So about Hillary's League Of Conservation Voters endorsement

[pinebox]

Can someone please explain this to me?
Thank you

[NCTraveler]

1. They feel Clinton is in a better position to promote the causes important to them.

Here seems to be what you are missing.

THEY DIDN'T SAY SANDERS WAS BAD AT ANY POINT.

Your graphic truly shows nothing with respect to who will be able to advance their agenda in the most positive way.

[pinebox]

6. I never said they said that.

Did I?
Nope.

Hillary won't be able to advance anything, I've already explained this. She's the most polarizing politician. Republicans would rather work with a meat shredder than her.

[NCTraveler]

7. "I've already explained this."

Then it's all wrapped up but the vote. Best wishes.

[Sheepshank]

15. When purchasing a car.....

do you buy the cheapest car and only take that into consideration?

do you buy the most expensive only and use only the cost as the defining purchase decision?

Or lets take a more realistic view in that cost (or votes in your posters) is only one factor in a myriad of factors that are calculated in the final decision.

[ChiTownDenny]

40. Where did you get the pretty graphics?

You should provide a link for the source or some way to document its origination.

[tecelote]

29. This seems contradictory...

How Hillary Clinton’s State Department Sold Fracking to the World
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251783865

[kristopher]

36. +1

[lewebley3]

34. Three Cheers for Hillary

[Art_from_Ark]

55. Hip...........hip.............hoo.........ray........

[JDPriestly]

39. In other words, Hillary has more money.

Money from the wealthy and money from corporations.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for Citizens United.

That's what this roundabout language, the euphemisms about her better leadership, her better "organizing" in D.C. ability, her better "promote the causes" business is about.

This is the year in which we the voters decide.

It's pretty much up or down.

Bernie means that Citizens United goes down one way or the other.

Hillary means thumbs up to Citizens United.

Why do I say that?

Because if we vote for Hillary because of her "better position to promote causes" we are saying that all her corporate funding is great and is the only way that a politician can win in our country. (Well it used to be our country; if we vote for Hillary we are telling the corporations that it is really their country.)

If we vote for Bernie, we are telling corporate and extremely wealthy donors that we are big kids. We don't need their hand-outs. We don't need their money in our politics. They are supposed to mind us, not us them. We are the bosses in our government, not them.

It's a matter of the message we voters want to sell D.C., Congress, ourselves, the world and most important, the corporations and their owners.

Which will it be?

Hillary, Citizens United and corporate rule or Bernie, the People United and government of the people, for the people and by the people?

A vote for Hillary is a vote for Citizens United.

A vote for Bernie is a vote for government by the people.

[tex-wyo-dem]

43. +1000! Nt

[NCTraveler]

46. I don't think you are aware of what CU is.

Your post at least makes it seem that way.

[MADem]

50. That's a bogus image--Clinton is not a "Senator" and hasn't been one for years.

The picture is old, the image unsourced. Who knows what year that was taken from?

To be fair to Sanders, his current 2015 LCV ranking is a hundred percent--so they didn't even get THAT part right!

I posted the Clinton LCV endorsement downthread--with a link, too.

[Scuba]

2. It pays to have friends at the top.

[senz]

20. Pulling strings for self-advancement.

Just what we want want in a president!

[tex-wyo-dem]

44. Yep, that's pretty much it in a nutshell...

What groups like LCV, NEA and others try to do is gain influence at a future time by hedging who they think is going to win the nomination, not necessarily the strongest proponent for their cause(s).

What I would like to ask the LCV is why would they think someone who supported important issues that would do terrible damage to the environment (kXL, TPP, fracking, etc) be a better choice than someone who has been consistently against these issues?

[UglyGreed]

3. Money and connections

[senz]

21. That's what it's all about!

Why should we expect anything more?

[AzDar]

28. Nailed it.

[ibegurpard]

4. I expect LCV to keep their mouths shut

When she sells out environmental concerns to big business.
And it will happen. Bank on it.

[Fawke Em]

5. "Bank," being the operative word. eom

[senz]

23. She has her priorities straight.

The Clintons know what's important.

[firebrand80]

8. Maybe they don't think Bernie can get things done

If I recall the debate correctly, Bernie's answer to whether his agenda can be implemented in our current political environment is "we need a political revolution." That may well be true, but it doesn't really address the issue of how much he could realistically accomplish.

I don't have any personal knowledge of how they came to their decision, but my guess is that they believed Hillary was more likely to accomplish her agenda, even if they agree with Bernie's positions more.

[kelliekat44]

11. Maybe they are right. nt

[demwing]

41. That makes no sense

"We don't really agree with you, but will support you because other people (who don't really agree with us) agree with you" ???

[kristopher]

42. You don't seem to understand the basis of Bernie's campaign and strategy

Without a voter revolution nothing will change from what we've had for 30+ years.

