Like it or Not, Hillary Clinton is Being More Honest with Voters Than Bernie Sanders

Yes… yes, I’ve heard it all before. Apparently I’m some sort of “paid shill” for Hillary (still waiting on that check, by the way), I’m a “fake progressive,” and I’m just “afraid” of the Sanders revolution.

Now that we got that out of the way, hopefully now we can focus on what I mean when I say Hillary Clinton has been more honest with voters than Bernie Sanders.

I certainly don’t mean that Bernie Sanders is a liar or a dishonest person. In fact, despite what most people may think about either candidate, according to non-partisan fact-checking site Politifact, Clinton and Sanders both tell the truth at about the same rate. Clinton’s “True/Mostly True” score is 50 percent while Sanders comes in at 52 percent.

What I mean when I say Clinton is being more honest with voters than Sanders is that, for maybe the first time, we’re seeing a leading candidate of a major political party essentially telling voters: Look, I know what my opponent is telling you sounds great, but based on the realities of how government works, what he’s promising he’s going to do isn’t remotely feasible or realistic.

For as much flack as Clinton gets from many Sanders supporters for supposedly saying whatever she feels will benefit her most politically, the truth is, she could have simply gone all-in on single-payer health care, free public college and a $15 an hour minimum wage to leave very little gap between her and Sanders. Politically speaking, especially as it relates to the primaries, that would have probably been the easier thing to do.

However, the political realities of an election are as such that you can either run on ideological purity or you can run on realistic ideas.

Sure, many of the policies on which Sanders has largely built his campaign are more liberal than several of Clinton’s policies. He wants single-payer, she wants to improve and expand the Affordable Care Act. He wants free public college, she wants debt-free public college. He wants a $15 minimum wage, she wants $12. The problem with what Sanders wants to do is that his big plans stand absolutely zero chance at ever getting through Congress.

Now I know what some of you are going to say: The wave of support he’ll bring to the polls in November would hand Congress back over to Democrats so he could get this passed. 

No, it won’t.

First, there’s almost zero chance Democrats reclaim a majority in the House of Representatives this November, though there is a distinct possibility that they can retake the majority in the Senate. But even if, by some miracle, Democrats took back the House and gained a majority in the Senate – they would still need 60 seats in the Senate to prevent Republicans from being able to filibuster legislation. That’s even more unlikely than Democrats winning back a majority in the House.

But even beyond all of that, there’s another reality many Sanders supporters seem to ignore. That is, there are quite a few congressional Democrats from somewhat conservative areas of this country supported by left of center voters who would oppose some of the policies on which Sanders is running. So it’s not just that Sanders would need Democrats to take back both the House and Senate, he would need overwhelming majorities in both houses to stand any chance of his proposals getting through the legislative process.

Now if you want to tell yourself that’s all possible this November, go right ahead if that makes you feel better. But that’s not going to change what the political realities are.

In fact, even Sanders knows an overwhelming Democratic majority in Congress is unlikely based on his answer to a question during CNN’s town hall when he was asked how he plans to get any of this passed. His answer wasn’t that he thinks Democrats are going to shock the world by winning overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate. It was his claim that he has a record working with the other side to get things done. Though the key phrase he used during his answer was “when there was common ground.”

I can promise you this much: when it comes to socializing health care, free public college, more than doubling the minimum wage, raising taxes on the middle class and passing trillions in tax hikes for the wealthy – there’s absolutely zero “common ground” to be found within the GOP on any of that.

I’m not saying Clinton has been perfect. I think when she says that Sanders wants to “rip up Obamacare and Medicare” she’s being a bit disingenuous. While technically true (being that Medicare has copays, and Sanders’ single-payer plan doesn’t, it’s not really “Medicare-for-all”) in that he’s wanting to get rid of the systems we have now, he wants to replace it with his plan. So it’s misleading to claim that he’s trying to “get rid” of something. The context of what she’s saying is that we’ve spent years trying to get where we are now with health care reform so we should build on that instead of trying to start completely over from scratch – especially with plans she knows aren’t politically realistic.

At least not now. In the future? Probably. But I see the path to single-payer health care through expanding the Affordable Care Act to such an extent that it eventually transitions us toward true universal health care. While that might take longer than most people want, I think that’s a much more plausible strategy than going straight for a complete overhaul of our entire health care system.

