several points in this race, Sanders has characterized her as being against universal healthcare "like every other country in Europe" because she's against his plan. That's what I think she's implying here, that if Bernie Sanders actually was around in the 90s (which he was), then he should know that she is very much for universal healthcare.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Ouch, holy fucking shit. This is potentially bad enough to make Bernie starting beating her just about everywhere. He isn't going to let her live this one down. And he shouldn't.

 

[Macam]

And to think I got some flak when I said she wasn't a good campaigner. She might be winning delegate game, but campaigning isn't her fortè.

At this point, I think we're just about that point in the cycle where an incensed Bill Clinton, in an over zealous attempt to defend Hillary, will make some stupid, off handed remark somewhere that will feed the media cycle on the issue that much longer.

 

[Koyuga]

Hillary's memory not having a great week.

 

[ugaboga232]

He also didn't get the attacks that she did by placing herself in front of the issue and using her clout to attempt to get it passed. Hillary Clinton was beaten bloody by the right and by the health insurance industry for pushing universal healthcare. And this is important, because at several points in this race, Sanders has characterized her as being against universal healthcare "like every other country in Europe" because she's against his plan. That's what I think she's implying here, that if Bernie Sanders actually was around in the 90s (which he was), then he should know that she is very much for universal healthcare.

Well she came out very strong against single payer in general and anything that would try to replace obamacare so both are distorting things on that issue.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

Ouch, holy fucking shit. This is potentially bad enough to make Bernie starting beating her just about everywhere. He isn't going to let her live this one down. And he shouldn't.

Really? I mean, that would be interesting, but I can't imagine this type of thing matters THAT much to voters. Who knows, I guess. It'll be an exciting few weeks.

 

[Leona Lewis]

Ouch, holy fucking shit. This is potentially bad enough to make Bernie starting beating her just about everywhere. He isn't going to let her live this one down. And he shouldn't.

lol

Bernie's had his fair share of "misspeakings" and ones far more damaging than this. He can't get through a debate without one

 

[orthodoxy1095]

I remember seeing that photo on social media months ago. How do you mess that up?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Haha good point, I can understand what she was trying to do (i would argue that sanders did help a bit from what I know but you are probably far better informed). Seems like both campaigns are sucking.

There's an element to the actual point being made that I think is an unfair attack. A first term congressman from Vermont isn't going to lead any fight on any given issue. He's not going to have the platform of a First Lady.

It seems meant to also beg the question what has he achieved over two and half decades to these causes; amendments attached to other people's legislation largely. Some co-sponsored legislation. His largest health related achievement is probably money for community health centres in exchange for his ACA vote.

It's also seems like it's meant to defend her long history at the forefront of fighting for public healthcare and as much a defense of her record, her battles, her scars and achievements.

This highlights both the inherent advantages of being a prominent party leader for decades, versus someone who has been more a voice advocating for certain causes on the sidelines.

But her campaign has been really really bad this past week. There isn't really any argument on that. Not sure if it's been shaken by Michigan, or just complacent in the lead.

 

[Tesseract]

Now is obama's chance to distance himself from Hillary's shame and join Bernie as father and son.

 

[Setzer]

So I think this will be time I vote a write in candidate for President

Same. If our choices are Hillary or Trump, we're fucked either way.

 

[ugaboga232]

There's an element to the actual point being made that I think is an unfair attack. A first term congressman from Vermont isn't going to lead any fight on any given issue. He's not going to have the platform of a First Lady.

It seems meant to also beg the question what has he achieved over two and half decades to these causes; amendments attached to other people's legislation largely. Some co-sponsored legislation. His largest health related achievement is probably money for community health centres in exchange for his ACA vote.

It's also seems like it's meant to defend her long history at the forefront of fighting for public healthcare and as much a defense of her record, her battles, her scars and achievements.

This highlights both the inherent advantages of being a prominent party leader for decades, versus someone who has been more a voice advocating for certain causes on the sidelines.

But her campaign has been really really bad this past week. There isn't really any argument on that. Not sure if it's been shaken by Michigan, or just complacent in the lead.

As always the mods manage to succinctly say what is right. I don't know why her campaign is giving these unforced errors up, I doubt it will matter much in the long run but who knows.

 

[steveovig]

Same. If our choices are Hillary or Trump, we're fucked either way.

At least with Hillary, we know Planned Parenthood ain't leaving and neither is Obamacare, among other improvements from the last 7 years.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

Is it? How many postcards and thank you notes as FLOTUS do you think she [or her staff] wrote as FLOTUS? Ballpark figure.

On the point, of running against him for a year, sure the campaign should have known about this. People are pointing out that the campaign did.

Which again largely leads me to the conclusion that it's tangential to the point that's being made... very very poorly... by the campaign.

Regardless of whether she remembered it or not. It is still a really stupid mistake to have said it or worded it that way. While I plan to vote for her in the GE. Certain things she's done in the debates as well as her recent flubs in the past week really make me question her viability against Trump. If this was a normal republican candidate, I wouldn't be concerned. She is seen as distrustful and the embodiment of Washington politics/ the establishment. She doesn't need to dig her own grave with these uninformed comments.

There's an element to the actual point being made that I think is an unfair attack. A first term congressman from Vermont isn't going to lead any fight on any given issue. He's not going to have the platform of a First Lady.

It seems meant to also beg the question what has he achieved over two and half decades to these causes; amendments attached to other people's legislation largely. Some co-sponsored legislation. His largest health related achievement is probably money for community health centres in exchange for his ACA vote.

It's also seems like it's meant to defend her long history at the forefront of fighting for public healthcare and as much a defense of her record, her battles, her scars and achievements.

This highlights both the inherent advantages of being a prominent party leader for decades, versus someone who has been more a voice advocating for certain causes on the sidelines.

