Bernie Sanders immediately distanced himself from Hillary Clinton on trade, foreign policy and the environment as he announced a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination that represents her first serious challenge from the left….
Asked how he would differ from Clinton, Sanders claimed he would not run a negative campaign but highlighted three issues where the former secretary of state has been vague since announcing her frontrunner bid earlier this month – and more conservative since long before then.
“I voted against the war in Iraq, and not only did I vote against it, I helped lead the effort,” he said. “I am helping right now to lead the effort about the trans-pacific partnership because I believe it continues a trend of horrendous trade policies which have cost us millions of decent paying jobs.”
“I helped lead the effort against the Keystone pipeline, because I don’t think we should be transporting some of the dirtiest fuel in the world and have got to be really vigorous in terms of transforming our energy system,” he added. “Those are some of my views and we will see where secretary Clinton comes back.”
Fox employee and O’Reilly Factor booster Dennis Kucinich, redux?
dcsohl says
FiveThirtyEight makes a compelling argument for why, although his campaign has 0% chance of success, Sanders is excellently positioned to bring important topics to the fore and pull Hillary to the left.
hoyapaul says
there are a lot of reasons why Sanders is not well-positioned to make much of a difference in this race. The big one is highlighted by Nate Cohn’s piece today.
In short, Sanders might appeal to narrow slice of the Democratic Party (liberals who are white, well-educated, secular, and wealthy), but will not likely have much appeal to the entire rest of the party base (among whom Clinton is overwhelmingly popular).
dasox1 says
Even though he’s never been a registered Democrat? Interesting. I’m surprised that he wouldn’t run as an Independent, since he’s always been a Socialist/Independent. Given his views on trade, the environment and foreign policy he’s at least a different voice.
Christopher says
…that running third-party in the general is a good way to hand the election to the GOP.
thegreenmiles says
The primary debates are pretty much the only place to shake things up. If you run as an indy, you have to wait until the presidential debates in September 2016 to get serious airtime, and by then it’s too late.
dasox1 says
But most people who think they have what it takes to be POTUS want to be relevant in the conversation as long and publicly as possible. For Sanders, that would be running as an Independent.
methuenprogressive says
Other than that, I can’t see any meaningful impact from a Sanders candidacy.
bluewatch says
I am really excited that Bernie is running. He speaks directly to the issues that I think are important.
Bernie Sanders is a hard worker and an articulate spokesman. He just might surprise everybody.
Join me on the Bernie bandwagon! We are going to win.
jconway says
Whether you agree with Bernie Sanders on every issue or not, there is no doubt in my mind that we deserve a real contest, we deserve to hear his perspective, we deserve this debate, and the Democratic party deserves to have this side of the left represented within it’s ranks. Libertarians and Tea Partier’s were once considered gauche, even Buckley kicked the Birchers out of his movement.
Not anymore. The far right controls Congress and is pulling the strings, why should the far left sit on the sidelines when those extremists are given power and latitude by their establishment? It’s a voice our primary and our party sorely need to hear from. Not saying he has earned my vote, but he has definitely earned my attention. I think he has earned all of ours.
hoyapaul says
Agreed — especially since a competitive primary would be good both for the party and the eventual nominee. Unfortunately, an old white guy from an obscure state who has never run as a Democrat before is a less than an ideal candidate for the left wing of the party.
jconway says
If Warren is getting 10-15% in most polls against Hillary, and Sanders is picking up 5% when Warren is included, if the support ends up combining. 20% is higher than the votes/delegates Ron Paul got in either of his runs, and look how much influence his brand of libertarianism now has on the party. And Sanders might get one on one debates, or won’t need to share the stage with the 10-15 candidates that Paul had to. The message is worth more than the messenger for these kinds of campaigns.
If we wanted a viable liberal to run against Hillary and beat her for the nomination it would have to be a woman of color. But our best shot for that slot will be a California Senator next cycle, not a presidential candidate.