Again, I’m not calling Bernie Sanders a liar. As I’ve said for months, if he ultimately wins the nomination I’ll fight relentlessly for him to be our next president just as I would for Hillary Clinton. What I’m saying is that, based on the realities of government, he’s building his campaign based upon ideas that just aren’t realistic. He’s not lying as much as he’s misrepresenting what he could actually get accomplished if he were president. While all politicians do this, including President Obama and Hillary Clinton, his entire campaign is mainly built upon ideas that are so far left that he would have trouble getting some Democrats to support them.

Another response I’m sure I’ll get is the typical “ideological purist” response of: We need a revolution to come in and change everything to put an end to the status quo. “Settling” is what we’ve done for too long, which is why nothing ever gets done. 

Look, you won’t get any argument from me that our government generally sucks and needs to change. That being said, politics is often about knowing how to pick your battles. In fact, sometimes it’s about taking one step back to get two steps ahead. And that’s never going to change no matter how many times you say we “need a political revolution.” Politics, since its inception centuries ago, has always been a slow process toward progress. Ultimately, pushing too hard for something when the environment isn’t conducive to accomplishing those goals can actually make progress even more difficult to achieve in the future.

We have two candidates running very similar, yet still very different campaigns. On one side we have Bernie Sanders, who’s giving many on the far left exactly what they’ve wanted to hear for years. He’s making a lot of huge promises that play right into the hopes and dreams of far-left liberals. And on the other side we have Hillary Clinton, who’s still very liberal on a lot of these issues, telling voters the truth about the realities of government and what sort of progressive goals are realistically achievable based upon those realities. Even though by doing so she’s alienated some of the liberal base.

Ultimately, whether it’s Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as the Democratic nominee for president, I’m going to bust my butt to make damn sure Republicans don’t retake the White House in 2016. Because no matter what your feelings might be about either the “dishonest Wall Street shill” Clinton or the “unrealistic grumpy socialist” Sanders, both candidates are far… far better than anything the GOP will nominate.

And as I’ve said plenty of times before, there’s far too much at stake this election to allow a Republican to be our next president.

Feel free to hit me up on Twitter or Facebook and let me know what you all think.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • James Schroder

    I applaud the Sanders supporters, as I do the Hillary Supporters. In the end, it is much more important to keep the White House in the hands of the democratic party than ever allow a republican to pack the courts with neocon neo-fascist judges like Scalia or Thomas. If that were to happen, it would be the end of this republic. So, I will choose the safe candidate and support Hillary because I believe ultimately, she has the best chance of election.

    Like Allen, if Sanders pulls off the primary victory, I will support him with time and money….for the good of the republic. I IMPLORE Bernie supports to consider doing the same for Hillary if she wins. If you don’t then you, by default, vote for the republicans.

    • AtheismRules

      James – this is based on the demonstrably false premise that BS supporters consider her a Democrat (sic).

      At least 41% (of BS supporters) have said that she is a DINO – and wont vote for a Republican (HRC). Having analysed and compared policies and voting – it is hard to argue with that observation.

      If you want the candidate with the best chance – then surveys are already saying that Bernie has.

      • John Cross

        You are the kind of scum who is going to destroy the Democratic party. Why don’t you go back to your Trump/Cruz love fest. BS is not even a registered Democrat. Can’t lower himself so low apparently.

      • Sanity Please

        With Bernie Sanders, what you see is what you get. His message will be the same today, tomorrow, and in January 2017. The same cannot be said of Hillary Clinton. She will do or say anything to be president. She’s a phony, and people instinctively distrust her. Sanders will take the fight to the Republicans and be in the face of whichever clown emerges from their primary debacle every day. I’ll take my chances with
        Sanders. I hope he buries Clinton in the primaries.

      • Blaine Coleman

        Yeah, you support not-evolving, while truly intelligent people’ minds actually evolve…

      • Sheila

        People “instinctively” distrust her? No. Certain factions have been waging a war against her for 30 years and it’s just sunk in. People THINK it’s instinct, but it’s just repetition. It’s scientifically proven that even when presented with evidence to discredit a prior false belief, people will still believe the lie because they heard it first.

      • Jeri Okamura

        Sheila. You choose to ignore the fact that her untrustworthy rating is second only to Trump’s.

        You Hillary people have such blinders on! You actually believe that the only reason Bernie supporters think she is a liar and a criminal is because we’re not capable of thinking for ourselves.

