Hillary Clinton to CNN: "I will be the nominee"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I seriously doubt it. I think they'd just let Sanders run as the nominee.

No chance. Party leadership is mostly Obama loyalists and Obama does not like Bernie and reports have said he is pretty pissed off that Bernie is acting like he wasn't progressive enough. Obama would ensure Bernie wouldn't be the nominee in that situation, he and the party people loyal to him would oppose it 100%.
 
Let's take the word "impossible" out of it, since that is such a sore spot.

Bernie Sanders has no path to the nomination that is probable, realistic, supported by precedent, or worth entertaining.

Better?
 

There are some issues with the link. First the lawyer is a leader in the black community so it would make sense to have him in the article. Second, although The African American Alliance of the Northeast Kingdom is now inactive she serves on the board of Vermonters for Criminal Justice Reform . This is most likely the organization she was referring too. Was a poor job by the author separating the two in the article. He should have specified which organization. I have to do some more digging on the third guy, but soo far it just looks like this article was quickly written to try and explain away a negative for Sanders. Sure Brown supported Sanders, but other black leaders are detailing their experiences with Sanders/his people. Simply because one guy has no problem with Sanders doesn’t mean there isn’t an issue.

Edit: If something is wrong feel free to send me a pm. I'm always open to change my stance if there is evidence.
 
Fight until the end, Bernie, even if the end is inevitable. The party isn't worth anything if it doesn't continue to evolve and progress. The Democrats can either evolve and change for the better lose due to stubbornness and elitism.
 
She's not wrong. Although I'd prefer Bernie, she's the nominee and she's going to make a very fine president. I disagree with her ideologically, but Hillary Clinton is so many lightyears beyond the Republican opposition that voting for her shouldn't even be a question.
 
Fight until the end, Bernie, even if the end is inevitable. The party isn't worth anything if it doesn't continue to evolve and progress. The Democrats can either evolve and change for the better lose due to stubbornness and elitism.

the party has been continuing to evolve and progress. It may not be at the pace everyone likes, but Obama has done a good job of righting the ship.
 
Fight until the end, Bernie, even if the end is inevitable. The party isn't worth anything if it doesn't continue to evolve and progress. The Democrats can either evolve and change for the better lose due to stubbornness and elitism.

12 dollar minimum wage is stubborn resistance to progress?
 
I read criticisms of this statement as more veiled sexism.

She's got an insurmountable lead, how dare she actually say so.

Meanwhile, long before Trump had his nom locked in, he made outright boastful statements and got no flack for it.
 
about the minimum wage.

In NY and CA, it makes sense for it to be at $15/h but it doesn't make sense for somewhere like Idaho ..$12/h would be a better fit there
 
Fight until the end, Bernie, even if the end is inevitable. The party isn't worth anything if it doesn't continue to evolve and progress. The Democrats can either evolve and change for the better lose due to stubbornness and elitism.

On what issues do you want the Democrats to evolve? What does their platform and Clinton's not cover?

Healthcare itself is a basic human right like drinking water and clean air.

Glad to see you agree with Clinton.
 
the party has been continuing to evolve and progress. It may not be at the pace everyone likes, but Obama has done a good job of righting the ship.

The biggest changes and most important changes happen with dramatic events that sometimes piss people off.

Teddy Roosevelt was no party guy. He busted monopolies.

FDR pissed off his own mother, but he did what was best for the country. He actually taxed rich people.

Large changes and idealists are what shaped the most prosperous era in American history, not corporatists that manage to say folksy things every so often while they hobnob with bankers.
 
Her proposal for letting people buy into Medicare would be the most significant step towards a single-payer system short of just switching to single-payer overnight.

It's funny because Hillary is painted as an incrementalist but if her proposed policies were enacted that would represent a serious change-up in many areas. But Bernie goes further so people just think Hillary is a corporate shill. Like

$15/hr = true progressive
$12/hr = Wall Street whore

I say this as someone who's lived and worked in the UK (single payer universal public provision), the US (an utter clusterfuck), Australia (single payer with private provision), France (universal multi payer) and Germany (universal multi payer). Universal healthcare does not have to be single payer, in fact unless you have public provision and ownership of healthcare providers (or at least public control and provision of healthcare providers) there's a pretty decent argument to say that single payer is slightly less efficient. I love the NHS and the utter lack of complexity involved in accessing and paying for its services, but it's still largely a monolithic organisation, in the US you have thousands of different individual private hospital chains and providers and while that's the case a universal single payer isn't probably going to be the best option but something like France's system might well be.
 
maybe if every clinton supporter in california suddenly dies a month ago

7kNeZ4.gif
 
On what issues do you want the Democrats to evolve? What does their platform and Clinton's not cover?