But her campaign has been really really bad this past week. There isn't really any argument on that. Not sure if it's been shaken by Michigan, or just complacent in the lead.

This is just mental gymnastics. Yes that is a good point about Sanders versus Clinton in terms of achievements. However you have to shoot for the moon to think that was what was meant. She was trying to imply he wasn't doing anything for healthcare, either in a who cared about Bernie Sanders in the 90's kind of way or unsupportive of it. Either way it's disingenuous and a poor attack.

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

At least with Hillary, we know Planned Parenthood ain't leaving and neither is Obamacare, among other improvements from the last 7 years.

Improvements hmm?

We should just rip the bandaids off and let the country bleed out for a bit so that it realizes what it really needs is surgery.

 

[MIMIC]

The level of intellectual dishonesty going on right now is astounding. Regardless of whether or not he actually did anything, he publicly gave his support to Hillary's initiative. "Where were you?" doesn't mean "you didn't do x, y, and z".

This is soooooooooo shifting the goal posts. This point isn't whether he did A, B, C, D, E, F, or G. He did H, which was enough for Hillary to thank him for it in a public setting.

Did Hillary turn around to Bernie and say, "Where were you when I was trying to get this health care thing passed?" No, she didn't. Did she say to the crowd, "You know what, these people behind me didn't actually do anything"? No. She was too busy benefiting from their support.

So pretending that her criticism has even a single shred of legitimacy is ridiculous.

 

[nib95]

I can understand your point of view, but I don't believe that Hillary is distorting history here, because I don't think she meant what people are saying she did. She's defending her record with that statement more than she's trying to erase his. But that's my interpretation, and other posters have shared similar sentiment, so I agreed.

Jesus dude, it's like you've lost all rationality in your support and defence of Hillary. I feel like she could almost do or say anything and you'd still support her, or frame a negative in to her positive. You're literally trying to re-write and frame her very specific words here.

Questioning where he was when she was pushing it is an attack, not a promotion, the very obvious objective being the implication that he wasn't there supporting it, or her at the time. She is very clearly misleading.

 

[studyguy]

Still doubt that this will amount to much, but it's embarrassing all the same.
It almost feels like she's having some awkward Jeb! moments with her campaign as of late. Unnecessary gaffes that come out of nowhere.

 

[not psycho]

Same. If our choices are Hillary or Trump, we're fucked either way.

What specific policies do you have in mind when you say this?

Like nominating a supreme court justice, immigration, justice system reform, health care, voting rights. No difference?

Improvements hmm?

We should just rip the bandaids off and let the country bleed out for a bit so that it realizes what it really needs is surgery.

Republicans are more than happy to keep running the country without majority support. It's actually their plan.

"Ha, take this Republicans! We're gonna let all your vote suppressing, health care denying, inequality widening schemes work! Do your worst! But you're gonna get sick of it eventually, and then we'll have you right where we want you!"

 

[cdyhybrid]

Dramatic reenactment of Hillary this weekend:

That said, I'm still voting for her with zero questions asked if she wins the Dem nomination.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

lol

Bernie's had his fair share of "misspeakings" and ones far more damaging than this. He can't get through a debate without one

He won't win the nomination, but anyone not thinking this damages her severely is kidding themselves. To get caught being this openly disingenuous- or clueless - is not a good thing. And Hillary has showcased, at least in my eyes, to have the equivalent of a political glass too many times for me to not believe her and her campaign are going to manage this in the worst way imaginable.

 

[border]

He won't win the nomination, but anyone not thinking this damages her severely is kidding themselves.

People will have long since forgotten about primary season nastiness by the time June rolls around.

 

[DOWN]

So what she meant is "Where was Sanders? In the background as usual on the big bills, among dozens and dozens."

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

Hillary's memory not having a great week.

What else happened this week?

 

[Leona Lewis]

He won't win the nomination, but anyone not thinking this damages her severely is kidding themselves. To get caught being this openly disingenuous- or clueless - is not a good thing. And Hillary has showcased, at least in my eyes, to have the equivalent of a political glass too many times for me to not believe her and her campaign are going to manage this in the worst way imaginable.

It's too late for any of that to matter. The moment Bernie endorses Hillary (and he will), no one will care that she misrepresented her primary opponent's record this one time.

And by then, the lies spewing out of Trump's mouth that she'll gleefully dissect piece by piece will be too numerous to keep count.

It only hurts her to the extent that it emboldens the (false) narrative that she's not a true progressive. And the only people who buy into that narrative would never have voted for her anyway.

 

[shinra-bansho]

This is just mental gymnastics. Yes that is a good point about Sanders versus Clinton in terms of achievements. However you have to shoot for the moon to think that was what was meant. She was trying to imply he wasn't doing anything for healthcare, either in a who cared about Bernie Sanders in the 90's kind of way or unsupportive of it. Either way it's disingenuous and a poor attack.

I don't really know whether the bolded is agreement or disagreement with what I wrote. This stands as the general attack line under what I wrote. But I'm not sure how the latter two interpretations of said bolded are the only corollaries.

It would frankly be so far beyond stupid to try and say he wasn't for public healthcare that she and her campaign staff would have had to have suffered mass aneurysms. So I'm not sure where that interpretation is even coming from. I mean I guess it's possible her campaign has really dropped its game that much. But it seems an unlikely line of attack.

As opposed to saying I've led on this issue, I've taken the slings and arrows, I've gotten things done, he hasn't. Which has been a campaign refrain.

 

[ampere]

So what she meant is "Where was Sanders? In the background as usual on the big bills, among dozens and dozens."

Probably. "Why wasn't he cosponsoring my bill and working with me?" moreso than "why wasn't he working on healthcare at all?"