        I’m 61 and that means I’m old enough to have lived through Bill’s administration. Just because the Republicans relentlessly nailed Bill and Hillary for a variety of illegal activities throughout Bill’s entire time in office doesn’t mean they didn’t commit those crimes.

        If you can possibly get yourself to be objective, do a Google search about Vince Foster’s death. There were many others that we never heard about.

        The Clintons are used to being able to live above the law. They know how get leverage in high places and they know how to use it.

        Haven’t you ever wondered why the Republicans have not made one claim of illegality or shady dealings against the Obama’s, even though they really HATE him?

        You Hillary people are incredibly naive to think that just because Hillary claims those investigations are a Republican conspiracy it is true. Do you also believe everything else she’s been saying on the campaign trail and in the debates? REALLY NAIVE!

      • A Clarke

        The problem with HRC is that she doesn’t evolve; she triangulates. To me, that is an affront, and an insult to my intelligence.

      • A Clarke

        I’m good with that.

      • Mona Small

        ❝my neighbor’ s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet❞….A few Town ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a Town ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here:a680➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsBatch/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦:❦::::a680……

      • Sheila

        She and Obama share the same policies, almost word for word. If you support Obama but not Hillary, I see only one explanation….

      • Valerie Bryan

        Sheila, what you probably don’t get is that Sanders is the candidate a lot of us thought we were getting with Obama. But time and time again he slid right in many worrisome ways-TPP anyone? So I voted for Obama thinking he was something he’s not, or at least not anymore. I gave him a second chance and a second vote, mainly because despite our political differences, I genuinely like the guy. I genuinely like Sanders. I do not like Hillary and I definitely don’t trust her.

  • Michael Wright

    Some some said that Hillary’s plan is what’s palatable in the now, and that’s definitely not the tagline of the Sanders campaign. Its called the Sanders revolution for a reason.

  • I agree.The likelihood that a Sanders administration could advance any of its policy objectives give the current state of Congress is nil and while I know he’d uncompromisingly fight for change, I don’t see the Congressional GOP budging one inch. Obama at least took office with Congress behind him.

  • AndyMatts

    Bernie Sanders is saying I will fight to try and achieve all these unrealistic things.

    So, how does trying, and falling short, measure up worse to not even trying. If Bernie Sanders fails, 100% to make any progress at all towards his unrealistic pipe dreams, how would we be worse off than someone who wants to keep things the way they are? Either way, no progress is made.

    Thing is, only one of those approaches has any hope of even making progress.

    If you feel that it is a mischaracterization that Hillary is just defending the status quo, I would say no more so than your characterization that Sanders trying to do more would somehow set us back even farther.

    • Sheila

      It’s not worse, but having a President who actually gets things done would be better. I’d love to see Bernie in the WH. And if he doesn’t get the nom, I’ll happily see Hillary in the WH. Anyone but the GOP.

      • Jeri Okamura

        First, apparently, you did not understand what AndyMatt said. Hillary only intends to maintain the status quo.

        Second, what evidence do you have that Hillary would be better able to get anything at all done? It is well known that no Republican will work with her.

        Third, Bernie has been one of the most productive members of Congress. He has many bipartisan bills. He is well likedin Congress, even by Republicans.

      • AndyMatts

        I have no problem with this. I have a problem with the argument that Sanders trying to get something done will somehow hamper him more than, say Obama being black or Hillary being the target of partisan witch hunts, non-stop for, literally, decades.

        Does anyone think that Hillary being supposedly more pragmatic will somehow translate to an ability to get over, around or through right-wing obstruction? Is there ANYONE that conservatives hate and would screw over, out of spite, more than Hillary Clinton?

        This idea that she will somehow be more able to get anything done because of practicality is absurd. However, she does have a hard-core, hardball edge to her (campaign tactics illustrate this, for instance) that suggest that she would not be hampered by trying to make nice with people who have no interested in playing that way (an attitude that held Obama back for 6 years of his presidency).

      • AgNO3

        He has never said it will be a pen stroke fix. He has said this is the GOAL, it will take steps. Step one, vote for Bernie. I also honestly believe that the GOP will be nicer to Bernie than they EVER will be to Hillary. To much of their base would castrate them for even sort of working with her. Why do you suppose Bernie is shown to beat every candidate on the GOP except Kasich. While HRC only beats Trump. That says to me he will have much broader support if elected.

