Clinton is about to make a huge mistake

[left-of-center2012]

In 2008, Clinton tried to dismiss Barack Obama while playing up her experience. She can't afford to do it again.

It seems more and more likely that Clinton will be taking the same personal approach toward Sanders that she did with President Obama
i.e., that she is experienced and pragmatic and knows how to get things done in Washington, unlike the idealist Sanders.
(Remember when Obama was the liberal idealist?)

Not only did this approach fail last time around, but the political atmosphere in America has become even more anti-establishment over the past few years.

It is time for Clinton and the Democratic establishment to accept the reality that establishment politics are quickly losing their appeal to the American people.

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/12/hillary_clinton_is_about_to_make_a_huge_mistake_heres_what_she_needs_to_learn_from_bernie_sanders/

[hifiguy]

1. She seems to have learned nothing from her '08 run.

And running as the champion of the status quo is no help.

[yeoman6987]

3. As long as she gets her supporters to the caucus', she will win

She did not take caucus' seriously last time. That was here fatal flaw. It won't be repeated. All this other daily stuff is back ground noise. Keep up what you are doing Hillary!

[NiceTryGuy]

5. Ron Paul lost in the '08 campaign...

The fringe candidate lost in the '08 campaign.

Bernie Sanders is a lot of things to admire, but comparing him to Barack Obama is a bit fanciful. And this argument that says Hillary Clinton can't campaign on her strengths because she's going to lose to the Jesus Christ of Politics - it's getting a bit old. The fawning tones in the Bernie echo chamber don't capture the electoral reality.

In the end, it comes down to winning - and Bernie Sanders doesn't have a path through the electoral college. It would be lovely if this nation were that progressive, but Bernie Sanders simply cannot get through Ohio and Florida in the current environment. The world would be a better place if he could, but these states are the primary reason why the Democratic candidate has to appeal to the middle.

This Bernie stuff is wonderful and dangerous. Wonderful because it seems to be sparking a movement. Dangerous because it may end up getting a Republican elected in the most critical time in the Supreme Court history.

Hillary can beat any Republican put against her. Pick one, any one. There's no "gamble" to it. Clinton is the odds-on favorite to win in any match-up. The question is whether the Democrat base is going to make a huge mistake by continuing to weaken the sure thing in favor of a candidate that has as much potential to make the electoral college map look like 1980 all over again.

[msongs]

7. unlike obama as a challenger, sanders is a lone wolf with no party support nt

[SoapBox]

14. LOL

Ya...screw the millions and millions of Americans who will vote for Bernie.

But...The Entrenched Establishment is so much more important.

Not.

[oasis]

15. I agree completely.

[Armstead]

20. That binary mentality has driven us into the ditch as a nation

Personally, I think in a Bush 3 v Clinton 2 matchup, Bush 3 will eke it out.

Two same, old same old candidates -- people will want a change, and the results will be a version of Gore 2

[rhett o rick]

11. She has nothing else. She is who she is and everyone knows. You either support the oligarchy

or you support Sanders.

[NiceTryGuy]

16. A dumb man once said...

"you're either with us or against us..."

[rhett o rick]

18. It was true when he said it as it is now. There are only two sides in our current

war on the 99%. You either support the 1% or the 99%. Clinton may give some concessions (cake) to the 99%, but her allegiances are with the 1%. She has worked very hard to be a member of the 1% and her friends are all members of the 1%. She tells Wall Street that people (99%) shouldn't pick on the bankers (1%).

The difference between Obama and Clinton is that Obama at least pretended to favor the 99%.

And welcome to DU.

[jeff47]

19. Sure she has. She isn't running as the only one who can get white votes this time.

Instead, she's running as the only one who can get non-white votes.

Learning!

[morningfog]

2. Shhhhh! Just sit back and enjoy it.

[L0oniX]

4. Who needs to know how to get things done when the repukes are going to obstruct her as much as Obama

Wanna bet they won't? They already hated her and Bill before and I doubt they are going to be singing Kumbaya now.

[Motown_Johnny]

6. But they have enough Super PAC money to cram it down our throats,

so eventually we will need to swallow it. Right?


At least that is the plan.


Just spend the money on ads and the mindless masses will convert.

[NorthCarolina]

10. She might be wiser to simply pocket that Super Duper PAC money now.

Why waste it.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. Hillary was not a senator for very long

[restorefreedom]

9. right. his 40 plus year career as a mayor, rep and senator is worthless.

ok, got the talking point. good luck selling it.

[Flying Squirrel]

12. It's not like she has a choice

She can't pretend to be anti-establishment, nobody would believe it.

[Hoppy]

13. Get with the program. She ain't talkin' experience no more. Now, she wants you to know, SHE'S HUMAN.

[Major Hogwash]

17. Good analysis and I agree more people are pissed off at the establishment policies of both parties.

For completely different reasons, of course, while pulling in totally opposite directions -- the Republicans want more of a Tea Party's version of a war with everyone, a nonsensical "Kill Them All and Let Gawd Sort Them Out" approach, while the Democrats want more of a socialized, friendlier federal government to give equal footing to allow everyone the same access to the federal government's programs in order to be a more effective government for the people.

FOR ALL PEOPLE.

Not just bankers, or Wall Street traders, or military equipment manufacturers (the MIC).