Sen. Claire McCarthy -- er, McCaskill -- calls poor Hillary the "underdog"

[brentspeak]

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2016/01/23/democratic-party-running-scared-bernie-sanders/79220798/

Is Democratic Party running scared of Bernie Sanders?

snip

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo, another Clinton supporter, even tried to draw sympathy for her candidate saying,“She does her best work as an underdog," a tough act to sell given Clinton's pedigree as first lady, secretary of state and long-time presumptive nominee.

[draa]

1. At least she admitted it.

The last step is acceptance so we're almost there.

[Thinkingabout]

2. No the Democrat party is not scared of

Bernie Sanders, why is Bernie Sanders supporters so afraid of his socialist title he says he is?

[draa]

4. What?

No one is scared of the "Socialist" title. No one.

The better question would be is why is Clinton so afraid of the word Democrat.

[Thinkingabout]

6. Afraid of the Democrat word, no, what could make you believe she

Afraid of the Democrat word, she has been a Democrat in her voting age, I do not find Democrat offensive in the least, quiet proud of being a life long Democrat myself.

[draa]

10. And yet she tossed away the #1 party goal like it didn't matter.

Tossing Single Payer will be her downfall. When 80% of the party, and probably many of her supporters, want SPHC it was foolish to turn her back on it. When you couple that with the $2.8M she received from the Insurance company it's not going to be good for Clinton.

And we already see the effects in new polling.

She's 8pts down in Iowa and 27pts down in NH, both of which happened AFTER her move against SPHC, because the Liberals, which are 47% of our party, are pissed. I've talked to many in my area and it's not good. Don't know what she was thinking but...

[Thinkingabout]

11. Did she toss it or knows it is not going to happen now?

She wants to improve ACA and not toss it out as Sanders wants to do.

[draa]

14. You can spin it anyway you want but it doesn't matter.

It's optics.

People don't care how she parses her words. Or that she wants to continue the give away to the insurance companies. Or even if she wants to improve the ACA. That doesn't matter. What matters is she took SPHC off the table and then sided with the Heritage Foundation heath care plan we have today.

I'd also imagine no one is buying her "improvement" line either. Since the ACA was passed in 2010 there has been ZERO attempts by our party to improve it. None. So why should anyone buy that excuse now. smh

Now before you says "but Republicans" I'll tell you that doesn't work. We've watched the GOP try to repeal it 62 times. We've watched our own party do nothing for 5 years. People don't care if you can do it. They care about the Democrats not trying. That's why the "No We Can't" motto is now attached to Clinton and anyone that's sided with her on SPHC.

[Thinkingabout]

17. Why wasn't the GOP successful on their last vote?

Because we have a Democrat president who just happened to be the same president who signed the ACA into law.

[draa]

21. I'm not denying that but it still doesn't matter with regards to Clinton and SPHC.

The polling out of Iowa after she moved away from the party platform was NOT good. Polls on who do you trust on Health Care showed a -38pt drop for Clinton. She led Bernie +60 - +30 before that and he led +50 - +40 after that vote (I'll try to find the poll when I get time but it's somewhere on Dkos if you want to go look. Man I hate their new format lol).

I haven't seen the numbers for New Hampshire but I don't need to. It's an extremely Liberal state. She lost 11pts at least if you take that 16pt poll for Bernie that was an outlier. If you take the others it's about 18pts or more. That is major.

[Thinkingabout]

22. Do you call making improvements ACA moving away from the party platform?

That is news to me.

[draa]

24. I do.

That's not our plan. It's a Republican designed plan. If our party leaders had put their own package together in 2008 and passed a Democratic Party plan you'd have more support. As it is, a $900B give away that leave 29M people uninsured is not a party ideal. That's Republican ideal.

And you have no proof they'll improve it. Just because a politician says they will means nothing after what we've seen from politicians in both parties. In fact, I have more proof they WON'T try to improve it as you do believing they will.

[Thinkingabout]

25. I thought you had gone on to the DNC platform,

I don't think the 2016 platform has been established yet.

[libdem4life]

26. The ACA sucks for most people...$6-8-10,000 deductibles? Right.

What we lack is vision and commitment and yes, Revolution. Single payer...the only industrialized country in the world NOT to have some version of it. We're No. 34 doesn't sound so cool.

The Democrats have become the party of Nope...so, enter Bernie. Deride Vision and Commitment all you want...and many do...without it, well, just Nope.

Real Democrats stand for Single Payer. EOS. I think we're smart enough to get there. It's the lack of will and the strong interests against it that strangle.

[enid602]

29. single payer

The only major countries that have Single Payer are Japan and the UK. Medicare is ALREADY bigger than the single payer in those countries. ACA is insurance mandated Universal Healthcare, similar to the other 135 countries that have it. Do you see France, Germany or Belgium going over to single payer? No. Are the majority of European countries in favor of having one big NIH rather than their insurance mandated? No. Single payer in the US would be three times the size of Japan's, provided it can reduce per capita health costs by 60%. Provided that Bernie can drum up more than the handful of senators who supported it during the last go round. Providing the House, most likely controlled by Republicans until the 2020 census magically changes its mind and funds it. Bernie was a fool for making this race a referendum of single payer. The fact that his supporters continue to respond to every post with 'everybody else has it' shows they don't really know the difference between SP and insurance mandated.

