Support NeoGAF

[Diprosalic]

Hillary is pretty right wing though. Its just that Trump realllly skews the Overton window

if Hillary is pretty right wing then Sanders is too.

 

[whytemyke]

And here I voted for him in my state. Guess I didn't really know him as much as I thought.

Same here. I was a vote that helped him win Michigan and now I keep thinking, maybe Michigan is what helped create this shitshow?

 

[exmachina64]

This is why he needs to stay in until DC (possibly til the convention, if he cocks it up). He wants to stay in, sure, but he needs to to push his supporters into doing something useful, rather than just leaving the political process once he concedes. The longer he holds on, the more he can talk them into using their grassroots political power to push for a liberal agenda, both on the state-wide and national levels.

To contrast, if he'd conceded a few hours ago, his supporters would be (generally speaking) disenfranchised with the dems, if not the political process as a whole. Contrast his anger at the system after Nevada with his speech just a few hours ago.

It's too late for that.

In order to push for a liberal agenda at the lower levels and build a progressive organization to accomplish this goal, he would have had to start months ago. It's impossible to accomplish this task within a week.

Spuck-uk and Sir Fragula are European that I'm aware of, here in Europe Hillary Clinton is what you consider right-wing on fiscal and foreign policy for example. She is left on social issues obviously. However with this campaign she has gone more to the left on these issues than she was in the past so it's disingenuous for them to say she is outright right-wing as of this moment if they have paid attention. She definitely was in the past though but it's not really appropriate as a basis for her current campaign although many may disagree with that.

Ah, Europeans.

 

[E-Cat]

I don't think we even have a political spectrum term for someone like Hillary on fiscal and foreign policy issues here in Finland.

Bernie would be right-wing.

 

[KingSnake]

Fascinating article, can't wait to see the HBO drama based on this.

That VEEP spin-off with Louis C.K. as Sanders.

 

[Y2Kev]

I don't think we even have a political spectrum term for someone like Hillary on fiscal and foreign policy issues here in Finland.

Bernie would be right-wing.

While that's great for Finland, here is a fact about AMERKA:

Hillary Clinton is the most progressive candidate ever to win the nomination of a major party.

I'm proud of that!

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

Hillary is pretty right wing though. Its just that Trump realllly skews the Overton window

The Female David Cameron? (that's a hideous thought)

 

[Maledict]

The Female David Cameron? (that's a hideous thought)

No. No no no no no.

It really saddens me that we Europeans make ourselves look like complete wombles sometimes by coming out with statements like 'Hillary is right wing in Europe' or 'Hillary would be a conservative'.

Hillary has spent her life fighting for equal rights, for women's rights, for better healthcare, and to decrease poverty. Cameron has spent his life fighting to slash benefits to the poor, tear apart our health service and has campaigned on a platform of racism as recently as last month.

They are nothing alike except for the fact they both support gay marriage. Hillary would not only NOT be a conservative in the Uk, she's actually more to the left than a lot of our labour politicians.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

These Sanders campaign staffers are Hillary shills and tools of the establishment

 

[HK-47]

The Female David Cameron? (that's a hideous thought)

Last I checked, Hillary wanted to improve public healthcare, not dismantle it.

 

[sangreal]

The premise of my argument was that people vote for inevitability, an inevitability that was reinforced by sites like CNN and the NYT consistently reporting delegate counts that "barely" made a distinction between the types.

Nevermind that Jeb's "inevitability" was never reflected in any polls among all candidates (and certainly wasn't there at the beginning start of primary voting).

How do you reconcile this with 2008?

 

[Maledict]

Also the fact that Jeb absolutely was in the lead of polls taken at the start of the primary process. He wasn't always lingering at 6%, when he entered the race and for the first few months he was clearly the front runner.

 

[Abstrusity]

I'll say what I've been saying. I'm upset that Sanders kinda shit the bed, but I'm not gonna go full Trump -- I'll vote for Hillary. It's not us she'll want to bomb, anyway. Hope you like Syria 2: ISIS boogaloo. All we need to do now is ensure Sanders doesn't run a third party ticket.

 

[Souldriver]

Spuck-uk and Sir Fragula are European that I'm aware of, here in Europe Hillary Clinton is what you consider right-wing on fiscal and foreign policy for example. She is left on social issues obviously. However with this campaign she has gone more to the left on these issues than she was in the past so it's disingenuous for them to say she is outright right-wing as of this moment if they have paid attention. She definitely was in the past though but it's not really appropriate as a basis for her current campaign although many may disagree with that.

