Clinton says she takes a 'backseat to no one' among liberals

[Jesus Malverde]

Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday she takes a "backseat to no one" on championing liberal causes, presenting herself as a standard-bearer for Democrats as primary challenger Bernie Sanders generates large, energetic crowds.

Clinton addressed 850 people at an outdoor amphitheater at Dartmouth College, a last-minute venue change made to accommodate a larger audience. Days earlier, Sanders spoke before about 10,000 people in Madison, Wisconsin. The former secretary of state made no mention of Sanders but warned that Republicans would unravel President Barack Obama's policies if they recaptured the White House, including the repeal of his signature health care overhaul.

"I take a backseat to no one when you look at my record of standing up and fighting for progressive values," Clinton said on a sun-dappled kickoff to the Fourth of July weekend in Hanover, New Hampshire, across the Connecticut River from Sanders' home state of Vermont.

The Democratic presidential front-runner portrayed herself as a candidate of continuity to Obama and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, praising the Supreme Court's recent ruling upholding health care subsidies under the overhaul. She said if the nation elected a Republican president, "they will repeal the Affordable Care Act. That is as certain as I can say."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150703/us--dem_2016-clinton-8c5630b3e4.html

[morningfog]

1. She did not say "liberals" and never would.

She is not a liberal.

[Katashi_itto]

25. No backseat for her. She wants to be the one to drive over them.

[peacebird]

52. Exactly.

[840high]

55. Spot on.

[Duckhunter935]

2. This week maybe

My problem is she keeps EVOLVING

[Kalidurga]

4. That's just so she can lead from behind.

[840high]

53. Bingo. Thanks.

[cloudbase]

3. Well, if she says so,

then it's gotta be good enough for me.

[HooptieWagon]

5. Who knew war-mongering was a liberal value?

Did I miss the memo? How about TPP and XL?
I guess it depends on how you define "liberal"... Just like calling ones self a "compassionate conservative". Self-named labels don't mean shit. Past performance is the best indicator of future performance. Bernie has a 50+ year consistant track record as a liberal...he can be trusted.

[MissDeeds]

7. Well said

[marble falls]

8. I have a feeling some major evolving will be accomplished between now and the ....

convention. The worst that will happen is maybe she'll tack a little bit less to right. The best is we we get a President Bernie Sanders.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Fully 40% of Americans were against marriage equality when

she evolved for it.

Leadership!

[hrmjustin]

9. As a gay man i am happy when someone evolves.

My father evolved and i love him for it and my father has many great leadership skills.

[dsc]

14. marriage equality isn't at 60 percent now

nor was it when she announced her position.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. 43% against in 2013

http://www.gallup.com/poll/169640/sex-marriage-support-reaches-new-high.aspx

[dsc]

17. that is more than 40 last time I checked

but maybe math changed since 2013.

[MannyGoldstein]

18. Huge difference, my apologies. nt

[dsc]

19. It is especially when it is one poll

I, unlike you, am directly affected by this issue. So I, unlike you, have actually paid attention to what level of support we actually have. We are still not at 60%. We were still under 50% for much of 2012 and certainly were under that in many of the swing states (such as NC, VA, FL for example). Add in the difference in who votes (older) vs who doesn't (younger) and we are not even close to half of the actual electorate. The fact is I am not happy to say this, but marriage equality would still lose by at least 10 points in NC even in 2016. Yes, we have made gains, but we aren't a safe issue yet by any means.

The average of polls didn't have us over 50% in 2012 nor did it for much of 2013. I am quite sure we were no where near half the 2014 electorate.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. So, based on your read of things, do you believe that

Sanders commited a faux pas by favoring marriage equality 20 years ago?

[SunSeeker]

23. Supporting marriage equality in Vermont was not as politically risky as it was nationally.

Vermont was the first state to introduce civil unions in July 2000, and the first state to introduce same-sex marriage by enacting a statute without being required to do so by a court decision.