[libdem4life]

30. You underestimate many things...SP is a catch all phrase for a number of socialized

government health care plans. All it would take is moving the Medicare age downward, expanding what we already have, and making the appropriate adjustments. This has been discussed at length here and other places.

And people who call other people fools carry no ethical arguments worth much response.

[Thinkingabout]

38. Have you checked how much co-pay Medicare pays?

Do you know how much the monthly premium for Medicare?

[libdem4life]

40. I am on Medicare. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

42. Then you know it isn't free, I never hear Sanders talk about the cost.

[libdem4life]

43. Maybe you're not listening carefully enough. Lots have weighed in on the costs

and the savings. Not just Bernie. I don't know of anyone asking for free healthcare. But I certainly don't have deductibles that come in the 5 figure range. As a wealthy nation, we can do better than that.

[Thinkingabout]

47. I have ask the question here, some thinks it is free or

At least they think Sanders version is free.

[libdem4life]

48. How is "Single Payer" mis-characterized as "Free"? But, maybe some do.

Also, guess none of the Hillary people make that mistake? Got it.

[draa]

27. 2016 platform?

Look, I'm not talking about some new idea this party has come up with recently. This has been one of our party's signature goals forever.

I've been a Democrat for 30+ years and SPHC has been an ideal for that entire time. This isn't something we just glommed onto this year. This has been something many, many people have worked for decades on. Mainly public sentiment but in the background as well. Clinton tossed us all under the bus. That's not how things work in our party. All I can say is good luck because you folks will probably need it. eom

[Thinkingabout]

39. So Sanders trying to dump ACA is going to be good?

Do you really see it possible for Sanders to get Medicare for all through Congress? I don't. It will not happen until we can get Congress back to a strong Democratic standing.

[draa]

44. I deleted my last response.

I accused you of lying and I apologize.

As far as Medicare for All. Yes I do but it will take some work. I do believe the 8% of people who've left our party since 2008 will gladly come back if they think Democrats are going to work to help them.

I also expect independents will join our cause even if they don't join our party. Bernie has large support from that group because he's been an indy for 35 years.

Now, on to Republicans. I know quite a few who will vote for a better life. They aren't partisan and I know some in my family that's voting for Bernie outright. They're sick of getting crapped on. Especially by their own party. I'm also sure there's more out there because Obama took 9% of the Republican vote himself.

Like I said, it WILL take work, but so has every other major party accomplishment we've had. It will never happen if we don't try (and that's what was so disappointing about Clinton tossing it away like she did) Thanks.

[Thinkingabout]

49. As stated before, if those 8% and more was concentrating on

Electing Democrats at every level these things may just be able to get single payer, it will not happen with a GOP heavy congress. In 2014 about 35% voted, Republicans votes, you can see who is electing the Republicans, it is not Democrats. With 60% of the non voters we could have a Democratic heavy Congress.

[draa]

55. Those 8% left because our party has turned into the Do Nothings.

Here, take a look at this. You don't need to rec the OP but it will give a good example of why people are leaving our party. Please take the time to read it and maybe, just maybe, you can get an understanding of why our party is destroying itself. No one will vote for more of that. Ever.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511054538

As far as Congress. When Obama took the WH in 2008 he came in with a Super Majority in Congress. Why? Because of Hope and Change. People believed that and turned out in mass to give him the majority. We passed the ACA with that majority but not much else (minimum wage increase as well. get this, it was the first since the 1990"s under Bill Clinton. Why so long?).

I think the majority lasted 60 days or so but there was plenty of time to enact more Democratic policies and no one could have stopped them. They didn't and people saw that. As such our majority went to crap. Not because people didn't want to help. It's because they didn't see the Dems trying. They did nothing and voters stayed home increasingly more the next 4 elections.

Since then Gerrymandering has gotten worse but if you offer people hope and a reason they will turn out and vote. We can put Democrats back in State Houses all over the country. ALL House seats in congress are up for grabs this year. 34 Senate seats are as well (I think). There's a chance to take that majority back but not if it's Clinton (she's seen by many as the problem not the solution). And I'm not sure she can win the WH anyway (sorry to say).

Ok, sorry about the length but there's really no way to say it in less words. Unless I just grunted that is and you've shown me too much respect for that.

[juxtaposed]

54. Chelsea, Is that you?

[Fumesucker]

19. "The Democrat party", eh?

I've heard that particular grammatical error made somewhere else too.

[ronnykmarshall]

33. and calling a Democrat McCarthy ...

doesn't piss you off?

[Fumesucker]

36. If the Red Baiting shoe fits

You don't understand, I'm not pissed off by the antics on DU, I'm amused by them.