      • AndyMatts

        You get no argument from me on any of that.

      • dsmeb

        This is incredible — incredible that you actually believe this. The moment Bernie secures the nomination, you will learn exactly how nice the GOP is going to be to him. Nobody’s really gone after him yet — Clinton certainly hasn’t.

      • AgNO3

        Well its going to suck when HRC get indicted by the sitting grand Jury for political corruption. They don’t have 130+ agents investigating her cause its fun. Comney is an Obama appointee so its not some right wing crazy BS. Even MSNBC thinks she’s toast.

        And yeah I do believe it because its more then one poll saying this. Since HRC’s negatives are nearly the same as trumps its pretty easy to believe.

      • Daniel

        I think the danger with promising big and failing is that Presidents do need successes in order to be 1) reelected and 2) negotiate further from a place of strength. The general population sours quickly on people who fail–it’s a normal response. So realistic expectations and achievable goals go a long way.

    • Barbara D Holtzman

      He’s in the Senate, which is where they pass laws. How about he starts right now?

      • AndyMatts

        He’s been doing it for years. Just because you choose to be ignorant of that fact doesn’t mean it hasn’t been happening.

  • Sanity Please

    Nobody does dirty campaigning better than the Clinton machine…nobody! Expect them to pull out all the stops now. They’ll make Tricky Dick Nixon look like a Boy Scout.

    • John Cross

      Poor boy. Just wait until the Rove machine starts to unleash itself against Grandpa Bernie. So far all the dirty tricks have been on your side.

  • Russell Davis

    Americans have a shorter life expectancy than any other industrialized country. Because they have a single payer system and we don’t. They have figured out how to make it work and we are strangled by the insurance lobby. Future generations of children yet unborn won’t live as long as they could have if we don’t just get our house in order. Sanders is the only one who will even address the issue.

  • Matt Frazao

    I won’t be able to respond to all of the points this person is trying to make in their article. Overall I think it would be a more effective piece if it weren’t so sarcastic and dismissive in its tone, and didn’t use so many italics (I thought the CAPS LOCK thing was also a bit much to be taken seriously haha)

    Let me just focus on what seems to me to be this writers backbone for their post, this paragraph which supposedly sums up some rare opportunity to finally hear a politician tell it like it is (Hillary’s voice ):

    “Look, I know what my opponent is telling you sounds great, but based on the realities of how government works, what he’s promising he’s going to do isn’t remotely feasible or realistic.”

    Based on the realities of how government works? Yes. No shit. This is the problem. The main point. The way the government works is fucked. It doesn’t work for us anymore. It hasn’t for a good long while. And it is precisely because of the various issues that Bernie is addressing in his campaign that the govt is so pathetic and useless to us, the middle class, and those who are even more disadvantaged by our currently rigged governmental and economic systems. (Don’t get me wrong, it definitely works out for some, a few… a very very few.. and boy does it really work out for those chosen few special Lucky Ducks!!)

    This is the whole point, that the way these candidates are “forced” to run their campaigns, their only chance is to play ball with those who have a stake in ripping all of us normal and average people off. Yes, the money lenders, the college-industrial business complex, the healthcare industry, the military industrial complex, the prison industrial complex, etc. What I mean is, the suggestion here is that nowadays we just can’t get the things we should get out of our government, because of some unchangeable “reality” that we are just subject to. THIS IS BULLSHIT. Elections used to be publically funded, and not that long ago. The Citizens United ruling is the number one enemy of the US constitution, and to all of us as citizens. The fact that they chose that name (citizens United) for what that Supreme Court judgement allows is disgusting.

    Hillary has bought the farm though. Another deeply troubling political miscalculation on her part. She chose to play ball with that bullshit model of how our govt should work, and now she is upset that her progressive motivations would be questioned? Ha!

    The things that the writer is trying to brush off as fairytale are not fairytales. Don’t be fooled. Our parents didn’t have to go in debt like we do to get a college degree, let alone a mortgage, healthcare or any of the other completely reasonable things that Bernie is saying we have a right to receive as a product of our government. We do. We have before. Not that long ago. The government is SUPPOSED to work for us. People all over the world, in ACTUAL civilized countries have had these sorts of programs working for them through their government for a long time!! To convince people that these things aren’t possible would be the dirtiest most conniving political trick ever pulled, getting them to vote directly against their interests because they’ve forgotten the actual purpose of government. This is not sports. THIS IS NOT SPORTS. THIS. IS. NOT. SPORTS.

    we are on the same team. We know deep down what we need from the government. To perform the functions that people need, but can’t provide for themselves as individuals, and so together we literally fund the government, as a collective through taxes.

