Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II

[d4m10n]

Looks like Clinton may have put her foot in it in the latest debate. Her refusal to release transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street corporations is possibly understandable, but the way she stonewalled on it looks suspicious. Announcing that she'd release them once the GOP released the transcripts of theirs is a ridiculous tactic, and further strengthens her image of being closer to the Republicans than to the true progressive arm of the Democrats. Do we need a Democratic party candidate who takes her lead from the Republican Party?

I think we really do need to create and maintain the expectation that informal social demands (e.g. show us your health records and back tax returns) will be applied to all viable presidential contenders, not just the ones on one side of the aisle or the other.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Looks like Clinton may have put her foot in it in the latest debate. Her refusal to release transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street corporations is possibly understandable, but the way she stonewalled on it looks suspicious. Announcing that she'd release them once the GOP released the transcripts of theirs is a ridiculous tactic, and further strengthens her image of being closer to the Republicans than to the true progressive arm of the Democrats. Do we need a Democratic party candidate who takes her lead from the Republican Party?

Further, some reportage indicates that the speeches may, indeed, be as damaging to her campaign as the Sanders campaign suggests: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html

At this point, it looks like the stonewalling is hurting her more than the release could; unless there is something truly groundbreakingly bad in the transcripts.

And yet Sanders has big oops in those tax returns:

Democratic candidate Sanders' tax returns highlight contrast with rival Clinton

Sanders and his wife, Jane, paid $27,653 in federal income taxes in 2014, an effective federal tax rate of 13.5 percent, on income of $205,271, which is their adjusted gross income before deductions. That figure is just below the $206,563 that Census data show as the lower limit for the top 5 percent of U.S. households in 2014.

The Clintons OTOH, while they have earned millions, paid an effective tax rate of 35% federal and 45% when you add in state taxes.

In the two most recent years, 2013 and 2014, the Clintons paid an effective federal tax rate of 35.4 percent and 35.7 percent, respectively. When accounting for state and local taxes, the Clintons' combined effective tax rate was 44.6 percent in 2013 and 45.8 percent in 2014.

And Hillary is not shy about raising taxes on the rich:
Clinton Tax Plan Hits Top Earners With Highest Rate Since 1986

With the surcharge, that small group of the highest earners would pay as much as 43.6 percent in federal income tax on income from wages. A spokesman for Clinton’s leading rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, called it “too little too late."
“Now she can say she is going after the wealthy," said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, Texas, who has analyzed presidential tax returns for more than 20 years. "And what industry is big at $5 million salaries? Wall Street and CEOs, which is one of the things that Sanders has been hitting her on."

I know there are plenty of ways to spin this, but at least the Clinton's themselves have been paying their fair share of taxes and not using tax deductions to avoid paying taxes. And it's clear that with years of paying higher rates themselves, the Clintons are not motivated by personal greed to keep tax rates low for the rich.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Tough new Sanders ad takes aim at Clinton

The day after a contentious debate in Brooklyn, Bernie Sanders’ campaign is deploying its toughest TV ad yet targeting Hillary Clinton and her ties to Wall Street ahead of Tuesday’s make-or-break primary in New York.

“While Washington politicians are paid over $200,000 an hour for speeches, they oppose raising the living wage to fifteen dollars an hour,” the ad’s narrator says. “Two hundred thousand dollars an hour for them. But not even fifteen bucks an hour for all Americans."

Watch the 30 sec ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEv5zSF11q4

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

IOW Sanders is doubling down on the allegations by innuendo (he couldn't name a single specific) and misinformation (he knows damn well Clinton has been consistent $15 minimum wage in high cost of living areas like NY and $12 nationally because every community cannot afford $15).

 

[Dog Town]

IOW Sanders is doubling down on the allegations by innuendo (he couldn't name a single specific) and misinformation (he knows damn well Clinton has been consistent $15 minimum wage in high cost of living areas like NY and $12 nationally because every community cannot afford $15).

Shillary speaks misinformation!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Looks like Clinton may have put her foot in it in the latest debate. Her refusal to release transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street corporations is possibly understandable, but the way she stonewalled on it looks suspicious. Announcing that she'd release them once the GOP released the transcripts of theirs is a ridiculous tactic, and further strengthens her image of being closer to the Republicans than to the true progressive arm of the Democrats. Do we need a Democratic party candidate who takes her lead from the Republican Party?

Further, some reportage indicates that the speeches may, indeed, be as damaging to her campaign as the Sanders campaign suggests: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html

At this point, it looks like the stonewalling is hurting her more than the release could; unless there is something truly groundbreakingly bad in the transcripts.

Dream on
Dream on
Dream on
Dream until your dreams come true

 

[BrooklynBaby]

Tough new Sanders ad takes aim at Clinton

The day after a contentious debate in Brooklyn, Bernie Sanders’ campaign is deploying its toughest TV ad yet targeting Hillary Clinton and her ties to Wall Street ahead of Tuesday’s make-or-break primary in New York.

“While Washington politicians are paid over $200,000 an hour for speeches, they oppose raising the living wage to fifteen dollars an hour,” the ad’s narrator says. “Two hundred thousand dollars an hour for them. But not even fifteen bucks an hour for all Americans."