Like this classic..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1053879

[ronnykmarshall]

50. and I take back my comment

I cussed some asshole on Facebook (Hillary supporter) that make some shitty comment about bring up Joe McCarthy from the dead to "shame Sanders" ... I cussed that queen out BIG time.

I apologize, the senators comments were out of line about Sen. Sanders.

[Fumesucker]

53. It's all good...

You're OK in my book even if we might disagree sometimes...

[angrychair]

20. To be clear

First, Bernie is a Democratic Socialist. There is a difference.

Second, he is a Democrat and a candidate for President of the United States for the Democratic Party.

As much as some like to wish that inconvenient truth away, it never does.

[Fawke Em]

59. Maybe so-called socialists understand noun-verb agreement?

[Odin2005]

62. "Democrat" Party, thanks for showing your true colors by using a GOP slur.

[CharlotteVale]

3. Claire McCarthy, how utterly perfect.

[TheBlackAdder]

5. George Bush Sr. (1992) attacked BILL CLINTON for being a SOCIALIST--McCaskill using GOP tricks! nt

[Thinkingabout]

7. Sanders must be using GOP tricks also, he calls himself socialists also.

[TheBlackAdder]

9. But GOPers/Blue Dogs use 'socialism' with a negative connotation, but you already knew that!

.


Just like how HRC used 'socialism' to attack Barack Obama, but you already knew that too!


.

[Thinkingabout]

12. Do you think Sanders already knew the

Negative connotation when he said he was socialist?

[TheBlackAdder]

13. Democratic Socialist. See, how you spin that? So Rovian in its elegance.

.


It's all in the optics that are being portrayed by the candidate.

If you want to pretend that the US is not a hybrid of Capitalism and Socialism, so be it.


Even libertarians love socialism when it benefits their cronies.

Sanders is being straight up front.


(Expecting another silly retort.)

.

[Thinkingabout]

15. He has only started saying Democrat Socialist recently.

[TheBlackAdder]

16. See, more silliness. Can I call it, or what? nt

[Thinkingabout]

57. Are you good friends with Rove, he really likes

Sanders.

[TheBlackAdder]

60. You've got nothing, huh! Absolutely NOTHING! nt

[Thinkingabout]

63. How long has he been saying Democrat Socialist?

[JonLeibowitz]

61. You mean like in 2007 where he identified as a "democratic socialist" to the Times?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/magazine/21Sanders.t.html

How far back do we have to go?

Would 1995 satisfy you?

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/12/weekinreview/the-nation-to-vermont-s-voters-what-s-out-is-in.html

I would hope factual posting is important to you, as with all DU posters.

[Punkingal]

8. Sen Claire McCarthy....bwahahahahaha!

Perfect!

[ronnykmarshall]

31. Yeah ...

you guys should use some Hitler references to elected Democrats that DARE to support Hillary. Come on kids, I'm sure you can think of some and of course that shit will be just peachy here in GD-B.

[Punkingal]

34. I don't use Hitler references...and i'm not a kid.

I don't want to go back to McCarthyism, but your candidate and her mouthpieces don't seem to mind.

[senz]

18. Lord, what a phony woman.

Conveniently forgetting Hillary's wealthy donors, powerful connections, and Bernie's long shutout from the media.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

23. She's a fool

[libdem4life]

28. HRC as the Underdog...right...just nipping at the heels of the Powerful Bernie Sanders. LOL

[darkangel218]

32. Someone alerted on this lol.

I'm expecting 0-7 or 1-6 leave it. It was a very silly alert.

[pa28]

35. She's right. "Inevitable" Hillary never seems to be inevitable for long.

And it's happened so many times now.

[Attorney in Texas]

37. Clinton's the inevitable underdog, the anti-establishment establishment candidate, and the moderate

liberal progressive candidate.

Yet her supporters cannot wrap their heads around why-oh-why a majority find her disingenuous.

[AzDar]

45. LMAO, Senator LovePats.

[darkangel218]

46. And I was right:

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Sat Jan 23, 2016, 07:47 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Sen. Claire McCarthy -- er, McCaskill -- calls poor Hillary the "underdog"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511053668

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Compare a DEMOCRATIC senator to McCarthy? What's next Hitler? I'm sure the pro-Bernie "fair" jury will let this stand. So go for it.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Jan 23, 2016, 08:12 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not rising to the point needs to be hidden. May upset some though.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Fair post. McCaskill is certainly resorting to red baiting Sanders. If the comment fits you must acquit!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There is nothing hide worthy.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The same senator that called Bernie a communist should wear the McCarthy flag
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[morningfog]

51. I predicted this months ago.

[Jarqui]

52. To get them off their game like this, Bernie has touched a nerve

The Clinton campaign seems to be in full panic mode.

Bernie? He's just chugging along doing what he's done for the past 40-50 years ....

[silenttigersong]

56. Underdog pedigree might be a poor choice of words n/t

[Skwmom]

58. It's all part of a narrative they are creating. Remember Clinton and the comback kid. n/t