It's wrong to claim "Sanders should stay in as a left wing alternative to the two right-wing candidates Hillary and Trump". If you think Sanders is left wing, Hillary is that as well. And both are miles apart from Trump. If you deny that, you're simply wrong.

I'm a dirty European as well, so I get where other Europeans are coming from when they claim or think Hillary is not leftist enough. In Europe, historically, the left has been more socialist and stronger than in the US. But even that picture is becoming more hazy as we speak. Europe has had almost ten years of right-wing austerity implemented, where the wellfare state is slowly being eroded. And most left-wing parties are adopting a "responsible left" attitude, which adds some rather right-wing (liberal in economic terms) aspects to their platform. Couple that with 8 years of Obama where the US is definitely taking a turn to the left, both economically and socially, it's starting to become a wash. The only differentiating factor is the American Republicans being total nutjobs compared to the European political discourse. But even that, with the EU and migration crisis, is starting to become a wash, what with our own nutjobs gaining traction again. I honestly don't think Europeans have much authority in claiming what is progressive/conservative/left/right, and more importantly, what is best for America.

All and all a Clinton presidency would continue to push the US gradually to the left, as a continuation of the Obama years. And that seems like a pretty good perspective to me.

 

[KingSnake]

This whole talk about right wing is pretty absurd. If you want to make comparisons then in terms of European politics, Hillary is a social liberal and Bernie a social democrat with some extreme left nuances. Both having positions outside their spectrum (like for gun control and external politics) because of the specifics of the American society. Even in Europe there is a difference from country to country, like the left in France and the left in Germany are not the same thing. Or the conservatives in Germany vs. the conservatives in UK.

 

[E-Cat]

While that's great for Finland, here is a fact about AMERKA:

Hillary Clinton is the most progressive candidate ever to win the nomination of a major party.

I'm proud of that!

Really?? Is she more progressive than Obama? Seems a lot more gung-ho on foreign policy to me, not to mention those sweet Wall Street dollars.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

No. No no no no no.

It really saddens me that we Europeans make ourselves look like complete wombles sometimes by coming out with statements like 'Hillary is right wing in Europe' or 'Hillary would be a conservative'.

Hillary has spent her life fighting for equal rights, for women's rights, for better healthcare, and to decrease poverty. Cameron has spent his life fighting to slash benefits to the poor, tear apart our health service and has campaigned on a platform of racism as recently as last month.

They are nothing alike except for the fact they both support gay marriage. Hillary would not only NOT be a conservative in the Uk, she's actually more to the left than a lot of our labour politicians.

Europeans makes ourselves look like wombles by comparing policital system in the first place.

Every country the centre ground is in a different place. Period. Right wing and left wing relates to that countries center ground, not any global standard.

 

[HK-47]

It's wrong to claim "Sanders should stay in as a left wing alternative to the two right-wing candidates Hillary and Trump". If you think Sanders is left wing, Hillary is that as well. And both are miles apart from Trump. If you deny that, you're simply wrong.

I'm a dirty European as well, so I get where other Europeans are coming from when they claim or think Hillary is not leftist enough. In Europe, historically, the left has been more socialist and stronger than in the US. But even that picture is becoming more hazy as we speak. Europe has had almost ten years of right-wing austerity implemented, where the wellfare state is slowly being eroded. And most left-wing parties are adopting a "responsible left" attitude, which adds some rather right-wing (liberal in economic terms) aspects to their platform. Couple that with 8 years of Obama where the US is definitely taking a turn to the left, both economically and socially, it's starting to become a wash. The only differentiating factor is the American Republicans being total nutjobs compared to the European political discourse. But even that, with the EU and migration crisis, is starting to become a wash, what with our own nutjobs gaining traction again. I honestly don't think Europeans have much authority in claiming what is progressive/conservative/left/right, and more importantly, what is best for America.

All and all a Clinton presidency would continue to push the US gradually to the left, as a continuation of the Obama years. And that seems like a pretty good perspective to me.

The main problem is that Hillary is mostly left on domestic issues but she is more hawkish with regard to foreign policy (at least compared to Obama), which is obviously the only thing most Euros really care about.

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

No. No no no no no.

It really saddens me that we Europeans make ourselves look like complete wombles sometimes by coming out with statements like 'Hillary is right wing in Europe' or 'Hillary would be a conservative'.

Hillary has spent her life fighting for equal rights, for women's rights, for better healthcare, and to decrease poverty. Cameron has spent his life fighting to slash benefits to the poor, tear apart our health service and has campaigned on a platform of racism as recently as last month.

They are nothing alike except for the fact they both support gay marriage. Hillary would not only NOT be a conservative in the Uk, she's actually more to the left than a lot of our labour politicians.

