Bernie hurt himself in the debate.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Really, I think the problem is that Hillary is still an instinctively hawkish person.  It's not her genius, but her instincts, that are the problem.

Yes.  She is instinctively hawkish and for her to pretend she is some great friend of Obama after dog whistling through the entire 2008 primary is beyond absurd.  It really is a disgrace to the Democratic party that we would be considering a standard bearer who thinks it "sends a message" to deport children, that we will "never ever" have single payer because it's too hard (?), that it's okay to lie and bet against the American people by assuming they will never vote for a black candidate.  There's a reason Republicans are okay with Hillary Clinton.  They have plenty in common.

Well said.

Hillary Clinton:  The real conservative choice for president.

Jesus effing Christ! That's exactly what America needs. A Democratic Tea Party on a DINO hunt.

They are so "okay" with her that they've spent the last 24 years attempting to destroy her. Yeah, okay

[RaphaelDLG]

Really, I think the problem is that Hillary is still an instinctively hawkish person.  It's not her genius, but her instincts, that are the problem.

Yes.  She is instinctively hawkish and for her to pretend she is some great friend of Obama after dog whistling through the entire 2008 primary is beyond absurd.  It really is a disgrace to the Democratic party that we would be considering a standard bearer who thinks it "sends a message" to deport children, that we will "never ever" have single payer because it's too hard (?), that it's okay to lie and bet against the American people by assuming they will never vote for a black candidate.  There's a reason Republicans are okay with Hillary Clinton.  They have plenty in common.

Well said.

Hillary Clinton:  The real conservative choice for president.

Jesus effing Christ! That's exactly what America needs. A Democratic Tea Party on a DINO hunt.

They are so "okay" with her that they've spent the last 24 years attempting to destroy her. Yeah, okay

Yeah, that's because the American Conservatives of the 90s-10s are so far right they are like the equivalent of the Heath Ledger Joker and regardless of whether or not they actually have a huge disagreement with Hilldog in many areas they are aggressively, ruthlessly, cleverly partisan anyways so they magnify the difference to win support.

Like, who is more conservative, 2000s Hilldog or David Cameron - I honestly can't really tell.

[Trapsy]

Clinton should've pulled a Christie on Sanders.

[Trapsy]

If this new and empty narrative works ("if you disagree with Obama on anything or don't like the guy, then you are a feckless traitor and not a real Democrat"), then the GOP narrative that Democrats are nothing but a chimera coalition of ill-informed people voting based on personality, personal attributes and other components of identity politics will be vindicated. It's fine if you support one candidate or another based on the actual ideological positions taken by that candidate, but if you actually flip your support based on something like this, then you are an idiot and this "Majority Coalition" is a fycking joke. We'll see, I guess!

It's not about disagreeing with Obama on policy. Sanders seems to have this indication that Obama failed to deliver because he sold out progressives. It's an attack on his character not policy

[RaphaelDLG]

If this new and empty narrative works ("if you disagree with Obama on anything or don't like the guy, then you are a feckless traitor and not a real Democrat"), then the GOP narrative that Democrats are nothing but a chimera coalition of ill-informed people voting based on personality, personal attributes and other components of identity politics will be vindicated. It's fine if you support one candidate or another based on the actual ideological positions taken by that candidate, but if you actually flip your support based on something like this, then you are an idiot and this "Majority Coalition" is a fycking joke. We'll see, I guess!

It's not about disagreeing with Obama on policy. Sanders seems to have this indication that Obama failed to deliver because he sold out progressives. It's an attack on his character not policy

He did kind of screw progressives, all though in Obama's defense, he didn't really sell them out or anything, he just genuinely has a fundamentally different world view.  The quote from Favreau in this article is instructive:

http://www.vox.com/2016/2/11/10967374/obama-staffers-bernie-sanders

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Really, I think the problem is that Hillary is still an instinctively hawkish person.  It's not her genius, but her instincts, that are the problem.

Yes.  She is instinctively hawkish and for her to pretend she is some great friend of Obama after dog whistling through the entire 2008 primary is beyond absurd.  It really is a disgrace to the Democratic party that we would be considering a standard bearer who thinks it "sends a message" to deport children, that we will "never ever" have single payer because it's too hard (?), that it's okay to lie and bet against the American people by assuming they will never vote for a black candidate.  There's a reason Republicans are okay with Hillary Clinton.  They have plenty in common.

Well said.