Glad to see you agree with Clinton.

Affordable healthcare is not far enough. It should be universal.

We also used to have a great public school system where rich and poor kids could get a good education. Hillary thinks expanding that to public universities is too much because rich children like Trump's kids would also benefit. It's an asinine way to view large sweeping public projects. You pay for all because you have an investment in the community.

Just like local schools deserve funding even though your kids are already graduated and you gain nothing from it.
 
She barely won it and it was her home state.

But this is all silly. The Democratic nominee isn't going to be running against anyone else from their own party.

Are you SERIOUSLY going there again.
Her home state is NY.
 
Affordable healthcare is not far enough. It should be universal.

We also used to have a great public school system where rich and poor kids could get a good education. Hillary thinks expanding that to public universities is too much because rich children like Trump's kids would also benefit. It's an asinine way to view large sweeping public projects. You pay for all because you have an investment in the community.

Just like local schools deserve funding even though your kids are already graduated and you gain nothing from it.

Did you miss out on President Obama's first term?
 
Affordable healthcare is not far enough. It should be universal.

We also used to have a great public school system where rich and poor kids could get a good education. Hillary thinks expanding that to public universities is too much because rich children like Trump's kids would also benefit. It's an asinine way to view large sweeping public projects. You pay for all because you have an investment in the community.

Just like local schools deserve funding even though your kids are already graduated and you gain nothing from it.

There's more to Hillary's health care goals than the title of the page.

Hillary has never given up on the fight for universal coverage—and she won’t stop now.

Nearly every Democrat is in favor of universal coverage and it will never happen with a Republican controlled legislature.
 
The biggest changes and most important changes happen with dramatic events that sometimes piss people off.

Teddy Roosevelt was no party guy. He busted monopolies.

FDR pissed off his own mother, but he did what was best for the country. He actually taxed rich people.

Large changes and idealists are what shaped the most prosperous era in American history, not corporatists that manage to say folksy things every so often while they hobnob with bankers.

I'm pretty sure that this prosperous era you speak of was due to Europe being in shambles after WW2 and the rise of the American military/industrial complex.
 
I'm pretty sure that this prosperous era you speak of was due to Europe being in shambles after WW2 and the rise of the American military/industrial complex.

don't forget social programs being provided exclusively to white people thanks to the dixiecrats constantly threatening to split off
 
There's more to Hillary's health care goals than the title of the page.



Nearly every Democrat is in favor of universal coverage and it will never happen with a Republican controlled legislature.

I really hope it can happen. I think that should be the main objective.
 
about the minimum wage.

In NY and CA, it makes sense for it to be at $15/h but it doesn't make sense for somewhere like Idaho ..$12/h would be a better fit there

The Federal minimum wage is a floor, a one sized fits all floor. As it's a floor it makes more sense in a country as large and diverse as the US to be more pragmatic and set a reasonable national minimum (backed by additional tax benefits to boost the take home) and allow states, counties and cites to adopt higher 'local' floors based on their economic circumstances.

Clinton's proposed policy was based on Alan B Kruger's recommendations, Kruger was co-author of a 1993 paper showed incremental minimum wage rises had little effect of employment.

He wrote an article in the NYT prior to the primary season which is well worth a read. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/opinion/sunday/the-minimum-wage-how-much-is-too-much.html?_r=0

Research suggests that a minimum wage set as high as $12 an hour will do more good than harm for low-wage workers, but a $15-an-hour national minimum wage would put us in uncharted waters, and risk undesirable and unintended consequences...

I am frequently asked, “How high can the minimum wage go without jeopardizing employment of low-wage workers? And at what level would further minimum wage increases result in more job losses than wage gains, lowering the earnings of low-wage workers as a whole?”

Although available research cannot precisely answer these questions, I am confident that a federal minimum wage that rises to around $12 an hour over the next five years or so would not have a meaningful negative effect on United States employment. One reason for this judgment is that around 140 research projects commissioned by Britain’s independent Low Pay Commission have found that the minimum wage “has led to higher than average wage increases for the lowest paid, with little evidence of adverse effects on employment or the economy.” A $12-per-hour minimum wage in the United States phased in over several years would be in the same ballpark as Britain’s minimum wage today.