[TM99]

33. Yes, Sanders was a coward.

Oh, wait, not only did he support it in Vermont. He also voted against DOMA and DADT at the national level.

Leaders lead. Followers 'evolve'.

[SunSeeker]

48. Not a coward. He was just reflecting his local constituency.

He voted against DOMA in 1996 while he was a House representative for his Vermont district. He did not have to face voters on the national level, just his local Vermont constituency, who are quite progressive on social matters.

However, his local constituency is also pro-gun. Which could explain his vote against the Brady Bill.

[TM99]

50. Your logic is not sound.

He may have represented his Vermont district, however, he was voting on not one but two pieces of anti-gay legislation on the national level - DOMA & DADT. He spoke out against both of these.

Senator Clinton was still a bigot and pro heterosexual marriage only during her time in the senate. Yet, she represented NYC, which has a large LGBT population.

[SunSeeker]

56. Please, oh oracle of logic, explain how a progressive could vote against the Brady Bill. nt

[TM99]

57. Do the research

and stop being a snark, and maybe we can discuss it.

[SunSeeker]

58. Well, don't feel bad about not being able to explain it.

Bernie's campaign hasn't explained it either.

[TM99]

60. There is nothing to explain.

Not all Democrats agree on the level of gun control even if they agree that some makes sense.

Sanders has been moderate but reasoned in his positions on gun control. An F from the NRA, assault weapons ban, extended magazine bans, etc. are part of that.

There are some on the extreme edges that want extensive gun control. They often put forth things that will not pass. I agree with Sanders on his nay votes on those.

[SunSeeker]

61. What was "extreme" about the Brady Bill? nt

[dsc]

42. I don't yet know that he favored marriage equality 20 years ago

He did cast a vote against DOMA, as did several other straight Congress people, and according to the Congressional record he was silent on his reasoning while every single straight Congress person who did speak as to why they cast that vote stated that they opposed marriage equality but felt the bill was fueled by anti gay animus and unneeded since states didn't have to recognize same sex marriages. In his book, linked by a supporter, again he states that he felt the law was discriminatory and anti gay but doesn't state that he favored marriage equality.

[PatrickforO]

10. Wow.

Clinton must be very, very worried about Sanders and the challenge from the left.

First, "I take a bask seat to no one..." is a defensive statement.

Next and most important is the fear she tries to instill by saying that if a Republican is elected president, "they will repeal the ACA."

The implication: Sanders is not electable, she is.

The fact: Sanders is MORE electable than she is.

[madokie]

34. Hillary will never be President

simple as that.
Bernie on the other hand has a pretty good shot at it
Why because he has a record to run on and his message resonates with us the People.
Thats why

[Sheepshank]

11. The preemptive critics are hillarious

As if no one ever evolves. Thank God they are wrong otherwise we'd all still be shitting in our diapers

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

35. You had to 'evolve'

to quit 'shitting your diapers'?

You must have an interesting definition of evolution.

[frylock]

46. Clinton didn't evolve until 2012..

how does your shitty diaper analogy apply here?

[RufusTFirefly]

12. Translated "I am better than Bernie"

Now there's a winning strategy. Reminds me of the New Coke.

[99Forever]

13. Back seat lady?

You were so late arriving, you almost missed the bus completely.

"Me too" ain't gonna cut it this go around.

We the People are on to you.

[rhett o rick]

15. In 2002 she showed her true colors when she sided with the Republicons in the biggest

foreign policy blunder in our history. That ain't too liberal. Her close association with Goldman-Sachs aint liberal.

She may agree with progressive on some social justice issues, but she is a loooong way off on economic issues and continuous war issues. She support fracking because the oil industry like that and the hell with the 99%'s desire for clear drinking water. She supports the TPP that may end our democracy.

[Bonobo]

20. Progressives do NOT collect millions of dollars in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs.

How much more fucking clear does it have to be?