    And the idea is that this is just too much to ask? BULLSHIT. Know our history. Healthcare used to be a non profit industry. Private prisons used to not exist. College tuition, rent, books, and recreation money could be saved by a student over the course of a summer, just working a normal old summer job.

    There are people that have a very real, deeply invested interest in keeping those days dead. By deregulating these industries, we’ve allowed individuals and corporations to insert themselves into these equations and make so much fucking money off of our backs. And you think they’re going to give that up easily??? No. They want you to believe we can’t get back to those days where people could just like, live a comfortable life. It’s just “reality”. BULLSHIT.

    Hillary can’t be honest about any of this. She has chosen to play by these new rules. She takes big money from big spenders. Those who have it. Goldman Sacks, healthcare prisons military whoever. She is running her campaign on their dollar. You think if she gets in she’ll be able to stand up to any of them all of the sudden?? No. Look at Obama. Useless for the same reason. Change? Hope? Yea they did a good job selling those ideas. But implementation? Not very impressive. Yes the healthcare bill was good. But only kind of. It was almost single payer. I think it was like, ONE VOTE OFF!?!!?!!! but no one was paying attention then either. So no one really understood the difference one way or another. But now suddenly single payer is a just pipe dream! No. That’s not what happened. We got duped. Thank Joe Lieberman. Another “Democrat”. Bought is what he was. Throughout his shitty career as my home states senator.

    They want you to believe this BULLSHIT, anyone who might be reading. Because they have so much to lose. So much money. OUR MONEY. TAX DOLLARS. Your tax money and mine.

    They want to make it like sports, and get us fighting each other as if it’s over an imaginary game that doesn’t actually matter. But it does. There is a lot at stake. This is not boys vs girls. Bernie has a penis but Hillary has a vagina. Oh my god. Who cares. For all of us actual feminists, we know that gender and sex are irrelevant to a persons ability to do a job. So let’s focus on these issues. It isn’t sports or anything else petty. This is about US, the people, vs the big moneymaking industries. We can win. We can overturn citizens United, and never have to deal with millionaire politicians pretending to understand the little people again. Politics and government can work for people. They’re supposed to. They have before. They do all over the world. Hello? Has anyone read our constitution? We the people INSPIRED those countries to be like we once strived to be in most cases. THE WORLDS FIRST DEMOCRATIC UNION. democracy.

    This is not sports. This matters. Our government can and should be better. Our lives can and should be better as a product of that government. It’s broken. This article that you posted is part of the problem. Have some vision for what is actually possible. Bernie is raising money from only people like you and me because none of these big money interests would benefit from his policies. Only we would. Regular Americans.

    This is not sports. There is a lot at stake. Citizens United. Follow the money.

    I love what this country was meant to be

    This country is not currently what it’s meant to be

    Read the constitution

    It’s beautiful, and it is not JUST poetry, but deep, and immeasurably important TRUTH. It has been slowly dismantled, and I think it’s time we start rebuilding the ideas and values contained therein.

    • Thank You for saying all this. Your absolutely right and said it so well.

    • John Cross

      A long diatribe. Not sure about the sports analogy. Maybe a few too may totes on that spliff as you went along. Let me lay out the reality to you bubba, since you obviously do not understand a damned thing about the world around you. Sure, all the things you are saying are great. Universal Health Care (single payer or otherwise), free college tuition. Lets throw in some other stuff. I am all for it. In fact your bullshit analysis leaves me cold-we can do all kinds of other shit too, but lets leave it at that for right now. First of all, you paint kind of a rosy picture about the past. No, there was never a time in US history where you could work for the summer and pay off your tuition, books, rent, recreational money for the whole year. No, not even Otis had it that good. But that is not my main point. My main point is look outside the fucking window. Look at what is happening in the Republican party! The right wing is fully radicalized. Their normal candidates can barely raise single points in support. The left wing is still sitting on the sofa with a goddamned marijuana cloud over their heads. BS could not even beat Hillary in IOWA. New Hampshire means nothing. You will NOT survive a head-to-head fight. Your “revolution” would become a 20 year right-wing “terror” with Ted Cruz shoving religion up your ass and Donald Trump stepping on your head as he loots the treasury. Bernie Sanders is a trap–a pied puppet manipulated by Rove to lead you out to the slaughter. Now is the time for defense. Sanders is a guaranteed Repug win. Clinton can and will win the general unless you idiots follow the Nader strategy again. If there is going to be a revolution, let the troglodytes start it.