But $15 an hour is beyond international experience, and could well be counterproductive. Although some high-wage cities and states could probably absorb a $15-an-hour minimum wage with little or no job loss, it is far from clear that the same could be said for every state, city and town in the United States.

More logical is the proposed legislation from Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, and Robert C. Scott, Democrat of Virginia, calling for raising the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020. Their bill is co-sponsored by 32 senators, and supported by President Obama and Hillary Clinton. High-wage cities and states could raise their minimums to $15.

Although the plight of low-wage workers is a national tragedy, the push for a nationwide $15 minimum wage strikes me as a risk not worth taking, especially because other tools, such as the earned-income tax credit, can be used in combination with a higher minimum wage to improve the livelihoods of low-wage workers.
 
Are you SERIOUSLY going there again.
Her home state is NY.

Yeah, but the thing I take from it is she doesn't have the full support from liberals. And she might not have it by the general election.
 
Affordable healthcare is not far enough. It should be universal.

We also used to have a great public school system where rich and poor kids could get a good education.
Hillary thinks expanding that to public universities is too much because rich children like Trump's kids would also benefit. It's an asinine way to view large sweeping public projects. You pay for all because you have an investment in the community.

Just like local schools deserve funding even though your kids are already graduated and you gain nothing from it.

What utopia is this you speak of? Because surely it's not the United States of THIS America.

As a product of an inner city school system in a predominantly black area, this is complete and total bullshit.
 
Yeah, but the thing I take from it is she doesn't have the full support from liberals. And she might not have it by the general election.

Partially because Bernie is doing everything he can to make her look like a party shill, even though she has consistently been one of the most liberal people in he entire fucking party. I'm on mobile right now, but there is a graph floating around showing her voting record as a senator, and she was the second most liberal Democrat in the Senate.

But because she's not #1, she's a corporate shill. This is what I hate Sanders for the most.

Time for him to move out of the way and start the campaign against Trump, because Sanders lost months ago.
 
Yeah, but the thing I take from it is she doesn't have the full support from liberals. And she might not have it by the general election.

She won New York in 2008 by less points than 2016, and that was coming off being a popular senator, and New York was earlier, so Obama hadn't yet secured himself as the likely candidate.

She did about as well as any candidate would do in New York. It's too diverse of a state. And I don't mean that racially, I mean, the differences between Western, Northern, New York City, and Southern New York might as well be different states ideology wise.
 
She's correct. It's been over for a while.
Healthcare itself is a basic human right like drinking water and clean air.
I don't know about everyone else. But I have to pay for drinking water. And it's not even Evian.
And I'm part of the socialist utopia outside the US. Sad!
 
Is it still actually possible for Bernie to win at this point, however unlikely?

Barring some bolt of lighting striking down Hillary where she stands, not with any realistic chance, no. Compared to 2008, this should have been done ages ago save for the fact that Sanders had the funds to limp to the convention.

I mean if the arguments for him boil down to semantics at this point it's a done deal.
 
Is it still actually possible for Bernie to win at this point, however unlikely?
If he wins every remaining pledged delegate he still needs some of her super delegates to flip. It's possible. Like it's possible Chris Evans will show up in my bed wearing his costume from that scene in Not Another Teen Movie.
 
If he wins every remaining pledged delegate he still needs some of her super delegates to flip. It's possible. Like it's possible Chris Evans will show up in my bed wearing his costume from that scene in Not Another Teen Movie.

Jesus Christ that was Chris Evans wasn't it... I didn't realize it was him in that film.
 
Thanks for the responses. I'm a bit out of the loop.

That's a little disappointing because I prefer Bernie but as long as Trump doesn't win the election I'll be happy.
 
I don't understand HillaryGAFs disdain for the political process.

Irony aside.... Don't you worry, I reckon Hillary supporters will be enjoying the HELL out of the political process going forward, especially when California votes. And that includes the convention.

Good times.
 
Sure. Barring some miracle, she will be the Democratic nominee. I'm okay with that, and plan to vote for her in the general election. However, I'm not a fan of the fact that it wasn't really treated like a race. Since the beginning, people were saying that Sanders had absolutely no chance. Getting 43% of the popular vote is nowhere near getting blown out of the water like O'Malley or Chaffee.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom