Hillary's flip flops prove the left is winning.

[DonCoquixote]

Is it not funny to see Hillary change from this:

to opposing her former "Gold standard."

Or from this:

to opposing Keystone.

Friends, and by that I mean those of us on the Democratic wing of the Democratic party, as opposed to the "Reagan Democrats/Former Republicans" this is the time to pop the champagne, because we have proven that yes, we can apply PRESSURE to Hillary to lean right. The same "sensible" people who would lecture us on why Keystone and the TPP were needed are now going to have to backtrack in order to defend their Hillary.

This is a victory for two reasons:
1) it shows those of us who did not agree to a coronation are being listened to. Hillary wants so bad to sew this up so she can start attacking Trump, maybe finish off Jeb. She shows what the price of admission is: listen to unions more, listen to Wall Street less.

2) It shows to her that the whole wall of servile servants will not save her any more than in 2008. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is failing, indeed, she has failed to even get past Bernie Sanders, who, in World Series terms, should have been shut out in Game 4 and sent home. But thanks to some errors, these games are going into extra innings. This is good, because those of us on the left know that these centrist snakes have HIJACKED the party, and to a large extent, Hijacked Clinton, but we know if she needs to hang these folks out to dry to win, she will. The same people that yell that she will NOT need us will be ignored by Hillary, who realizes she DOES.

Granted, most of us know that when Hillary wins, she will turn around in five minutes, ass Keystone and the TPP, and if she needs to , she WILL bring out Bill, aka "minister of splaining stuff" to sell it. All her courtiers and acolytes will go right back to explaining why the TPP and Keystone are good things, because they liked them anyway. However, even IF that happens, that will not erase the fact that the Democrats will win the office by doing some good old fashioned leaning to the left. Things will only get worse for the Reagan Democrats, as Hillary will realize that the only way she will find support against the hyper-enhanced, deep-pocketed Ultra rabid right wing will not come from the Centre, but from the left, just like Bill had to run to the left after getting caught doing stupid stuff with Monica. Throw in the fact that even Morning Joe cannot defend his old GOP Buddies in the House, and we on the left will have REAL momentum, not the buzz from fake special effects, but the kind that comes when the people trying to shoot at you realize they are out of ammo.

WE ARE WINNING, and YES we will keep it UP! At this rate, I am hoping Bernie mentions Glass-Steagall, so that Hillary can co-opt that too. Then the people who kept yelling that GS was not needed can get on here and say how Hillary was always in favor of it. Hey, if telling people that we were, as Orwell put it, "always at war with Eurasia" is what suits our purpose, have at it, but it will be cute to see some Acolytes try to co-opt our positions or the issue. It will sound like watching some six year old on America's got talent trying to do Gangsta Rap, so bad it is good.

WE ARE WINNING. THE LEFT IS WINNING.

[DanTex]

1. The left wins if the Dems keep the White House. Otherwise, the right wins.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

13. That is only true if Bernie is POTUS otherwise we the people lose

[sibelian]

18. That's not politics, Dan.

That's supermarket branding.

[DanTex]

24. No, it's politics. Have you seen the Republicans?

[sibelian]

27. Everyone has. That's not going to work.

[DanTex]

29. No, it's not, which is why we need to elect a Dem.

[sibelian]

31. Fine. Stick a tin chicken on top of a pole, sign it "I'm a Democrat" and cheer away.

[JDPriestly]

19. If Hillary wins, the right has won.

She claims to be against the TPP. She used to be for it.

i do not trust her for one minute when she says she opposes it.

The Republicans will make a huge campaign issue out of Hillary's constantly changing opinions.

They did that with previous Democratic presidential candidates and they will tear Hillary apart for it.

There is no way on this earth that Hillary can win the presidency once the Republicans start in on her. And her frequent changes of opinion (which make her appear and maybe which actually reflect the fact that she is unprincipled and confused) will be just the stuff that successful Republican campaigns are made of.

One of the campaign strategies that Hillary is using this time is spreading the rumor that only she can win against the Republicans.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

She will get no Republican cross-over votes. Not when the Republicans start playing videos of her flip-flops on out TVS and on YouTube and social media.

The meme that only Hillary can win is utterly false.

[daleanime]

36. This is one one those sad cases where I agree....

But I'm not happy about it. Hillary's done some good and I can see why some do support her, but I think they're wrong. I don't want to vote for some one who voted for these endless wars. Even I could tell it was a bad decision from thousands of miles away, our presidential candidate has to be able to make better choices.

I don't want a candidate with such close ties to Wall Street, especially one that thinks the best way to change it's behavior is to offer "incentives".

I do want a candidate that I can trust to push a proudly progressive agenda. Some who is willing to go to jail for what he believes. Someone who will walk the line with us.

I do want a candidate who will change the conversation in DC and that candidate is Bernie Sanders.

And yes, that means a lot of work before the election and a ton after the election. I hope no one here tells me that they're not willing to work.

[JDPriestly]

42. Thanks. Excellent post.

[sulphurdunn]

34. The right won a long time ago.

The struggle is to defeat or at least defang democratic rightists.

[whatchamacallit]

45. As if Hillary really believes in her recent conversions

and would go to the mat for them. The left only wins with the right dem in the White House.

[mhatrw]

55. No, the left wins if this election is about issues rather than bullshit personality squabbles

and gotcha scandals.

The left wins if we finally have a national discussion about our ever growing wealth disparity, all of our policies that favor corporations over regular people, and our "democracy" and "free press" of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

[Fearless]

56. The left only wins if a progressive Democrat wins the GE

[One of the 99]

2. It also proves why it is good Bernie is in the race

He's bringing up important issues and pushing the other candidates in the correct direction.

[dorkzilla]

38. In Hillary’s case it would ONLY be a TEMPORARY direction

You think she’s going to keep that anti-TPP anti-Keystone BS up if she has to go toe-to-toe against the Republicans? She’s going to have to show them how tough and business-friendly she is, so she’ll talk up her tireless support of the TPP, her hawkish stance as SOS and all the shit that make us “Berniebots” not want to vote for her.

She won’t stay to the left because its NOT authentic and she’s going to say anything she has to to win. She thought her nomination was a shoe-in--she wasn’t counting on SOCIALIST!!!! Bernie Sanders garnering so much attention so now she has to fight him off by appealing to the left/progressive wing of the party.

Don’t think this is genuine.

[One of the 99]

59. Sorry

I'm not a hater.

[dorkzilla]

61. I’m not a hater either, just a realist and observant. nt

[One of the 99]

65. Could have fooled me. nt

[Ed Suspicious]

21. STRAIGHT FIRE!!!!

Soon you too will feel the bern.

[cascadiance]

44. And polls are useless before the first debate, which intentionally has not been allowed to happen...

... up until this point to facilitate only name recognition.

Bernie's ahead of Obama's pace in terms of polls at this stage. History will repeat itself as the people discover more the depth of who their options to vote for are, much like what happened in 2007-2008!

[HooptieWagon]

4. ? Is, will she flip-flop back to the RW if nominated?

I'm thinking she'll pull an Obama, and veer hard right. I don't think she'll fight a bit against KXL and TPP. Her supporters will cheer her 'strategic move', and tell us how wonderful KXL and TPP are for 99%.

[99Forever]

5. Of course she will.

She is a neoliberal. Lying comes naturally to her.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

16. Just like republicans where lying is a way of life

No difference between neo liberals and republicans

[99Forever]

17. Oh, there's a difference alright.

Republicans are upfront about fucking us over.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

22. That is true

[Ed Suspicious]

23. This.

Somebody said it really well yesterday, but I can't find it to attribute it.

It was something to the effect of "She represents to socially tolerant wing of the Republican party."

[JDPriestly]

30. She is an outrageously ambitious neoliberal. The ambition is incredible.

But she has flip-flopped too much and mostly just to get elected.

I think that her flip-flopping makes her a candidate far too vulnerable to win the presidency. The Republicans will reduce the tiny big of experience she really has (not counting the Clinton presidency years because she was not in elected office at that time) to video upon video of her flip-flopping on issue after issue.

She cannot win the presidency on her meager record.

She was First Lady in Bill Clinton's White House. If she takes credit for what he did, liberals won't like her. Glass-Steagall anyone? Private prisons anyone? NAFTA anyone" The "reform" of the media laws anyone? The list goes on and on. Things liberals really don't care for much.

Oh, most impoartant -- the appointment of Greenspan to the FED anyone?

She spent a few years in the Senate. Elected twice to the Senate, she did not finish her term and served four years as Secretary of State. (Why not eight?)

She voted in the Senate for about eight years, has a pretty good record on women's and children's issues and was the Secretary of State. That is her relevant record. That is not a lot for a Democrat.

Among her votes in the Senate was support for the Iraq War. She was in charge of our policy with regard to Syria and Libya -- and that could cause her a big problem in 2016.

I'm sure Hillary fans will hate this post because they it points out that the Hillary propaganda that only she can win against Republicans is utter nonsense.

She does not have a strong record, at least not a stronger record than Bernie or even Martin O'Malley.

Hillary has a lot of problems and will have a lot of problems in a campaign against the Republican nominee regardless of who that turns out to be.

And if that nominee turns out to be someone other than Bush, Hillary will also have to deal with the problem that she spent 8 years in the White House already and is the second Clinton to seek the presidency.

The argument that only Hillary can win in 2016 is utter nonsense. Sounds good, but is not true.

[Divernan]

41. She'll follow the money in anticipation of running for a 2nd term.

As Marlon Brando said in One Eyed Jacks, "Talk is cheap, Jack. Make your play!" and the Clintons' play is always to follow the money. There are tens of millions of corporate/One Percent quid pro quo dollars in play to finance/subsidize the Clintons re the trinity of her campaign, her Family Foundation and their personal wealth. And what a tangled web that is.

[90-percent]

12. forgot where i read this

But Obama's 2008 victory was something like this;

"Thanks for getting me elected. I can take it from here."

Bernie's decades long record of being correct on important issues before they were popular has 1000% more credibility than Hillary's constant recalibration of whatever her positions are on any given day.

-90% Jimmy

[sulphurdunn]

15. The play is in the Third Way

play book. It's fake left during the election then go right after.

[frylock]

49. Counter Trey

[sulphurdunn]

53. Yep. Sometimes

the dems will throw in a fake pass to the TE coming across the middle before he makes his block on the DE. If the DE takes the bait and hits the TE, the DE is out of the play as much as if he'd been blocked. The rest is plain ole 'student body right.' That is pretty much how the leadership of the Democratic Party plays the game.

[kenfrequed]

6. Her switch on these issues does not impress me.

The first Democratic debates are next week. There is no way she would risk such a damaging sound-bite body blow to be repeated all over the internet by having her have to give a pro TPP or pro pipeline answer.

This is why we have the stilted language about her being troubled by what she has heard about the TPP, when in fact the benefits to the pharmacological and entertainment industry have ALWAYS been part of the thing.

This is why we have her dismissing the XL pipeline as a "distraction" from the real issue of global warming.

Both of these issues are things are symbolic representations of critically important issues that we Democrats are very excited about and I would fully expect her to trade off these and other ecological and economic concerns at the drop of a hat to favor the wealthy industries that are invested in these things. I do not trust a candidate to regulate industries on Thursday after she cashes their checks on Tuesday.

[DrBulldog]

7. Looking at liars . . .

I was reading today about the techniques used by FBI counterintelligence to detect liars. I came across this tip:

"Liars tend to speak more than truthful people in an attempt to sound legitimate and win over their audience. They will also use more complex sentences to hide the truth."

Now who does that remind you of?

[sibelian]

20. Hmmmm, I'd be careful with that.

The assocation between verbosity and falsehood should be seen as relational rather than causative.

(Oooh, that was pretty, what I just said, maybe I was lying)

[Ed Suspicious]

25. It was pretty truthy, though.

[sibelian]

26. OWWWW.

You said I said something "truthy"! You're mean.

[Ed Suspicious]

28. The truth hurts.

[sibelian]

33. ... true.

sniff.

[JDPriestly]

32. I'm very verbal. I talk a lot. So does everyone else in my family.

It's in the genes, I'm sure. Even my youngest grandchild talks a whirlwind.

Someone up the line kissed the Blarney Stone.

But we are not liars. So it probably depends on the person.

However, the more words you use, the more you speak, the greater the chance that you will say something that either offends someone or is untrue.

It's just a matter of the odds. The more you talk, the more you are likely to make a mistake.

I think the FBI is referring to statements in certain situations and not just to the differences in the the verbosity of different individuals. So it isn't just that people who talk a lot are supposedly less honest than others. It depends on the context of the speech and what is being talked about.

[dorkzilla]

39. I’m the same (as is my family). Mom said I started talking at 1 and never shut up!

But there is, to my mind anyway, a difference between being verbose and being loquacious.

The point is, Hillary speaks but says very little....well, says little of anything “concrete”.