Thanks for the clarification! I've avoided the Presidential Nomination threads as they seem a scary tribal place so don't know too much about Hilary. Be gentle on this - I thought she was in with the banks like Conservatives are?

 

[HK-47]

Really?? Is she more progressive than Obama? Seems a lot more gung-ho on foreign policy to me, not to mention those sweet Wall Street dollars.

lol Obama got a lot of sweet Wall Street and corporate dollars as well.

 

[KingSnake]

Also talking about Hillary as beyond right wing by comparison with your own country when you have actual extremists in the government is at least tasteless.

 

[Kathian]

What does progressive policy have to do with foreign policy honestly?

 

[E-Cat]

lol Obama got a lot of sweet Wall Street and corporate dollars as well.

I suppose so. But in what sense is Hillary more progressive than Obama, exactly?

What does progressive policy have to do with foreign policy honestly?

My understanding is that progressives usually tone down on the warmongering rhetoric. Kind of goes hand-in-hand with being liberal in general.

 

[Kyzer]

I'll say what I've been saying. I'm upset that Sanders kinda shit the bed, but I'm not gonna go full Trump -- I'll vote for Hillary. It's not us she'll want to bomb, anyway. Hope you like Syria 2: ISIS boogaloo. All we need to do now is ensure Sanders doesn't run a third party ticket.

It's gotta be hard to justify voting based on who intends to go to war with who considering war is something you shouldn't be able to foresee (trump threatening Armageddon aside)

 

[Blader]

Not the plentiful in adjectives commentary that essentially pictures Bernie as a megalomaniac.

This is nothing new from people who have actually worked with Bernie over the years, including one GAFer, which is certainly closer and more personal experience than you have to speak to.

 

[TyrantII]

Par for course, and how you know it's over.

Losing campaigns get into these negative feedback loops and the last show to drop is the tell all blame game to stick it on someone else, so you can get hired again. Sanders at the top is naturally who will get the brunt of it. Don't take it all as fact.

House and Senate who opposed him to not making more of an issue out of Clinton’s email server investigation and Bill Clinton’s sex scandals, all of which they discussed as possible lines of attack in the fall. They blame Clinton going after him on gun control for goading him into letting loose on her Goldman Sachs speeches.

“If they hadn’t started at it by really going hard at him on guns, raising a series of issues against him, that really was what led to him being much, much more aggressive than he otherwise would have been,” said Tad Devine

This is damning though.

Bernies policy on guns is fair game. I don't see how attaching the Clintons on personal grounds is tick for tack.

But it makes sense when the only only position difference worth a damn has you on the wrong side. Gun control is the biggest policy difference where Clinton is more liberal. Tack would be coming after her for one if her policy positions. Unfortunately, they're not much diffetent on anything else in policy, or ability to get it done

 

[Dash_Riprock]

What a horrible human being.

 

[wesleyshark]

I count three actual fedoras in the as shot of Sanders hq on CNN right now

It's all about ethics in political revolution

 

[Slayven]

I hope there is a documentary

 

[crisdecuba]

What a horrible human being.

If this is how you define horrible, then you leave yourself very little room on the scale...

 

[TyrantII]

It's wrong to claim "Sanders should stay in as a left wing alternative to the two right-wing candidates Hillary and Trump". If you think Sanders is left wing, Hillary is that as well. And both are miles apart from Trump. If you deny that, you're simply wrong.

I'm a dirty European as well, so I get where other Europeans are coming from when they claim or think Hillary is not leftist enough. In Europe, historically, the left has been more socialist and stronger than in the US. But even that picture is becoming more hazy as we speak. Europe has had almost ten years of right-wing austerity implemented, where the wellfare state is slowly being eroded. And most left-wing parties are adopting a "responsible left" attitude, which adds some rather right-wing (liberal in economic terms) aspects to their platform. Couple that with 8 years of Obama where the US is definitely taking a turn to the left, both economically and socially, it's starting to become a wash. The only differentiating factor is the American Republicans being total nutjobs compared to the European political discourse. But even that, with the EU and migration crisis, is starting to become a wash, what with our own nutjobs gaining traction again. I honestly don't think Europeans have much authority in claiming what is progressive/conservative/left/right, and more importantly, what is best for America.

All and all a Clinton presidency would continue to push the US gradually to the left, as a continuation of the Obama years. And that seems like a pretty good perspective to me.

It think Europeans also forget that the biggest thing the US President does is pick Supreem Court Justices. Since the 60s, there's been a Herculean battle on the right to stack the court and legislate from the Bench to roll back the advances in civil rights, financial protection, and reproductive rights.

The next president is likely to pick between 1-4 justices on top of the current vacancy. Be it Bernie or Hillary, those picks will be even more left than Obama's picks which have been reliably progressive and modern.

I wouldn't put it past Hillary want to put women justices in the majority as well.


The real fight for progressive, left ideals is in taking back the Senate this year; and building a structure to take back the house and individual state legislatures 2018 and beyond.

Hillary is never going to veto progressive legislation that comes across her desk from congress. Trump would never even see it if he wins, as he stacks the court for another generation of rulings like citizens United and birth control denial.

 

[Slayven]

Surprised there was nothing about the Vatican trip

 

[hobblygobbly]

It's wrong to claim "Sanders should stay in as a left wing alternative to the two right-wing candidates Hillary and Trump". If you think Sanders is left wing, Hillary is that as well. And both are miles apart from Trump. If you deny that, you're simply wrong.

I'm a dirty European as well, so I get where other Europeans are coming from when they claim or think Hillary is not leftist enough. In Europe, historically, the left has been more socialist and stronger than in the US. But even that picture is becoming more hazy as we speak. Europe has had almost ten years of right-wing austerity implemented, where the wellfare state is slowly being eroded. And most left-wing parties are adopting a "responsible left" attitude, which adds some rather right-wing (liberal in economic terms) aspects to their platform. Couple that with 8 years of Obama where the US is definitely taking a turn to the left, both economically and socially, it's starting to become a wash. The only differentiating factor is the American Republicans being total nutjobs compared to the European political discourse. But even that, with the EU and migration crisis, is starting to become a wash, what with our own nutjobs gaining traction again. I honestly don't think Europeans have much authority in claiming what is progressive/conservative/left/right, and more importantly, what is best for America.

All and all a Clinton presidency would continue to push the US gradually to the left, as a continuation of the Obama years. And that seems like a pretty good perspective to me.

I 100% agree with you as a European myself, I never said that Sanders should stay as a left-wing alternative unless "you" is referring to people in general that think so. My post was just in context of why some Europeans think Clinton is right-wing when some posters asked why they think that just as your post also explained.

 

[Maledict]

Thanks for the clarification! I've avoided the Presidential Nomination threads as they seem a scary tribal place so don't know too much about Hilary. Be gentle on this - I thought she was in with the banks like Conservatives are?

Hillary was for Frank-Dodd, the major piece of banking regulation legislation that arose out of the financial crisis, and her policy platform is clear about taking further steps to tackle the industry. She has some very informed policy around the potential next big issues (like shadow banking) which no-one else is mentioning.

Just because she hasn't announced a policy of hanging every one in two bankers doesn't mean she's in bed with them. Cameron's trying to sell the whole country off piecemeal, Clinton wants further regulation and limits on Wall Street. Huge difference.

 

[CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls]

Politicians are politicians and any differentiation from that norm is obscured by closing time.

I admire Sanders for his policies and what he wanted to do. I don't have to admire the man, per se.

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

Hillary was for Frank-Dodd, the major piece of banking regulation legislation that arose out of the financial crisis, and her policy platform is clear about taking further steps to tackle the industry. She has some very informed policy around the potential next big issues (like shadow banking) which no-one else is mentioning.

Just because she hasn't announced a policy of hanging every one in two bankers doesn't mean she's in bed with them. Cameron's trying to sell the whole country off piecemeal, Clinton wants further regulation and limits on Wall Street. Huge difference.

I was just going from the fact that three of her top five individual donors have been Wall Street banks - Goldman Sachs, Citibank, and JP Morgan, not any policies of hanging bankers.

 

[giga]

I hope there is a documentary

More likely we'll get a game change part 2 for trump's rise.

 

[Y2Kev]

I was just going from the fact that three of her top five individual donors have been Wall Street banks - Goldman Sachs, Citibank, and JP Morgan, not any policies of hanging bankers.

They've been employees of banks donating to Hillary. I mean I'm included in that and I am for Wall Street regulation.

For example, completely abolishing Dodd frank and replacing it with nothing. That is really important.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

I was hearing about this kind of stuff about Sanders right when he announced he was running. It took awhile for it to manifest itself in the campaign, but the tone and direction of the campaign is without a doubt 100% Bernie Sanders. I give him a lot of credit for how successful it was, but mostly for how much of a cult of personality he was able to build in spite of it not matching his actual personality.

 

[Amir0x]

As I've said over and over, in the end Bernie was just a pathetic candidate whose ego grew so out of control he started to believe his own bullshit. This article just underlines just how bad of a candidate he had really been. What a bullet we dodged with this troll candidate.

