people are impressed by Bernie Sanders.

Let me give folks an example. Here was one of the exchanges:


BLITZER: Secretary, let’s talk about Social Security, another critically important issue. Senator Sanders has challenged you to give a clear answer when it comes to extending the life of Social Security and expanding benefits. Are you prepared to lift the cap on taxable income, which currently stands at $118,500? Yes or no, would you lift the cap?

CLINTON: I have said repeatedly, Wolf, I am going to make the wealthy pay into Social Security to extend the Social Security Trust Fund. That is one way. If that is the way that we pursue, I will follow that.

CLINTON: But there are other ways. We should be looking at taxing passive income by wealthy people. We should be looking at taxing all of their investment.

But here’s the real issue, because I — I’ve heard this, I’ve seen the reports of it. I have said from the very beginning, we are going to protect Social Security. I was one of the leaders in the fight against Bush when he was trying to privatize Social Security.

But we also, in addition to extending the Trust Fund, which I am absolutely determined to do, we’ve got to help people who are not being taken care of now. And because Social Security started in the 1930s, a lot of women have been left out and left behind.

And it’s time that we provide more benefits for widows, divorcees, for caregivers, for women who deserve more from the Social Security...

BLITZER: Thank you, Secretary.

CLINTON: — system and that will be my highest priority.

BLITZER: Senator?

Go ahead, Senator.

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: An interesting comment, but you didn’t answer the question.

CLINTON: I did. If that’s the way we’re...

SANDERS: No, you didn’t. My legi...

CLINTON: — yes, I did.

SANDERS: Can I answer...

CLINTON: I did answer the...

SANDERS: — may I please...

CLINTON: Well, don’t — don’t put words...

SANDERS: — can I have... (CROSSTALK)

CLINTON: — into my mouth and say something...

SANDERS: — do I not?

CLINTON: — that’s not accurate.

BLITZER: Go ahead, Senator.

SANDERS: All right. Essentially what you described is my legislation, which includes (INAUDIBLE)...

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: Now, we’ve got — here is the issue. Your answer has been the same year after year. In fact, the idea that I’m bringing forth, I have to admit it, you know, it wasn’t my idea. It was Barack Obama’s idea in 2008, the exact same idea.

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: He called for lifting the cap, which is now higher — it’s at 118 — and starting at 250 and going on up. If you do that, you’re going to extend the life of Social Security for 58 years. You will significantly expand benefits by 1,300 bucks a year for seniors and disabled vets under $16,000 a year.

What’s wrong with that?

Are you prepared to support it?

CLINTON: I have supported it. You know, we are in vigorous agreement here, Senator.

SANDERS: You have sup...

CLINTON: I think it’s important...

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: — to point out that...

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: — you know, we’re — we’re having a discussion about the best way to raise money from wealthy people to extend the Social Security Trust Fund. Think about what the other side wants to do. They’re calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme. They still want to privatize it.

In fact, their whole idea is to turn over the Social Security Trust Fund to Wall Street, something you and I would never let happen.

SANDERS: All right, so...

CLINTON: So, yes, we both want to make sure...

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: Look, Wolf...

CLINTON: — Social Security (INAUDIBLE)...

SANDERS: — I am very glad that...

(CROSSTALK)

CLINTON: — and well-funded...

SANDERS: I am very glad to...

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Thank you, Secretary.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Senator, go ahead.

SANDERS: — campaign of challenging, if I hear you correctly, Madam Secretary, you are now coming out finally in favor of lifting the cap on taxable income...

(APPLAUSE)

SANDERS: — and extending and expanding Social Security. If that is the case, welcome on board. I’m glad you’re here.

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: No.

BLITZER: Thank you.

Errol — Errol Louis, go ahead.

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: We are going...

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: — we are...

(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: — we are going...

LOUIS: Secretary...

CLINTON: I — as he said, I’ve said the same thing for years. I didn’t say anything different tonight. We are going to extend the Social Security Trust Fund. There is still something called Congress. Now, I happen to support Democrats and I want to get Democrats to take back the majority in the United States Senate...

BLITZER: Errol...

CLINTON: — so a lot of — a lot of what we’re talking about can actually be implemented...

BLITZER: Errol, hold on a second.

CLINTON: — when I am president.

LOUIS: Secretary...

BLITZER: Go ahead.

Hold on, Errol...

SANDERS: — I’m still...

BLITZER: — Errol. Hold on.

SANDERS: I’ve got to admit...

BLITZER: Go ahead, Senator.

SANDERS: — maybe I’m a little bit confused.

Are you or are you not supporting legislation to lift the cap on taxable income and expand Social Security for 58 years and increase benefits...

CLINTON: I am...

SANDERS: — yes or no?

CLINTON: I have said yes, we are going to pick the best way or combination...

SANDERS: Oh, you — ah.

(APPLAUSE)

(BOOS)

SANDERS: OK.

CLINTON: — or combination of ways...

(BOOS)

CLINTON: — you know...

(BOOS)










Now look at that exchange. Bernie swear he had a gotcha moment. It seems the Bernie crowd did too by booing Hillary at the end.


But y'all telling me yall don't understand the point that Hillary is making? She says we could raise the funds for Social Security that way, but there are others ways to do it, the important point is, wealthy people are the ones who are going to pay for it.

Is that really too complicated that Bernie and his people needed an even simpler answer? To demand a yes or no answer on that is silly. She absolutely answered the question and it was absolutely consistent.

BTW, Bernie too old to be up on stage talking about "I am confused" because I swear I was wondering was he really confused or was that just rhetorical flare.




ANyway, I've watch Hillary a few times lately and I think one of her bigger problems is that she speaks like a lawyer.

For example, she got crucified for not promising that she will never lie to the public.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/18/hillary_clinton_wont_flatly_deny_she_will_never_lie_to_the_public.html



I felt that was kind of bullshit because she infact gave a much more honest answer. Or maybe better put, a much more accurate answer.

It would have been super easy to just say yes I will never lie to the public and I think a typical politician would know to say that but if you ask me that's the dishonest answer and slick answer.


Anyway, Hillary is not a great communicator, maybe she needs to dumb it down when talking to Bernie's folks. IDK.









>Guess we've reached the usual 300-post trigger for a new
>politics thread.
>
>New York coming up on the 19th. 95 delegates on the Rep side,
>291 for the Dems (the Dems have a higher overall number of
>delegates, so they usually have bigger numbers).
>FiveThirtyEight's polling average currently has it Clinton 57,
>Sanders 40, but we've seen these margins thin and even flip.
>It'll probably be an ugly week. Must win for Sanders, I think
>they've even promised it. To start turning the pledged
>delegate race, he needs to win it big. On the other hand, it
>would be embarrassing for the Clinton campaign if they lost
>it, even by a small margin, so the media would go wild. We'll
>see how it goes. Debate this Thursday (April 14).
>
>On the R side, Trump has a huge lead. He's flirting with 50%
>from what I hear, which might make it possible for him to
>sweep the delegates, which in turn might make it possible for
>him to end up with a delegate majority before the convention.
>Considering how the talk about convention procedures is going,
>that might be his only chance. The other news is that John
>Kasich is beating Cruz in NY. A strong second place (and a
>weaker Trump showing) might help his delegate count, making it
>more plausible that the convention would land on him as a
>consensus candidate. (Paul Ryan is clearly
>lobbying-by-not-lobbying-but-making-campaign-ads-anyway for
>that spot as well).
>
>The rest of the major races (not sure how many of these we'll
>get through before needing a new thread):
>
>April 26:
>Maryland -- 38 R delegates, winner-take-most; 118 D
>(proportional, as always)
>Pennsylvania -- 71 R WTM; 210 D
>Connecticut -- 28 R (proportional); 70 D
>Delaware -- 16 R winner-take-all; 31 D
>
>May 3:
>Indiana -- 57 R WTM; 92 D
>
>May 10:
>Nebraska -- 36 R winner-take-all; (Dem caucus already held)
>West Virginia -- 34 R (proportional); 37 D
>
>May 17:
>Kentucky -- (Rep caucus already held); 61 D
>Oregon -- 28 R; 74 Bernie Bros with gluten-free trail mix
>
>June 7:
>California -- 172 R WTM; FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY SIX D
>Other states -- who the hell cares...
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"