      • John Cross

        BTW, that stuff in the constitution about protecting the slave trade really was NOT that poetic but if there was one thing Lincoln did right, it was to wait for the right-wing to fire the first shot.

      • Matt Frazao

        Haha ok John, keep talking yourself down buddy. Keep using references to pot smoke and boogie man scare tactics about the big bad Repugs. I mean, in your view the constitution isn’t poetic. You lack vision. Understandable, to a degree. We’ve been living under a government that also lacks vision. Concerning for you, for sure, but don’t worry john, maybe someone younger and brighter can step up and help you up to your feet, and point out the fuzzy shapes on the horizon to help you make up for your old, ailing and decrepit eyes toward the future. Sad that they can’t even get a clear view of the past, as your analysis of your friend Otis is also straight up wrong. If your redneck daddy Otis, or brother or whoever the fuck Otis is wasn’t just sitting around on his fat full of shit ass he certainly could’ve done just what he said. A whole generation did. They didn’t go into college debt. Not like my generation has had to. But again old man, you just relax and breathe

      • AgNO3

        Rightwing? I think you missed history class bubba. In 1840 Lincoln was the right, The democrats where still the left but where pro slavery. Lincoln and Eisenhower could have hung out together. The GOP of today is nothing like the party of even Nixon. (ACA was actually a Nixon plane you can google Nixon health reforms) Can we keep the name calling going Bubba, its makes things so much more fun to argue like 9 year olds. If you where to look at Eisenhower and Nixon’s Social reforms it might hurt you brain though so maybe don’t do it. Lets just say many of them would line up with Sanders, and several would not. On the other hand HRC still won’t release her speeches even though ZERO NONE ZILCH, other people still in the race in either party have given any speeches to wall-street. THUS ALL SPEECHES HAVE BEEN RELEASED. Oh right she lied again and won’t release them. Never mind that fact that I would expect GOP speeches to be pro bank soo…… Yeah when is she releasing her speeches since she is the ONLY person running who has any wall-treet speeches? $2.9Million for 12 speeches to banks.

        fyi HRC only beats Trump in an election in current polls, On the other hand in those same polls that are all over the place if you can read (I know, I had to get back to the name calling. it’s just to fun. I’m glad you went there first) Say Bernie beats everyone but Kaisch. However I do believe that the name bubba fits your profile picture much better. I can’t wait for you insult laden response.

  • Justin Gould

    At the time, rebelling against the British empire was “unrealistic”. At the time, abolishing slavery was “unrealistic”. At the time, the desegregation was “unrealistic”. At the time, allowing women the right to vote was “unrealistic”. Do you see where I’m going with this?

    • John Cross

      Rebelling against the British empire: 9 years of war and 50,000 deaths. Abolition of slavery: 5 years of war and 500,000 deaths. Those were “revolutions”. See where I’m going with this?

      • Justin Gould

        And how many people have died from inadequate healthcare? how many have died from hunger or poverty? how many soldiers have come back only to take their own lives b/c they get little to no support from the country they fought for? I get it tho, you’re old and scared that things will change and make your cushy life tougher. Sorry brother the revolution is happening.

      • Sheila

        And if Bernie doesn’t get the nom, you’ll see to it the rest of the country suffers, amiright?

      • Justin Gould

        assume much sheila? honestly, i don’t know what i’ll do if he doesn’t get the nom. i might vote for HRC or I might not. i’ll have to really think about it. what if he DOES he get the nom? what are you gonna do?

      • Daniel

        HRC supporters are smart and I’ve yet to meet a single one who would claim they wouldn’t support Bernie if he secured the nomination. I haven’t unfortunately seen the same of Sanders supporters.

