Home | About | Donate

With All Eyes on New York, Clinton's "Progressive" Platform Wobbles


With All Eyes on New York, Clinton's "Progressive" Platform Wobbles

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Democratic presidential contenders Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have finally agreed on a date for what is sure to be a spirited debate in Brooklyn ahead of New York's primary on April 19.

The candidates will face off on Monday, April 14 for a debate moderated by CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer.


Deirdre, thank you for putting progressive in quotation marks.
She is the opposite of progressive as we've discussed here many times.

In the meantime-----I have been supporting the Sander’s campaign with contributions of time (phone banking) and money.

Yet in the back (and sometimes front) of my thought process is the fear and dread that if HRC gets the nomination Sanders WILL (as many on Truthdig tell me) throw his support behind her at the convention. That would translate into me helping HRC/DNC. I don't want any part of "moving her to the left" (which is absurd). That is not acceptable to me.

It would be helpful to explore where this movement is going and get a sense of Sander’s commitment to the "political revolution" he so passionately speaks of.

It will be a political devolution if he throws his support behind HRC and asks the millions that he has mobilized to do the same.

Some excellent points are made in an article published in March by Socialist Alternative: “Sanders’ supporters need a debate on how to make sure we do not end up imprisoned by the constraints of the Wall Street dominated Democratic Party.”

“if Sanders accepts the results of the primaries and endorses Hillary Clinton, rather than running as an independent, his campaign will end up as a transmission belt for Clinton and the same old corporate politics of the Democratic Party that alienated so many Sanders supporters in the first place.”

“it is is also time to look soberly at the situation and draw lessons from the experience so far and prepare the way to break from the Democratic Party. Sanders should declare his intention to take the political revolution all the way to the general election in November, as an independent if necessary.”



HRC thinking to herself--who paid me last, who paid me most?


Indian Point should be closed, finally. But right now the energy would be largely replaced by natural gas so it would increase greenhouse gas emissions. I would like to see a plan to replace it with renewable energy. Perhaps hydro could be used until solar gets more up to speed. The $15 minimum wage of course sounds good but where is the money going to come from? If it comes from cutting jobs of some minimum wage wage earners to pay others that isn't so good. Both New York and California passed laws that include provisions to pull back if the wage increases result in unemployment. This is really an experiment. Hopefully it will work but that remains to be seen. Incremental increases as we have done in the past would be a less riskier path but the Republicans in Congress remain unwilling to increase the minimum wage at all.


Thanks Riz. Will go with that today. That is what I'm hoping for as well.
When I ask for links/sources from those that keep telling me how ignorant I am because "Bernie has stated he is specifically supporting Clinton", they only come up with one vague clip from last summer on ? Cspan


"When i was Senator, i went after oversight, i went after safety..."

So as the "progressive realist who gets things done incrementally," please tell us Clinton's ACHIEVEMENTS on "oversight" and "safety" for Indian Point? Must be safe and well overseen now, huh?



Good analysis, Riz. The NY primary campaign will tell us a lot about the nomination.


"Unfortunately, they're not really sincere moves, and I think were she [Clinton] to get the nomination, I think you would see her backing off some of those 'progressive moves' that she's made over the course of this campaign."

Backing off on campaign promises should win politicians fines and/or imprisonment.

A proclaimed democracy is a sick joke if politicians are able to promise what they will do during a campaign and then do the opposite after being elected.


Republicans tend to be 100% wrong on the issues. Hillary Clinton is only 99% wrong save for abortion rights.

The two corrupt old capitalist parties aren't even trying very hard any more to pretend they have differences. Now their attitude is, "red or blue. Donkey or elephant. Pick one you pathetic idiot voter and shut your mouth!"


As typical of Clinton, she misrepresents, or just parrots industry executive BS, on the downstate/NYC power actually supplied by Indian Point nuclear plant! IP is a catastrophe waiting to happen! Our own "Fukushima on the Hudson"!

"You get 25 percent of the electricity in the greater New York City area from Indian Point” Hillary said - that is near word for word the IP operator lie!