[rhett o rick]

49. It's perfectly clear unless one lives in a denial bubble. nm

[Indepatriot]

21. Liberal like this?

[link:http://

|

[Bonobo]

24. Be careful. Even direct video evidence means nothing to true believers.

Even a threat of nuclear mass extinction from the Secretary of State is completely acceptable because because because...

What they don't get is that some of us will NOT have it anymore.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Jury results...

On Sat Jul 4, 2015, 03:54 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Be careful. Even direct video evidence means nothing to true believers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=424379

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is completely inappropriate. Vilifying posters for supporting a Democratic presidential candidate is probably about as far removed from the original purpose of this forum as can be.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Jul 4, 2015, 04:03 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: over-the-top
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We expect dissension in this forum. Isn't that why it was created? This is just standard primary talk.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alert does not match the post.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Dear alerter. You appear to be confused about the original purpose of this forum. It wasn't created for the purpose of silencing people who's opinions you don't like. This post doesn't rise to even a fraction of the level needed to hide something, so while I'm here can I write you a prescription for some Toughen UP, DU Isn't An Echo Chamber pills?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
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.

[Bonobo]

27. Eventually there should be consequences for stalking and frivolous alerts.

I am being targeted.

[bravenak]

28. I have been on a jury for you for the past 2 days, I believe.

[Bonobo]

30. I think you are probably very fair. nt

[bravenak]

32. Always.nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

36. I haven't been offered any juries in quite some time now.

I'm beginning to wonder if having more than 70 of the mostly noise, very little signal folks on ignore makes it so I don't ever get offered up their posts to jury on.

[bravenak]

37. If you have hides it affects jury selection as does having a star.

Once I got a star I started getting jury duty all the time. I can't remember whether ignote affects it.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

38. I don't think it's supposed to, but maybe

I've just won the sort of 'regard' that has me on a lot of jury blacklists.

[Violet_Crumble]

29. This is the second jury I've been on for you in the past few days...

I'm thinking someone out there at this time of day has got a bit of an itchy trigger finger when it comes to yr posts. that one I was just on should have been a 0-7 leave, imo

[Bonobo]

31. I'm grateful! nt

[MissDeeds]

39. That is absolutely chilling

If a Republican had said that, people here would be outraged.

[Chan790]

40. Yeah, she doesn't take a backseat to liberals...

she's too busy trying to run them down with a steamroller to advance her "The best Democratic position is a Republican one" agenda.

As a liberal, I know the face of my true enemy.

[DCBob]

41. This article doesnt mention it but she brought up gun control..

"We have to take on the gun lobby one more time,” said Clinton, speaking without notes or a teleprompter in front of a crowd of about 850 Dartmouth students and native Granite Staters. “The majority of gun owners support universal background checks, and we have to work very hard to muster the public opinion to convince Congress that’s what they should vote for.”
She said it was the “height of irresponsibility not to talk about it.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/hillary-clinton-i-take-a-backseat-to-no-one-on-liberal-record-119723.html

Its good she brought that up... its needs to be a campaign issue.

[Gothmog]

43. Hillary Clinton's position on voting rights is amazing

Clinton is making voting rights a key issue in 2016. I love her position in pushing on voting rights

[restorefreedom]

44. i see the beads of sweat forming

this train is off the tracks, and they all know it.

there is a reason she lost in 2008

and here we are again.

[MisterP]

45. but she votes 93% with Sanders! and hates war, fracking, and TPP! and is the new FDR!

[Comrade Grumpy]

47. I didn't realize voting to invade other countries for bullshit reasons was a progressive value.

[onecaliberal]

51. Sorry ma'am, you most definitely take a back

Seat to my preferred candidate. He's been a champion for the people his whole life. (No evolution necessary) Something tells me I'm not alone.

[840high]

54. +10

[Doctor_J]

59. talk is cheap

Her record is more Reagan than Roosevelt, by a lot