Watch the 30 sec ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEv5zSF11q4

This ad targets "Washington politicians", not Hillary Clinton. Sanders is too much of a wuss to go straight at Hillary. Trump will be happy to take the fight to her in the general.

 

[luchog]

I think we really do need to create and maintain the expectation that informal social demands (e.g. show us your health records and back tax returns) will be applied to all viable presidential contenders, not just the ones on one side of the aisle or the other.

It's certainly not a bad idea. Too many skeletons in closets that need to be flushed out.

And for someone claiming to be as supportive of open government as Hillary does, she's being awfully cagey about stuff. Which brings up the FBI investigation. I'm not really expecting it to amount to much; but that is certainly going to be a weapon that the GOP is going to bludgeon her with come General Election time.

 

[luchog]

Totally inconsequential, but had to share it.

https://www.facebook.com/massimo.mascoli.7/posts/10154116820832433

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Totally inconsequential, but had to share it.

https://www.facebook.com/massimo.mascoli.7/posts/10154116820832433

Really? You are resorting to bringing up her politics when she was in high school?


Factcheck

Q: Did Hillary Clinton work for Goldwater?
A: She was a high-school Young Republican and "Goldwater Girl" in 1964 but swung to supporting Democrat Eugene McCarthy’s campaign in 1968 and George McGovern’s in 1972.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

"I like transparency and accountability, and I know Hillary does as well. I think she wants to bring accountability into government. I think she cares deeply about openness and transparency." -- New York Senator Kirsten Gilibrand (April 15, 2016)




#ReleaseTheTranscripts

 

[Donal]

In the two most recent years, 2013 and 2014, the Clintons paid an effective federal tax rate of 35.4 percent and 35.7 percent, respectively. When accounting for state and local taxes, the Clintons' combined effective tax rate was 44.6 percent in 2013 and 45.8 percent in 2014.

Effective tax rate? Really? So, stealing talking points from Sanders wasn't enough, her and her mouthpieces at Clinton News Network have to start defending her with Republican talking points?

 

[Donal]

IOW Sanders is doubling down on the allegations by innuendo (he couldn't name a single specific) and misinformation (he knows damn well Clinton has been consistent $15 minimum wage in high cost of living areas like NY and $12 nationally because every community cannot afford $15).

You should tell Fact Check and Politifact, because they didn't get the memo, either. I guess they are chasing the cute boys supporting Sanders. But, hey, now Hillary is all about a $15 federal minimum wage. And isn't that what counts?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Effective tax rate? Really? So, stealing talking points from Sanders wasn't enough, her and her mouthpieces at Clinton News Network have to start defending her with Republican talking points?

Stealing talking points?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You should tell Fact Check and Politifact, because they didn't get the memo, either. I guess they are chasing the cute boys supporting Sanders. But, hey, now Hillary is all about a $15 federal minimum wage. And isn't that what counts?

I did see it. I posted about it. They reported the facts, Clinton has always been for a $12 federal minimum wage while supporting $15 in local markets. Clinton never said she was for a $15 federal minimum wage in the debate. Sanders is claiming she was talking about federal when she was talking about supporting the NY $15 minimum.

Instead of showing Sanders was wrong conflating federal with NY, they concluded Sanders was "mostly true". They contradicted the same facts they included in the fact check.

Fox news just conflated the same thing. Sanders continues to conflate Clinton's statement in the debate and insists $15 should be the federal floor. That's not realistic in podunk Oklahoma. Clinton's position is more rational. Sanders' position reflects his extreme POV.

 

[Trakar]

Bernie, now merely a lessor evil candidate

While I still support and advocate many similar, progressive, public policies, a thorough examination of his climate and science policies have forced me to downgrade his candidacy to "lessor evil" status.

In accord with this, I will no longer contribute to, or support his campaign, or any other major party candidacy this year.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Effective tax rate? Really? So, stealing talking points from Sanders wasn't enough, her and her mouthpieces at Clinton News Network have to start defending her with Republican talking points?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sanders-return-shows-federal-tax-rate-13-5-001031024.html

Sanders and his wife, Jane, paid $27,653 in federal income taxes in 2014, an effective federal tax rate of 13.5 percent, on income of $205,271, which is their adjusted gross income before deductions. That figure is just below the $206,563 that Census data show as the lower limit for the top 5 percent of U.S. households in 2014.

WOW yahoo is in on the conspiracy too !!!

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Shillary speaks misinformation!

Great argument !

 

[Childlike Empress]

Interesting endorsement: I'm the real-life Gordon Gekko and I support Bernie Sanders

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Interesting endorsement: I'm the real-life Gordon Gekko and I support Bernie Sanders

"When [Bill] Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall, it was the culmination of the largest ever lobbying effort by the banking community to that date, $300m spent to convince Congress that Clinton, aided by Robert Rubin (US treasurer, previously with Goldman Sachs) and Alan Greenspan, a Milton Friedman-style supply-side economist, that the restraints on speculation should be removed. The banking community’s gratitude was and is unending. Who can blame them?

"Remarkably, today the derivatives positions held by the large banks approach 10 times those of 2007-2008. In four banks alone, they exceed the GDP of the entire world. This is the interesting consequence when unchecked risk management rests in bankers’ hands."

Can a presidential candidate have a corporation as her VP running mate?

Hillary Clinton/Goldman Sachs