 

[TyrantII]

I was just going from the fact that three of her top five donors have been people employed at Wall Street banks - Goldman Sachs, Citibank, and JP Morgan, not any policies of hanging bankers.

That changes when context is applied. Especially to a senator from New York.

Both my contributions to Bernie and Hillary are consider Wallstreet due to my employer.

Should they both be disqualified now?

 

[sangreal]

Collecting employer info for large donations was a mistake

 

[platocplx]

in terms of sanders I liked the message, but i really just couldnt get on board with the messenger.

 

[hammysaurusrex]

Wow, reading that article... my narrative has been totally incorrect. I've been giving Bernie the benefit of the doubt that he was principled and would do the right thing, if not for that damn Weaver and Devine whispering lies in his air that he could become king. The reality seems far from that. I should have taken the opinions of the members of congress that have worked with him more seriously that saw a lot of deficits in his personality to accomplish anything - reading them in retrospect, it's obvious they saw this coming.

I kind of pity him - he's a very, very angry man.

 

[Souldriver]

The main problem is that Hillary is mostly left on domestic issues but she is more hawkish with regard to foreign policy (at least compared to Obama), which is obviously the only thing most Euros really care about.

That is true though. It's one of the topics where I also have serious doubts about her ideas and policies.

And for Europeans, it definitely sounds too hawkish and interventionist, which we associate with the right. But perhaps it would be better to associate it with America instead. Almost all presidents have been interventionist, whether they are left or right. And in recent history at least, it seems like democrats still have the more nuanced and hesitant approach than republicans.

That doesn't change the fact that on certain issues (like Palestine) I think Obama's approach might be better than Hillary's. It's a valid criticism.

 

[Souldriver]

I 100% agree with you as a European myself, I never said that Sanders should stay as a left-wing alternative unless "you" is referring to people in general that think so. My post was just in context of why some Europeans think Clinton is right-wing when some posters asked why they think that just as your post also explained.

No, I meant the "you" more as the people you were quoting, like Sir Fragula, who said "Hillary is pretty right wing". It wasn't directed at you personally, and I just wanted to continue on what you were saying.

 

[Nikodemos]

The people claiming Hillary has gotten more good press probably were asleep the whole time. Most of the stuff on her was emails, emails, emails, emails, Libya, emails, emails, emails, black incarceration in the 90s, emails, emails, emails, Libya etc. ad nauseam.

 

[KingK]

Look at all the anti-semitism in this thread. There really is no other reason to dislike Bernie. I guess Jewish politicians are just held to different standards!

Spoiler

That was sarcasm.

Not sure how much of the article I believe, but I have been moderately disappointed in some of his campaign's moves during its death throes. I also think people have been vastly exaggerating how much he's "hurting the party" though. The democratic party is hardly perfect and deserves a lot of criticism from the left. If you care about progressive causes you shouldn't want the party to take your vote for granted and get complacent. You want to keep the pressure on them to counteract pressure from the right. The problem is some of Sanders criticisms recently are rather petty and have little or nothing to do with progressive policy.

If you want to win the Democratic nomination, you can't just appeal to white people.

This is now about to be true for the Presidency as well. (and may be true already.)

Since when has socialism/leftist politics not appealed to people of color? Hillary put more of a focus on social issues while campaigning and already had a long and generally positive reputation in many of those communities, but there's nothing about Sanders platform that excludes or ignores non-whites. Although I'm sure some of his fans online didn't help.

If people have been saying it for 25+ years, there's probably fire where that smoke is coming from.

Unless it's Clinton, amirite?

 

[Amir0x]

The people claiming Hillary has gotten more good press probably were asleep the whole time. Most of the stuff on her was emails, emails, emails, emails, Libya, emails, emails, emails, black incarceration in the 90s, emails, emails, emails, Libya etc. ad nauseam.

It's probably the single most hilarious bit of revisionist history to date in this campaign. Hillary has been under siege from virtually every corner - including the entire Republican war machine - for YEARS now. Bernie has never, not even for a single week, been under that sort of intense scrutiny and fire. Never, period. Literally every day Hillary had to weather some new fucked up attack with virtually no merit. And then this piece of shit Bernie Sanders has the fucking gall to try to pin up those conspiracy theories and bullshit attacks and pray for her indictment so he can usurp the will of the people who CLEARLY voted for her more?

What a goddamned shame Bernie is.

 

[Already Torn]

If this is how you define horrible, then you leave yourself very little room on the scale...

Conning people out of millions of dollars to fuel your own ego at the potential cost of the future of your country (refusing to support down ticket candidates unless they kiss your feet first) isn't exactly saintly. If not horrible, it's reaaaally sleazy and gross.