[clamshells]

8. I knew it was over for the left for 4/8 years

as soon as Obama appointed Rahm Emanuel. I would expect Hillary to shift immediately back to the right if she were elected. Not that Obama hasn't done some things correctly, but much less than he could have.

We only have one candidate who's been speaking the truth, consistently, for decades. It is not Hillary.

[LiberalElite]

9. typo

In first para. "Pressure ... to lean RIGHT."

[retrowire]

10. just because a wolf in sheeps clothing is

saying left this and left that to cater and win doesn't mean the left wins.

it just means they understand the majority is left and they can't win without us. not that they'd actually implement the changes we want.

but there is that Bernie guy who's had these positions for decades.... Bernie 4 president.

[Myrina]

37. ^ this ^

Why accept a pretender when we have a contender in Senator Sanders?

[retrowire]

46. exactly. n/t

[Android3.14]

11. You say that, but...

As soon as the primaries are over, it will be back to the same old MIC and 1-percenter bullshit. Unless Bernie wins, and then we have a totally new and good definition of BS.

[Broward]

14. I don't know about winning, but at least having an impact.

Either way, we have to play the long game here.

[in_cog_ni_to]

35. The Left wins ONLY if Bernie wins.

Hillary will flop back to her previous support of the TPP and XL pipeline if she wins. And she sure isn't going to tax the Wall St. Transactions of all her good buddies - it's just not going to happen. This past week of flipping on 3 MAJOR issues is nothing but debate prep. She MUST BE LIKE BERNIE - because she has witnessed his rally crowds. She knows she's going to lose.

[Javaman]

40. Here slogon should be "yeah, me too!" because she always chimes in after

Bernie says something (something he's been supporting for years).

[retrowire]

47. exactly!!!! n/t

[d_legendary1]

43. No we're not. We're being taken for suckas!

Someone who wants trade deals isn't going to change their mind so easily (see her long awaited answer to TPP). She's only doing this for votes. The last guy promised us to renegotiate NAFTA and didn't. Instead he's out there pushing TPP like its the next best replacement to NAFTA (technically he didn't lie to us).

I've had enough of third way politics! Time to elect someone who puts people ahead of profits!

And Clinton ain't that person.

[Matariki]

48. We're "winning" until we elect someone who says what we want to hear

but enacts actual policy that benefits the 1%

Sort of like when we had majorities in the House and Senate but still somehow had to "keep our powder dry"

[DonCoquixote]

50. I am not saying Hillary has changed

FAR from it, indeed, I am sure that people are already working on the strategy for her to do her 180 before march 2016, even if Bill has to "explain stuff." What I am saying is that the centre is looking weak now, and this is where we can apply the long game to gnaw at their roots, they way they gnawed at ours.

[Maedhros]

51. There will be no victory until Hillary is defeated in the Primary.

If she wins, like her predecessor, she will shove the Left into a dark corner and tell us to shut up.

[rockfordfile]

62. Clinton\Sanders is the Democratic nominee I will support.

[Maedhros]

63. When the General election arrives, I will vote for whichever candidate most closely represents

my views. If that's a Democrat, then fantastic. If not, so be it.

The nomination of Hillary will actively discourage many independents and young people from voting. Therefore I think it is absolutely imperative that she be defeated in the Primary.

[Jester Messiah]

52. No, it just proves that she'll tell us what she thinks we want to hear.

At least, for as long as it takes to get past the primaries, then she'll return to being a corporate shill and warhawk. The question is, how many are dumb enough to get played?

[DonCoquixote]

57. the point is

she, and all those depending on the centre, are vulnerable, which means she will either adjust or perish. If the chooses the latter, then Bernie will be the David that slew Goliath, just as Obama was.

[azmom]

54. They don't call them flip flops anymore.

[link:|

[Bernblu]

58. Yes

but if you believe Hillary I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

[DonCoquixote]

64. I do not

Like I said, I am sure that right now, there are scores of unpaid interns and overpaid ad execs on the phone telling the Lloyd Blankfleds and Alice Waltons of the world "she is just kidding, the plan to destroy all lefties will go into place no less then five minutes after the acceptance speech!

The point is that the centre is running out of steam

[sabrina 1]

60. The Left is on the rise Globally. After decades of neolib/con policies the people, everywhere, have

finally had enough and are refusing to play their games anymore. THAT is why DWS, Brock et al are losing.

[uponit7771]

66. Cause Sanders stances on everything has been the same since the campaign began? No, they're BOTH...

... "evolving" on issues.

None of the candidates can throw a stone, not one