Senator "Chuck" Schumer also lies for Entergy - Indian Point! "U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer promptly rebutted the coalition’s demand to close the plant, countering that Indian Point provides 25 percent of the Downstate area’s power, and that there is currently no way to replace that energy. Plus, he said, closing the accident-plagued plant would boost electricity rates 30 to 40 percent"

The true amount of downstate power from IP is about 12.5%, the rest sold on the open market! There is never any lack of power when IP shuts down for any 'accident" either!



Although I would like to see Bernie bolt the party as a protest, and as a strong statement that the Democratic Party, as presently constituted is not supportable. In the long run I agree with the late great American Socialist Michael Harrington, that since the socialist vote had declined from a peak of approximately one million in the years around World War I to a few thousand by the 1950s, that if socialists were ever going to leave their mark on the country, it would have to be done through the Democratic Party. Socialist parties haven't really gained much strength in recent years either.

As for Bernie supporting the "nominee" I have thought it pro forma from the moment he uttered it, he had to take that position to run on the Democratic Ticket and get his message out there, as he has. His policies are at such great variance from Ms. Hillary, only the hopelessly naive think his endorsement is anything other than a formality. I know it isn't popular on this site, but in the long run, in my judgment, the likelihood of a Third Party being successful is much less than a take over of the established Democratic Party, as Harrington suggested years ago.


Let's hope it's pro forma.

If he loses to Hillary and then supports her, he will appear hypocritical and his revolution will die.

If he loses to Hillary and wants to continue his revolution, I think he should hook up with an established party of the left.


Plus even if you accept their false argument, OK great, let's gamble with millions of lives and trillions of dollars...


Too bad CD changed the headline on this article from "With All Eyes on New York, Clinton’s “Progressive” Platform Wobbles" to "Progressive Debate Deepens as Sanders Battles Clinton for New York".

The original headline points to Clinton as a fake "progressive." The new headline pretends we have two progressives debating.


I think other issues are of far greater impact on our nation today than the closing of Indian Point. Nuclear energy production is on the hot seat already while Fukushima is still radiating and killing life forms. Bernie will be better off spending the limited debate time on Panama Papers, trade, HRC's donors, her terrible record as secretary of state, her flip flopping and sounding progressive, etc. similar weaknesses.


On days when the wind is cranking out of the northwest, today specifically, Hillary Clinton's house in Chappaqua is only 15 miles downwind from Indian Point. Around Indian Point is a cancer cluster. It's a good thing for their progeny that the Clintons have almost never actually lived there.

The recent Brussels, Belgium bombers had seven hours of surveillance footage of a Belgian nuclear power plant. At the last minute they decided to blow up the airport instead. NYC is known to historically be a terrorist target. Why not the nuclear plant upwind from NYC someday?


I'd like to see progressives take over both parties. Let the billionaires form their own third parties as H. Ross Perot did in 1992, and then they can see what it's like to be called spoilers.


Exactly so Webwalk! A headline change is in order as it currently suggests an equivalence between the candidates, rather than a struggle between true progressive values honestly championed, and deceitful shilling for big-money usury, and business as usual cloaked in a slippery "progressive" shell........reform vs "incrementalism".


Here we go again. We entrust our political debates to the well-proven totally-bought media, like the likes of Wolf and CNN. Of course the candidates can weave and dodge, answering questions that were not asked. We do have media like CSPAN, and that is the place where debates need to be broadcast. We need to have questions asked by a variety of citizens and organizations. Certainly we need those from the religious block, from the health care block, from those championing open and fair elections, the black lives matter block. The only worthwhile questions are those which let the candidate demonstrate they are aware of what is happening, and for the candidate to tell clearly just what needs doing to address the concerns. The idea that we would assume that an organization like CNN would ever do anything to address the common good is foolish. CNN has a long, well document record of trivia. Perhaps CNN is good theater. But nobody should expect something of substance there.


This was never a political revolution. It was always a political campaign, as Noam Chomsky has pointed out with his usual clarity. It has from the beginning been an internal Democratic Party process. Sanders accepted that, even if many of his organizers have not.