- Politics and Social Issues»
- United States Politics
Sanders versus Clinton ~ Who is more electable?
Whitewater. Benghazi. Travel Gate. Healthcare fiasco. And so many more "little" peccadilloes during her reigns as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State. And, now, we have the email server "scandal". Is it real? Maybe. Is it a continuance of questionable activities? Absolutely! What else has she done over the last 30 years? The Facebook page "No Hillary in 2016" has put together a little recap of a few (25) of her greatest hits. You can find it here -> "Hillary Clinton: A Career Criminal"
Her record clearly shows that she is untrustworthy, aligned with the establishment and totally oblivious to what real Americans are going through. She has a gorgeous mansion in Chappaqua, NY and her Super Pacs hold $25,000 a plate dinners, which, of course, don't include you or me. Or Joe Average. Nope, we're locked out economically. Do you think that's going to change just because she becomes president? I doubt it greatly.
A true hawk on foreign policy issues (Hillary Clinton's Hawkish Record), Clinton would have us embroiled in an ongoing war, supporting the Military Industrial Complex as did G.W. Bush, Bush Sr. and Reagan before her. She is not a progressive, as she would have you believe. She represents the money, not the people. Remember when she marched with Martin Luther King in Selma? Yeah, me neither. She was working for Barry Goldwater, who wanted to strengthen segregation, not abolish it. She has never been progressive and never will be.
So, is she electable? That's the real question here, after all. If big money and the corrupt DNC have their way, yes. She has the money behind her to "get it done", at least in the primaries. But polls show that she is far less likely to beat a republican contender, whether it be Trump, Cruz or Rubio. Do we need 4-8 years of a republican president, one who will appoint at least two more Supreme Court justices during his/her time in office? We don't need more Scalias, we need more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs.
Then we have Bernie Sanders. The peoples' candidate. He has been fighting for social issues since his days in college, and before. He marched in Selma. He fought against incredible odds, in the city in which he served as mayor, for programs that changed it forever for the good of people. As Senator, he has fought every hard battle against GOP bills that would quash labor advances, veterans' programs, even social security, which is a privately funded program. Yep, you paid for it, but they steal from it as if it was their own to spend. But Bernie fought hard and long to keep those bills from passing. He has always worked for the betterment of American lives and will continue to do so.
Now, we all know that every candidate has his or her ideals that we might disagree on. There's a lot of contention with his stance on gun control among NRA members. But that's mainly because the NRA is misrepresenting his stance. He does not want to take your guns away, he wants to keep them from ending up in the wrong hands. Shut down illegal internet gun sales, better screening for mental issues or for terrorist uses, and a more controlled waiting period for background checks. The only people that should be against this stance are the ones who should be weeded out. Once the gun owners realize this, then things can be improved for all of us. No, it won't stop everyone from using them for illegal purposes, but if even one life is saved, isn't it worth you waiting a few extra days before you can head out to the shooting range with your new toy?
Climate voters also have a dim view of his policies, since he believes that the economy has to be fixed so that money is available to make the necessary changes. They are correct in their assumptions, but fail to see the bigger picture; that view where it has to come in a specific order. His plans are not going to take forever to come to fruition. It takes a town to raise a barn, and the barn doesn't come before the money for the materials.
Racial equality has always been one of his benchmarks. So have veterans' affairs, infrastructure improvement, minimum wage increases, fossil fuel elimination, education improvement and so many more programs.In fact, on wages alone, as governor of VT, he effected raising the minimum wage to a level where it improved the state's economy since there was more spendable income. Imagine that. Pay went up and the economy improved. Sounds a lot like the opposite of what republicans have been lying to us about for far too long.
Of course, either of these candidates is still a far better choice than any GOP hopeful. If Hillary is nominated, I, personally, will vote for her. The alternatives at that point are too dangerous to allow in.
Take a moment to vote in this totally unofficial poll
Who do you believe is the better candidate for the Democratic Party's nomination?
What Are Your Thoughts on Campaigning Tactics?
How have you worked for your choice of candidate? Give all of us, in the comment section below, a few strategies we can use that have worked for you.