Hillary vs Bernie

[Barrister]

Iread somewhere that the best and worst things about Sanders is that he has been so remarkably consistent in his positions over the years.  You can go look at speaches from 30 years ago and he sounds like he's talking today.  That gets him some real credibility.

But it also means he can't pivot or change his views to try and appeal to other groups.  He's incapable of trying to pick up the "black lives matter" mantle.

That doesn't at all jive with what I've read on him (which admittedly is not that much).  My understanding is that he actually mellowed quite a bit.  He started out as a real socialist and over time became essentially a social democrat.  He's also been quite a pragmatic mayor, which is not at all what you would expect from an ideologue.

As for "black lives matter" mantle, I think he's been wearing it all along.  From what I understand he's been consistently a real social libertarian.

Social libertarian is not what "black lives matter" wants.

Here's Ta-Nehisi Coates on what's wrong with Bernie Sanders (spoiler - he doesn't support reparations).

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/bernie-sanders-reparations/424602/

[alfred russel]

He long-ago wrote an article somewhat sympathetic to rape.

Wait, what?

[Admiral Yi]

This is why I thought O'Malley would ultimately win or at least do well.

Anyway, right now the race is a referendum on Hillary, with the "no to Hillary" camp being an old guy that gives every indication of being a well meaning true believer. I'm not shocked she is losing that. However, eventually Sanders is going to get tough scrutiny, and he is a bad general election candidate.

Disagree.  First because the no Hillary vote is not taking part in the Democratic primary IMO, and second because I think the Bernie vote is motivated by faith in the revolution, not animus towards Hillary.

[Barrister]

He long-ago wrote an article somewhat sympathetic to rape.

Wait, what?

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/29/410606045/the-bernie-sanders-rape-fantasy-essay-explained

[DGuller]

What makes you say that?

By all accounts he was genuinely liked (as opposed to settled for) by his electorate, in every position he held.  Once people get to know him, apparently they hold very positive opinion of him.  Hillary, not so much.  I'll vote for her if I have to, but I'll be feeling a little dirty doing that.

Sanders is divorced, was a single dad who was not married to the boy's mother.

Okay, moving on.

He long-ago wrote an article somewhat sympathetic to rape.

Well, that part I definitely never read about.

I'm not saying he's a bad man.  But I don't see how you can say one is morally a better person than the other (unless you believe Hillary murdered Vince Foster).

Hillary is by most accounts a very unpleasant person, in person.  And I think that for politicians, a "speaking circuit" is a bribery tour, for past or future favors.

[Valmy]

Here's Ta-Nehisi Coates on what's wrong with Bernie Sanders (spoiler - he doesn't support reparations).

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/bernie-sanders-reparations/424602/

Yeah he is kind of fixated on the reparations stuff. I mean I am all for reparations if it really would fix the race problem, but I just do not see how it would. It just seems kind of an odd way to go. Not to mention the fact it sounds like a nightmare logistically.

It is the indispensable tool against white supremacy. One cannot propose to plunder a people, incur a moral and monetary debt, propose to never pay it back, and then claim to be seriously engaging in the fight against white supremacy.

Except it would not be the whites paying, it would be everybody. And how do you give a cash payment to 'a people'? 'A people' does not have a bank account. We would have to give it to individuals. And is it supposed to be a symbolic act? Like an admission of guilt? Are we all supposed to be feel better, and that is the purpose...so every black person gets a few bucks as a symbolic gesture? Or is it supposed to be quantified somehow based on a historical study of 'plunder'? Or used to achieve a certain end, like say achieve some sort of bench mark of social progress? And what would that be? Sudden windfalls of cash do not have a great record as a tool of empowerment.

[Barrister]

Except it would not be the whites paying, it would be everybody. And how do you give a cash payment to 'a people'? 'A people' does not have a bank account. We would have to give it to individuals. And is it supposed to be a symbolic act? Like an admission of guilt? Are we all supposed to be feel better, and that is the purpose...so every black person gets a few bucks as a symbolic gesture? Or is it supposed to be quantified somehow based on a historical study of 'plunder'? Or used to achieve a certain end, like say achieve some sort of bench mark of social progress? And what would that be? Sudden windfalls of cash do not have a great record as a tool of empowerment.

In Canada we had something like reparations - we paid out just under two billion dollars in compensation to survivors of indian residential schools.  Apparently the average amount of the settlement was $20,000 paid to just under 80,000 people.

I doubt it will ever happen, but it would be interesting to see a survey to determine what the long term effects of such payments were to the recipients and their family, when compared to native families that did not receive benefits.  I suspect there would be little difference.

[Valmy]

I am reminded a bit of that Indian official...Tharoor I think?...who made the point that India did not need the money but he would like the Brits to pay reparations just to cleanse everybody's soul. 1 pound a year would be fine. Or something like that. But I don't think that is what Coates is saying that this is supposed to achieve some kind of social progress.

[LaCroix]

Hillary is by most accounts a very unpleasant person, in person.  And I think that for politicians, a "speaking circuit" is a bribery tour, for past or future favors.

What accounts are those? I found one from an ex-intern who wanted Bill's D, but are there any others? Hillary's an ambitious career woman; she doesn't have a meek personality, either. Of course people are going to call her unpleasant or a bitch. It's more acceptable for men to have those traits, so it tends to rub people the wrong way more than normal.

Also, someone can seem that way in her professional capacity but be an extremely nice person in her personal life. I don't know if that describes Hillary, but Bill chased her for years and genuinely seems to love her. I'm assuming she's got some good qualities unless there's concrete evidence beyond "she's just a bitch, you know?"

[The Brain]

Bill seems to love her? Bill is poly?

[LaCroix]

man i type all fancy to appease dguller and he doesn't even respond smh

[Razgovory]

I'm not sure I buy that "Hillary is an unpleasant person", most of what we "know" about her personalty is stuff people said about her in the Clinton era.  Typically people who didn't like her.  She seems to have earned quite a bit of respect in the US senate.

[Eddie Teach]

Her RL personality matters less than her public persona. Which is kind of stiff and awkward for someone who's been facing cameras for thirty years.

[Razgovory]

Except it would not be the whites paying, it would be everybody. And how do you give a cash payment to 'a people'? 'A people' does not have a bank account. We would have to give it to individuals. And is it supposed to be a symbolic act? Like an admission of guilt? Are we all supposed to be feel better, and that is the purpose...so every black person gets a few bucks as a symbolic gesture? Or is it supposed to be quantified somehow based on a historical study of 'plunder'? Or used to achieve a certain end, like say achieve some sort of bench mark of social progress? And what would that be? Sudden windfalls of cash do not have a great record as a tool of empowerment.

Yeah, we are so far removed from the event it would be difficult.  Do you get money based on how black you are?  If we did genetic testing and found someone was 10% black 40% Indian and 50% white, do they get money?  What about people who are black but never had ancestors who were enslaved in the US.  Or those who had ancestors who were slaves while in the British colony but not in the US?  Do people who's last slave ancestor was liberated in 1865 get more money then those who's last slave ancestor was liberated in 1805?  It's a real mess.

[viper37]

Another factor is personality.  Sanders is without a doubt a much better human being than Hillary, there is just no way around that.

What makes you say that?

Sanders is divorced, was a single dad who was not married to the boy's mother. 

how would that make him less of a human being than the married Hillary?