        As to the “revolution”, your comparison of people dying from inadequate health care to a bloody uprising and war that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, is at best a stretch and at worst a desperate grasp that falls short. My family escaped the Russian revolution. That’s what a revolution looks like. Bernie has some progressive ideas that would require working within the existing system. His nomination and election wouldn’t change anything structurally. He, like HRC, could reshape the SCOTUS with their nominee, and then perhaps Citizen’s United could be overturned, but no guarantees on that. The changes wouldn’t be dramatic and bloody. He’s one man. And he’d have the House and possibly Senate against him just like Obama. So unless you’re wanting to act like the current militia subculture and start training with guns to overthrow something, you aren’t part of a revolution. You’re part of an oft repeated political phenomenon where a progressive candidate (like Howard Dean, or George McGovern…you should read the path of his candidacy in the 1972 election if you haven’t already. There are some commonalities.) inspires the left. It’s a good thing to have happen, but it isn’t a revolution. Historical context helps.

      • blackkofi

        As Malcolm said…by any means necessary! See where I am going with this? Justin Gould I am with you and Bernie!

      • blackkofi

        As Malcolm said…by any means necessary! See where I am going with this? Justin Gould I am with you and Bernie!

  • John Austin

    Nice puff piece David Brock, you have no class. Hillary for prison 2016!

    • AgNO3

      The DOJ doesn’t grant immunity to people unless they are testifying. So why do you supposed that Server guy was granted immunity by the DOJ. There is probably a Grand Jury in place. Inditement, who knows but again, you don’t give immunity to people until you need them to testify because its plays your card. So they wouldn’t have granted him immunity most likely unless he was going in front of a Grand Jury.

  • Natsu

    I do agree with the writer that as the current political system and rhetoric exists, it would in theory be difficult for Sanders to get his policies passed. That is a realistic outlook based on the current political climate.

    However, the current political climate also appears to be related to what seems like spite over Obama being elected. I mean, more than I’ve seen under any other Presidency, the pettiness in Washington has been at a pretty epic high in recent years where long time politicians even note that you used to be able to still go out and have a drink with your political opponents whereas nowadays you cant.

    I bring this up because it is totally believable that if Sanders is elected that that may continue, or maybe it might not. It’s no secret that in this country we still have some really terrible social issues that need to be addressed both on the racial and sexism fronts, and I don’t doubt Clinton’s qualifications or what she represents symbolically if she wins, but as I was speaking with a friend over this weekend, I’m not even sure if we’re actually ready for that kind of change as a country. We elected our first Black President and over the last 8 years, we’ve had fighting, pettiness, rudeness directly aimed at a sitting President, etc. I don’t want to be pessimistic, but everything that Secretary Clinton represents is still related to all of that and I also kind of feel like her election into office would continue the fighting. If Sanders was elected into office, I don’t know if he would continue the pettiness since he hasn’t really been a huge target of Republican ire as he doesn’t represent anything different from what we’ve had before other than being a Democratic Socialist.

    Plus oddly enough, I’ve seen some people who are on the Republican side who also genuinely like Sanders. I’m not entirely sure what to make of that, but if there are motivated constituents on the right that are also down with Sanders’ policies, no matter who gets what seats potentially they could keep their representatives in check by telling them what they care about and that they should work with him. Is that likely? I would normally have said no, but right now I don’t know anymore. I’ve seen some discussion with some young people that are registering and re-registering for one party for the primaries and another for the national election to make sure that the best candidates make it to the White House. I don’t know how common this is, but that is an interesting work around to our two party system.

    Other than that though, even if it’s idealistic, is it so bad to have an election year where we are idealistic? I mean, from a young age we are taught things about what this country represents and what it’s supposed to be and then we grow up and realize it isn’t like that and lot of things suck. Even if it’s hard, maybe it’s worth going with something idealistic at least sometimes since we want to try to be our best and aim for it even if we don’t actually make it. It’d be nice if we could at least go in that direction and I’d rather do that with a leader that has a bit more of a record of integrity and consistency. As realistic as Clinton is, I simply can’t really tell what kind of policies she’s really going to do or implement or what is an empty campaign promise since she’s changed so much over the years. I mean, it’s great to change your mind and all that, but it’s hard to tell whether or not she’s even going to try to deliver. With Sanders, I feel like he’s at least going to really go for attempting it.

