"I posted this on DK this morning, and... I am surprised though, at how little thoughtful discussion was brought about by it."

I'm not surprised. Most of the remaining commentors there have been conditioned to pounce and ridicule anything that's not overtly haliographic over Clinton. It's become a cult atmosphere, and you're either in it, or you're a threat to it.

I often wonder. Looking at the Bill Clinton administration, Mr. Clinton embraced any number of right-wing policy initiatives, from job-killing "free trade" deals to draconian criminal justice "reforms" to "ending welfare as we know it". And it's not widely remembered that his efforts to privatize Social Security and Medicare were only derailed by the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

If Bush I had been re-elected, it's very likely these initiatives would have met with far more resistance in Congress -- but because Clinton was a Democrat, the opposition within his own party was effectively muted. Thus, arguably Bill Clinton was not the lesser evil at all, but in fact the more effective one. And given her cozy relationship with Wall St. the fossil fuels industry, the military establishment, the Israeli lobby, etc., I very much doubt that Hillary's embrace of right-wing policies would be any less fervent than that of her husband.

...and we will no longer eat them. That is the rejection point we are about to get past.

It is a rising sense of 'I don't give a fuck'. We are not going to be Charlie Browns trying to kick the football again.

That's the Bernie or Bust mentality. Supreme Court, blah, blah, blah. Clintonites need to realize that enough is enough is no longer exclusive to Republicans. It also means milquetoast Corporate Third Way Establishment Dems. That's what Clintonites are missing at their peril. Two of shit is still shit, the size of the pile does not matter.

Hillary Clinton and the Third Way Corporate Dems and all of the liberal interest groups that have welded themselves to HRC are playing a very dangerous game this time around.

They are playing a game of Democratic Party Chicken. We might not blink this time around. Maybe if we let them know early enough, they will be the one's to swerve. It's about the only card we have to play. The refusal card. Or to be completely yet purposefully flippant, like ghost busters, we cross the streams. The door swings both ways...

[video:https://youtu.be/9wrEEd1ajz4]

I'm Bernie or bust. Of course no real ethical dilemma here in Alabama where the rethugs rule.

I'm more hopeful than I've been in the last couple of weeks that we will have Bernie as the nominee in the general. The Clintons and their political machine might steal it from us, but I think the worm has turned and Bernie is headed for victory. We'll know better after seeing margins in WI and NY. Winning in NY puts us on the path to the nomination in my view, and I'm hopeful.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/01/27/1475582/-Actually-I-ve-Had-It-W... by Greywolfe359

The new mainstream media message that echoes Hillary Clinton’s own closing argument last night in Iowa is that we should all “get real” and choose the pragmatic Hillary Clinton over the idealistic yet naive Bernie Sanders.

Paul Krugman urges us to face healthcare realities and give up on the progressive vision for universal healthcare.

John Avignone at Salon rushed to tell us that “quixotic insurgent campaigns” have “been the road to ruin of every political movement and every political party” that have tried them.

Both argue that we need to nominate Hillary Clinton, the pragmatic, realistic candidate who will work with a GOP-controlled Congress to make incremental progress. Bernie has great ideas but Hillary is the one who will “get things done.”

I’m sorry, but how can anyone be so fucking naive?

First, how can anyone keep a straight face while reminding us that the GOP will likely still control the House and in the same breath claim that Hillary Clinton will be able to work with that Congress? Have you been watching Congress for the past 8 years? Hell, do you remember the last time a Clinton was in the White House? The Republican House impeached one Clinton and I’m sure they are chomping at the bit to make it two for two. As we know from before, they don’t even need a good reason!

The majority of GOP House seats have been gerrymandered into rabidly red districts where the voters already HATE Hillary Clinton. The only danger they will face is getting primaried by someone who faults them for not impeaching the second Clinton fast enough. They are going to double down on the “make a one-term president” strategy they employed against Obama and say no to absolutely everything.

Hillary Clinton has no better chance of passing progressive reforms through Congress than Bernie Sanders does. Period.

Second, to the extent that she could get anything done, it’s precisely what might get done that scares the hell out of me.

You may be right that Hillary Clinton is more likely to find common ground with a GOP Congress on certain issues than Bernie Sanders would. But let’s think for a moment about what those issues would be…

Remember the common ground the first president found with a GOP Congress? Remember welfare reform? Remember financial de-regulation? Remember the expansion of free trade agreements that were devastating to American workers?

Hell, look at where the current president is finding common ground with Congress to pass the TPP over the objections of BOTH sides of the political spectrum. Or expand drone strikes and the surveillance state.

Yes, I can see Hillary Clinton finding common ground with a GOP Congress to do all these kinds of things. Anti-worker free trade laws. Hawkish foreign policy. Cuts to vital social services. Raising the retirement age? Tax cuts for Wall Street?

When I think about what Hillary Clinton might actually “get done” with a GOP Congress, it scares the hell out of me.

Third, in the face of an intransigent GOP opposition, we need a president who will use the bully pulpit of the Oval Office to fight for progressive ideas and win the battle for hearts and minds that will lead to electoral victories so we CAN pass progressive legislation.

Sanders can start to make incremental changes with good appointments to the federal agencies. Sanders appointees can start to reign in Wall Street and bolster workers by implementing new policy in the Departments of Treasury, Commerce and Labor. And Sanders can continue to give voice every day to the progressive changes we need.

Did you know that during one of the Democratic debates, one of the most googled phrases was “universal healthcare”? Already more Iowa Democrats are comfortable calling themselves “socialist” as opposed to “capitalist”. A majority of Americans support Sanders on nearly every major issue. We need those issues to be what is being talked about and debated and discussed. We need a champion for those issues with the biggest microphone there is—the White House.

We got our asses kicked in 2010 because Democratic leaders bent over backwards to work with GOP Congress that voted no on everything in the end anyway. Progressives stayed home because Democrats didn’t actually act progressive once in office. We didn’t even get a fucking public option.

The stimulus was too small and too focused on tax cuts. Wall Street got a bail out, homeowners got none and we didn’t prosecute the banksters.

And establishment Democrats can whine all they want that Republicans wouldn’t have let them. But how do we know? They didn’t even try! It would have been better to propose real solutions to our problems and LET the Republicans vote now and block it. Let THEM be the reason we failed. Then go back to the people and tell them to kick the bums out!

That’s how we win in 2018 and 2020. Not by passing shitty legislation that continues the transfer of wealth to the top one-tenth of one percent that has been going on for thirty or more years.

So don’t be so naive again. Let’s get real and vote for real change. And keep voting for it until we get it.

Let's not forget, S.N.A.P. benefits just dumped some half a million people. S.N.A.P. cost US tax payers somewhere around 80 to 85 annually. Quantitative Easing, spent 85 billion a month for 4.5 years! helping wall street, not to mention the 16 trillion in short term loans to the biggest banks, under a democrat in the WH. Who offered up cuts to social security during the grand bargain? Our military budget is like 3 times what it was in 1993, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. We have troops on the ground in Iraq, still in Afghanistan, over 800 military installations across the planet. (face palm)