Hillary Clinton:  The real conservative choice for president.

Jesus effing Christ! That's exactly what America needs. A Democratic Tea Party on a DINO hunt.

christ, you are a greek who is in favor of austerity measures who supports an american president who's forwarded an economic agenda that demonstrates the stupidity of "contractionary fiscal expansion" and that embodies the virtues of counter-cyclical fiscal policies. count me as someone on a "DINO hunt" if being on a "DINO hunt" means opposing candidates that a right-wing Greek weirdo, who is okay with the undemocratic rule of EU bureaucrats, supports.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Really, I think the problem is that Hillary is still an instinctively hawkish person.  It's not her genius, but her instincts, that are the problem.

Yes.  She is instinctively hawkish and for her to pretend she is some great friend of Obama after dog whistling through the entire 2008 primary is beyond absurd.  It really is a disgrace to the Democratic party that we would be considering a standard bearer who thinks it "sends a message" to deport children, that we will "never ever" have single payer because it's too hard (?), that it's okay to lie and bet against the American people by assuming they will never vote for a black candidate.  There's a reason Republicans are okay with Hillary Clinton.  They have plenty in common.

Well said.

Hillary Clinton:  The real conservative choice for president.

Jesus effing Christ! That's exactly what America needs. A Democratic Tea Party on a DINO hunt.

christ, you are a greek who is in favor of austerity measures who supports an american president who's forwarded an economic agenda that demonstrates the stupidity of "contractionary fiscal expansion" and that embodies the virtues of counter-cyclical fiscal policies. count me as someone on a "DINO hunt" if being on a "DINO hunt" means opposing candidates that a right-wing Greek weirdo, who is okay with the undemocratic rule of EU bureaucrats, supports.

Ummm, what?
Obama, along with Geithner first and then Lew, has consistently pressured Merkel and the other European policymakers to abandon austerity and loosen up fiscal policy, to the point that Schauble has openly expressed his annoyance with the American interference in EU's internal affairs.

Also, what the fyck has that to do with the rabid opposition of the Berniebots to Hillary?
Has she advocated austerity in any way and I missed it?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Really, I think the problem is that Hillary is still an instinctively hawkish person.  It's not her genius, but her instincts, that are the problem.

Yes.  She is instinctively hawkish and for her to pretend she is some great friend of Obama after dog whistling through the entire 2008 primary is beyond absurd.  It really is a disgrace to the Democratic party that we would be considering a standard bearer who thinks it "sends a message" to deport children, that we will "never ever" have single payer because it's too hard (?), that it's okay to lie and bet against the American people by assuming they will never vote for a black candidate.  There's a reason Republicans are okay with Hillary Clinton.  They have plenty in common.

Well said.

Hillary Clinton:  The real conservative choice for president.

Jesus effing Christ! That's exactly what America needs. A Democratic Tea Party on a DINO hunt.

christ, you are a greek who is in favor of austerity measures who supports an american president who's forwarded an economic agenda that demonstrates the stupidity of "contractionary fiscal expansion" and that embodies the virtues of counter-cyclical fiscal policies. count me as someone on a "DINO hunt" if being on a "DINO hunt" means opposing candidates that a right-wing Greek weirdo, who is okay with the undemocratic rule of EU bureaucrats, supports.

Ummm, what?
Obama, along with Geithner first and then Lew, has consistently pressured Merkel and the other European policymakers to abandon austerity and loosen up fiscal policy, to the point that Schauble has openly expressed his annoyance with the American interference in EU's internal affairs.

Also, what the fyck has that to do with the rabid opposition of the Berniebots to Hillary?
Has she advocated austerity in any way and I missed it?

english: do you speak it.

my point is that:
1. the obama administration has forwarded an economic agenda that is very "keynesian" and in touch with prudential macroeconomic practices. everything that you are stating about lew and geithner forms the basis of my post.
2. if i am remembering this correctly, you supported the memorandum and ditched pasok for some center-right liberal party because pasok was insufficiently reasonable.

this really isn't a complex point. i am questioning your bonafides and your general ability to accuse people of being purity trolls or left-wing tea party types seeing as you have a history of being opposed to the left in your own country. the democratic party is, in fact, a big-tent party of the left and my wonderful president's economic policies are a testament to this fact.

anyways, i do not think that berniebros on this forum are passionately opposed to clinton for the most part. i think they are simply aligned with his ideology and support him as such. it's not our fault that clinton has ran a condescending campaign over the past few weeks that implies that sanders supporters are either misogynists or gender-traitors or that a single-payer healthcare system, an idea which hillary clinton was once well-disposed to, would "damage" americans etc. furthermore, few people on this forum believe that hillary clinton should exit the party or that her "establishment" allies are DINOs. the last time i checked, it is the rabid clintonites who imply that they'd sooner vote for a billionaire than sanders.  this, in my view, is ideological purity trolling or dogmatism.