    Additionally, her husband’s recent rhetoric about Sanders’ supporters being sexist seem to be a bit off-base and insulting. I don’t support Sanders out of any feeling of sexism or wanting the status quo on women’s issues to be the same. Sanders has a good voting record on women’s issues, but he also personally has a very strong personal background on racial issues. The two of those together oddly enough has me looking at him like the candidate that would actually deliver me intersectional feminism. It’s really hard to ignore and not admire the fact that before he even had a political career that he was involved in the Civil Rights Movement and out there fighting for racial equality. Those are my rights that I wouldn’t have if it weren’t for him and it’s not everyday that I get to vote for a candidate that literally got himself arrested so that I could be born into a slightly better world. We still have a lot more work to do on this front and with all fronts of social issues, but things like that make me think that Sanders REALLY gets it.

    • Sheila

      At least Bernie’s a man. He will get far LESS obstructionist crap than Hillary. Almost for that reason alone, I want to see Bernie in the WH. I’m not looking forward to finding out what my fellow Americans REALLY think of us women once we have one in the WH. Although, I’m kind of already finding out, unfortunately…

  • Sheila

    I think you’re absolutely right. And I think far too many people who need to hear this won’t listen.

  • imapayne

    It should be of interest to all the “Bernie Fans” that he is now under investigation by the FEC

    • Jeri Okamura

      Only an idiot would cite this. You must be a Hillary-bot. Just like your hero, you choose to smear. This happens in all campaigns – it certainly happened in Obama’s campaign, but nothing was done. I’m sure it’s happening in Hillary’s campaign. Where is the story about that?

      You have to be pretty stupid to think this is news. Certainly, all campaigns know that the FEC is checking donations for compliance.

      There are only around 3400 contributions that the FEC claims are illegal: from foreign nationals, over the $2700 limit, from corporate entities. What percentage of 5 million contributions is this? Does your calculator display that many significant digits?

      There could be many explanations for these donations. Once again, only a stupid person would immediately jump to the conclusion that Bernie is deliberately trying to gain an advantage with them. Have you finished calculating the percentage?

      Bernie has until March 17 to refund those contributions or prove they are actually legal.

  • A Clarke

    I have $675,000 reasons not to trust HRC. She is a Wall Streetwalker, who has a sordid history of turning legislative tricks for her johns.

  • phanya2012

    I don’t believe Bernie ever said all of his plans would go into effect in the first two years of his term. There are a lot of things he probably can do toward achieving his goals — justice system reform is one a lot of people are for; attacking corruption in the government would not require Congressional action, I don’t think. Inspector Generals are there to do that. The Obama wave died before the 2010 election, largely because the economy was in the tank and no one had energy, plus many of his supporters thought he was more progressive than he was. A political revolution is more possible now — better economy, but still a lot of people unhappy with being ignored — it would mean working hard throughout the first two years and beyond to make even more Congressional changes in 2018 and 2020. Laying the groundwork for Warren in 2020, perhaps. Everyone acts as if Bernie is going to start all of this changing at once. And, of course, anything that has been achieved has been impossible until it was done.

  • lorkoos

    If we can’t at least TRY for what Senator Sanders proposes, instead of giving up before we even start because it’s not “realistic”, why bother with politics at all? Imagine if people like Ghandi, Mandela, and Martin Luther King had thought that way.

  • Bert Harvey

    This is a ridiculous piece. Clinton claiming things can’t be done aren’t her saying “political realities”, it’s clinton trying to dismiss policies to the left of neoliberalism, an ideology based on restoring and protecting the power of the rich with a dressing of noblesse oblige.

    So how about we stop letting people who have interest in moving left, who in fact redefined the Dems as centrists and triangulaters in the 90s, stop defining the left most boundary of our politics?

  • doovinator

    A 68 year old woman who spends $600 for a haircut. How much lipstick can you put on a pig?

  • Francis Johns

    Hilary Clinton honest!? You are being sarcastic, aren’t you? See how honest she is in the video – Google ” Google “Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight.

  • jasonallenpdx

    Is this an april fool’s joke?

  • Lisa Van Houten

    Let me tell you: What Bernie is proposing works. If you don’t like the scandinavian examples because you, too, think, that they are a homogenous people with nothing but love for their neighbors (which, by the way, is bullshit, they’re nice, but they’re just like everybody else, I should know, I lived there for a while) then take a look at Germany, We have what Sanders wants for the U.S.A. and it works. And our economy does great, by the way. So stop doing whatever this is you think you’re doing, this is just sad.
    I don’t know why I keep trying to enlighten you people, it’s hopeless but I feel so sad for you because you’re so brainwashed, you actually believe it has to be that way