Trickle up says
Too many moves ahead for me, but how do you figure all that?
scout says
Love his positions- they are badly needed in the race/conversation. But, Sanders is also known in Congress to be spectacularly disorganized operationally. I fear his image will not hold up well to the presidential process, and the perception of those positions will suffer by reflection.
bluewatch says
It’s silly to say that he is known to be disorganized operationally.
The issues matter, and Bernie does one of the best jobs of clearing articulating the issues.
Don’t underestimate Bernie Sanders. He will be our next president.
joeltpatterson says
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/30/8522019/bernie-sanders-hillary-donors
worth a look!
Trickle up says
The only possible benefits are long term. Which are maybe the best kind to have, eventually, but make no mistake: Sanders is not going to budge Clinton to the left.
What Sanders candidacy may do is to open that Overton window a little wider, introduce themes that influence congressional races, and build organizational muscle for single payer and expanding social security and taxing the rich and supporting the 99%. To make the S word respectable.
As for Clinton, this will be a fine opportunity for her to show that though she is chock full of compassion and desire for social justice, she believes in the promise of capitalism and is no scary radical.
She isn’t going to say anything that will get her into trouble in the general. The debates will give her the perfect platform to practice triangulation, drawing distinctions not only between herself and Sander but with the whole ongoing GOP train wreck as well.
Bernie is great, the real deal, a staunch stand-up guy. I hope he has a great run and I expect to cast my vote for him. But let’s not have any illusions about this elections; I doubt he does.
methuenprogressive says
WMUR is wondering if he’ll be allowed:
http://www.wmur.com/politics/question-is-bernie-sanders-eligible-to-run-in-the-nh-democratic-primary/32674614
Christopher says
…his strongest argument is probably that even though he doesn’t run as a Democrat he has caucused with them in both chambers of Congress, relying on their leadership for such things as committee assignments.
jconway says
Neither of whom were officially members of the party. It would be pretty petty of the Clinton campaign and/or state officials to fight that.
methuenprogressive says
He’s been at that post foreverandever, and is a huge supporter of NH’s First In The Nation primary. I’d think that rather than being ‘petty’, he’s trying his best to get it right.
michaelhoran says
By Sander’s announcement. Actually, I’m really relieved he’s running as a Democrat. That says a LOT about the guy–he’s not running an egomaniacal Nader-Stein guerilla operation, and isn’t going sacrifice the greater good for the pleasure, such as it is, of being a candidate in the General. It also spares me from a year’s worth of endless and painfully tedious conversations about the importance of voting for a Democrat come a year from November.
I’m not so sure that an old white guy from Vermont makes such a terrible face for the medium-to-hard left. I take the point–that’s always been the Greens problem, in running old, white millionaires from the suburbs posing as proles–but I want to see how he approaches communities of color before rushing to judgment. The Clinton brand still seems to resonate there. Open question.
What his candidacy will likely do is what front-runners likely dread–putting HCR is a spot similar to mainstream GOP candidates. She IS going to have to make some concessions to the progressive base in the primaries–I don’t think she can afford to utterly shrug off what Bernie–damn, I almost used his unfortunate initials–throws at her–but the comment above that suggests by comparison, He’s going to make appear more “reasonable” in the General is, unfortunately, probably correct. That’s Jeb’s ultimate stength as well.
Speaking of which: my FB feed has been absolutely lit up with nothing with Bernies for the past 48 hours. I’ve counseled folks against irrational exuberance–the (hard left) cocoon in which I exist tends to get confused sometimes about how representative of the mainstream we are. That said, seeing some real excitement has been genuinely refreshing. From a purely emotional standpoint, I can think of very few match-ups more dispiriting that Clinton-Bush. As in none. (Disclaimer: I come from the anybody-but-HCR camp. Admission: I don’t see anybody else, either).
Meaning that this may be good for the Party. Treat Bernie with respect (I was pleased to see the dream candidate salute his announcement), take his ideas seriously–he’s NOT Dennis the K, for goddsake–and you may win some very passionate, highly-active folks back into the fold. There will definitely be an uptick in Dem registration in closed-primary states. Maybe there’ll be some staying power.
I sure hope he’s on the NH ballot, because a hell of a lot of people I know are already planning on heading up there next winter…