Bernie is appealing to the sense of being disenfranchised that permeates the electorate.

He does not speak to the hot-button social issues that divide us by creating a mindset of antagonistic partisan warfare;

he speaks to the economic disparity issue (singular) that unites us across that chasm of partisanship.

With his integrity and his message he not only can win the election, but he has the potential to drag change along on his coattails.

If he doesn't get enough support in Congress in the 2016 election, he will be able to (and will) turn his attention to the downstream races that have been neglected since Dean left the DNC.

[RobertEarl]

9. I don't know

But I would imagine upset members who just heard about this top-down decision are making the phones ring at the LCV offices.

There is no better candidate who is for conservation than Bernie. I say that as a 30 year long environmental activist.

[JaneyVee]

10. They said missed votes count as no votes, so her 2007/8 campaign...

Caused some missed votes.

[Nanjeanne]

12. I'm Sure This Didn't Hurt

that Board Chairwoman Carol Browner, served as Environmental Protection Agency administrator under President Bill Clinton. I'm sure, as with many of these types of endorsements, long-standing relationships and insider connections hold a lot of sway. Also, LCV is a very powerful lobbying group with lots of money to spend. In the 2014 election they spent at least $10 million on various races and their separate PAC spent $2.5 million - most of that to support Kay Hagan's campaign. I imagine if Hillary is the nominee they will be spending a lot of their money to support her - so I think their reasoning is - she's one of us, she will likely be the nominee and we need to make sure she wins. Their money will come in handy for Clinton in the race to the White House.

[Autumn]

18. A plausible explanation.

They sure aren't bothering to hide quid pro quo anymore.

[hootinholler]

19. Welcome to DU

Nice tidbit there.

Please do be careful what you say for the first 100 posts, there are those on MIRT who will trash an account if they suspect the person is supporting Bernie.

[senz]

24. Good point. Thanks!

[Dodo]

38. What's MIRT?

Bernie is a Democrat, and I support him. I will vote the Democratic candidate in the GE. I want to make that clear.

[hootinholler]

47. Malicious Intruder Response Team

It has its own spiffy acronym. There should be an explanation in the Welcome and Help forum.

Not much to be worried about if you're nice, but do take care vigorously supporting Bernie.

[SwampG8r]

49. Malicious Intruder removal team

They used to be our police against trolls but I can't think they have much credibility after one was caught at a hate site directing alert swarms and celebrating their success in stalking members here.

[riderinthestorm]

25. Welcome to DU! K&R for a great beginning here nt

[PoliticalMalcontent]

58. This completely.

Board Chairwoman Carol Browner was appointed by Bill Clinton to run the EPA in '93. She later lobbied for Hillary in '08.

Apparently it is extremely rare for the League of Conservation Voters to endorse this early in the contest. So rare, in fact, that it has never happened before. This reeks of cronyism. A Clinton appointed her long ago and she is returning the favor.

END CRONYISM. Vote Sanders.

[PoliticalMalcontent]

59. An expanded thought. Why Now?

Why endorse this early if they've never had a history of endorsing this early? Is it possible Hillary called in a favor because her campaign is struggling to win the hearts of potential voters? There's clearly an enthusiasm gap and all of the political endorsements in the world don't seem to be helping.

[whatchamacallit]

13. It's called 'the fix' n/t

[DanTex]

14. They think Hillary will be a more effective leader on environmental issues, and they probably

Last edited Mon Nov 9, 2015, 03:34 PM - Edit history (1)

also think that Hillary is best positioned to win the general election.

[erronis]

32. And that HRC will be in a position to reward those that support her.

Bernie will end up with millions of individual real people and he will need to answer to each.

Hillary will end up with a top 300 donors and she will need to answer to each.

[zappaman]

16. ok. n/t

[cosmicone]

17. It is all about effectiveness and not lofty rhetoric n/t

[askew]

22. If that was the case, they would have endorsed O'Malley as he is the only one

who actually has gotten things accomplished on the environment. Hillary has been all rhetoric, though not lofty rhetoric because she lacks the skills for that.

[senz]

26. I don't think it interests her very much, either.

Some care. Some don't.

[pnwmom]

37. Rubio and Cruz both have a ZERO score. The difference among the Dems is negligible

compared to the vast gulf between the Rethugs and the Dems.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. What's that phrase about voting against your own self-interest?

[Cassiopeia]

30. $$$$$

[floriduck]

31. Her late arrival to oppose

The Keystone XL Pipeline must have been like foreplay to that group.

[tularetom]

33. I can explain it in two steps

1. Endorse Hillary

2. Collect a lucrative grant from the Clinton foundation.

See how simple that is?

[pnwmom]

35. Simple. Rubio has a 0% score, Cruz, has a 0% score, etc.

So compared to them, the difference between Sanders and Clinton is TINY.