[Trapsy]

If this new and empty narrative works ("if you disagree with Obama on anything or don't like the guy, then you are a feckless traitor and not a real Democrat"), then the GOP narrative that Democrats are nothing but a chimera coalition of ill-informed people voting based on personality, personal attributes and other components of identity politics will be vindicated. It's fine if you support one candidate or another based on the actual ideological positions taken by that candidate, but if you actually flip your support based on something like this, then you are an idiot and this "Majority Coalition" is a fycking joke. We'll see, I guess!

It's not about disagreeing with Obama on policy. Sanders seems to have this indication that Obama failed to deliver because he sold out progressives. It's an attack on his character not policy

He did kind of screw progressives, all though in Obama's defense, he didn't really sell them out or anything, he just genuinely has a fundamentally different world view.  The quote from Favreau in this article is instructive:

http://www.vox.com/2016/2/11/10967374/obama-staffers-bernie-sanders

You can make strong contrast with Obama without throwing shade. I really don't understand Bernie Sanders.

[Landslide Lyndon]

english: do you speak it.

my point is that:
1. the obama administration has forwarded an economic agenda that is very "keynesian" and in touch with prudential macroeconomic practices. everything that you are stating about lew and geithner forms the basis of my post.
2. if i am remembering this correctly, you supported the memorandum and ditched pasok for some center-right liberal party because pasok was insufficiently reasonable.

this really isn't a complex point. i am questioning your bonafides and your general ability to accuse people of being purity trolls or left-wing tea party types seeing as you have a history of being opposed to the left in your own country. the democratic party is, in fact, a big-tent party of the left and my wonderful president's economic policies are a testament to this fact.

anyways, i do not think that berniebros on this forum are passionately opposed to clinton for the most part. i think they are simply aligned with his ideology and support him as such. it's not our fault that clinton has ran a condescending campaign over the past few weeks that implies that sanders supporters are either misogynists or gender-traitors or that a single-payer healthcare system, an idea which hillary clinton was once well-disposed to, would "damage" americans etc. furthermore, few people on this forum believe that hillary clinton should exit the party or that her "establishment" allies are DINOs. the last time i checked, it is the rabid clintonites who imply that they'd sooner vote for a billionaire than sanders.  this, in my view, is ideological purity trolling or dogmatism.

Dude, you're seriously messed up. Really.

Can you find any posts where I support austerity in Europe?
I always said that Obama followed the right policies and we should do the same if we want to get out of this crisis.

As for the Berniebots, just today I saw posts here that call Hillary "evil". That just pisses me off and makes it impossible to take them seriously. If they change their attitudes then we'll see what happens. Otherwise don't ask me why I'm critical of people who think that Krugman and Ezra Klein are corporate sell-outs.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Bernie likely doomed himself by attacking President Obama rather than embracing him like Hillary did. If you look at it, in 2014 mostly all the democratic candidates that ran for senate attacked or distanced themselves from Obama and they ended up loosing badly. Hillary did the right thing by standing by Obama and defending him. That will help her a lot in the end.

In the end, that's true.  Obama is the Ronald Reagan of today's Democrats progressives; an iconic figure.  Bernie's beyond progressive; he's a "democratic socialist" who's never run for office as a Democrat until now.   

[Virginiá]

In the end, that's true.  Obama is the Ronald Reagan of today's Democrats progressives; an iconic figure.  Bernie's beyond progressive; he's a "democratic socialist" who's never run for office as a Democrat until now.    

I would say Sanders has potential to be transformative for Millennials/GenZ. Young people absolutely love the guy, and based on polls so far, he looks to be the only candidate in the entire race who can pull in perhaps better margins among Millennials / < 40yr olds than Obama did in 2008 (66% among 18-29yr olds). On the flip side, he doesn't seem to be as appealing to people over 40, and even less appealing to the 60+ age group.

Still, though, just him running a strong primary campaign is already helping to lock in young people to his vision of America.