And they think the issues are too serious and her org is much more prepared to go the distance and win.

Which you would know if you read their own statement explaining why they endorsed her now.

http://scorecard.lcv.org

[sabrina 1]

45. I don't think that is a surprise at all. And ANOTHER good reason to vote for Bernie!

[MADem]

48. Looks like you got punked.

Hillary hasn't been a SENATOR for a long time--yet your old image has her old title and an old picture. Where did you get this bit of "sales imagery?" Someone is selling you a bill of goods.

Further, the LCV endorsement considers what they've done outside of their legislative life--and apparently the whole picture, including her SECSTATE and FLOTUS work, put her over the top--here, with a link and all, too--an actual, valid source:

http://www.lcv.org/elections/endorsements/hrc-environmental-record.pdf

Hillary Clinton’s Strong Environmental Record

Hillary Clinton has a very strong
environmental record going back
decades from combating climate change
to investing in clean energy to working
to repeal Big Oil subsidies. From her
time as First Lady to U.S. Senator to
Secretary of State, Clinton has made
protecting our environment and public
health, especially for the most
vulnerable among us, a top priority.
Whether helping draw attention to the
links between air pollution and
children’s asthma as First Lady or
appointing the first-ever Special Envoy
for Climate Change at the State
Department, Clinton has consistently
demonstrated a deep commitment to
protecting our environment and
addressing the climate crisis.
IN THE U.S. SENATE
 Clinton authored and led on bills to help federal buildings and nonprofit health institutions
become more energy efficient and to promote clean fuel use in public transportation and
production in rural communities.
 Clinton co-sponsored bills to combat climate change by reducing carbon pollution, investing
in clean energy, and directing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce carbon
and other pollutants from power plants.
 She co-sponsored a bill to repeal subsidies to Big Oil.
 She was one of only 26 Senators to vote against the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which at the
time LCV called “the most anti-environment bill signed into law in recent memory.”
 Clinton proposed several environmental justice initiatives including extending financing for
the Superfund.
 Clinton consistently fought for clean water, including protecting the Great Lakes.
AS SECRETARY OF STATE
 Clinton made climate change a top priority at the State Department, including appointing the
first Special Envoy for Climate Change, Todd Stern, who serves as the Administration’s
point person for climate negotiations, including the recent, historic bilateral climate
agreement with China.
 In Copenhagen in 2009, Clinton made a breakthrough announcement committing the U.S. to
help jointly mobilize $100 billion by 2020 to help communities across the world deal with
the ravages of climate change. This commitment helped reinvigorate stalled negotiations and
led to an agreement in Copenhagen.
 Clinton helped reach a bilateral agreement with Brazil to improve coordination on climate
change and entered into 11 EcoPartnership agreements with China.
 Clinton also formed the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, to reduce short-lived climate
pollutants, with a group of 37 countries that are working to reduce black carbon, HFCs and
methane emissions.
PRESIDENTIAL PLATFORM
 Clinton has repeatedly pledged to defend and build on the progress of President Obama’s
Climate Action Plan, including the historic Clean Power Plan, the single largest step our
country has taken to cut carbon pollution and fight climate change.
 In July, Clinton pledged that the U.S. would generate enough renewable energy to power
every home by 2027. She also pledged that by the end of her first term there would be more
than 500 million solar panels installed across the country, a 700% increase from 2014 levels.
 Clinton will incentivize investment in renewable energy sources by increasing the number of
government grants for clean energy, extending federal clean energy tax incentives and
expanding renewable energy on public lands.
 In August, Clinton came out in opposition to drilling in the Arctic Ocean.
 In September, Clinton also came out in opposition to the dirty and dangerous Keystone XL
tar sands pipeline and announced a comprehensive strategy to modernize American energy
infrastructure and forge a new North American Climate Compact with Canada and Mexico to
cut carbon pollution.

[ibegurpard]

51. it appears LCV is the one being punked

They better hope there aren't any conflicts with their environmental priorities and her corporate backers.

[MADem]

52. They were very specific about her endorsement, which I posted, with a valid link,

as you can see. It's not some crap ripped off of twitter without attribution.

Apparently her SECSTATE work resonated with them as well.

Oh well. Helps to have a valid and CURRENT source of information.

[DCBob]

53. They explained it in their endorsement.

They think Hillary has a better chance of beating the GOP candidate and preserving environmental policies.

[Maedhros]

54. I worked for a grassroots environmental and public interest concern for a while in the 90s.

I worked my way up from canvassing staff to advocate (i.e. local/state lobbyist). I learned quite a bit how these organizations function, and they are all about the money. It makes sense for them to back Hillary, because they see it being beneficial to their pocketbooks.

[Duppers]

56. Ding, ding, ding!

That's what we thought!

Thanks for the confirmation!

[Fearless]

57. Because MONEY runs our elections.