# Hillary's lead over Sanders "nearly vanishes". **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 11, 2016, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833 "2016-01-11T17:48:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/81 "2016-01-13T18:52:18Z")
Well the one thing that has been clearly demonstrated by Sanders’ gains against the Republicans is that Hillary isn’t the only electable one any more. All the Democrats who have been sure they would have to hold their noses and vote for Hillary now have the option of breathing in the clean, fresh air of progressivism and voting for Bernie. And if you STILL think you are going to vote for Hillary … maybe you aren’t really a progressive … or a Democrat … ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/82 "2016-01-13T18:59:26Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > And if you STILL think you are going to vote for Hillary … maybe you aren’t really a progressive … or a Democrat … No true Scotsman would vote for Hillary. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/83 "2016-01-13T19:03:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No, mainly because a Clinton win wouldn’t be that disappointing. I think she’ll be leagues better than Obama has been. Nothing can match the disappointment and chagrin I felt seeing Romney go down. > > Plus I’ve learned to believe the polls so I shouldn’t be surprised by the result this time around. If Clinton is leading in October by 2 or more, she almost certainly wins. yes, things would be so much better if Romney would have won: > [@](#): > > In September 2012, Mitt Romney predicted that if Obama is reelected “you’re going to see chronic high unemployment continue four years or longer.” At the time, the unemployment rate was 8.1% and had been between 8.1% and 8.3% for the entire year. > > What would breaking out of “chronic high unemployment” look like in a Romney presidency? Romney pledged that, if elected, he could bring the unemployment rate down to 6% by January 2017. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/84 "2016-01-13T19:05:01Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > I can hardly think of a more Clinton-esque answer she could have given. “Clinton-esque” in the sense that it’s the kind of thing we have come to expect from America’s First Family of Falsehoods. Clearly false, everybody knows it’s false, but she repeats it knowing that she won’t get called on it. > [@Chelsea Clinton](#): > > There’s a $19 trillion gap in what Sen. Sanders has proposed and how he would pay for what he’s proposed, so that to me is particularly troubling. A Republican says it, the Usual Suspects go into fits denying it. Chelsea says it, and the SDMB hamsters labor under the efforts to change the subject. At least her mother is letting us know which of her pledges aren’t really pledges and [shouldn’t be taken seriously](https://gop.com/clinton-backpedals-on-promise-not-to-raise-middle-class-taxes-calls-it-a-goal/). Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/85 "2016-01-13T19:06:08Z")
I find these people who consider folks who are pro-Hillary aren’t true Democrats to be fascinating. I mean if the Republicans had front runners who had Hillary-type positions they’d probably have won in 2012 (well, I guess aside from difficulties in convincing voters to vote for a candidate who had positions that were the same as President Obama’s). ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/86 "2016-01-13T19:11:16Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > yes, things would be so much better if Romney would have won: Can I get the cite on that quote? It’s not that I disbelieve you, it’s that I’d like to see other delicious ironies in the article. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/87 "2016-01-13T19:18:53Z")
> [@Askthepizzaguy](#): > > I don’t want a weak Democrat with watered-down Republicanish policies who will give them half of what they want and get nothing in return. > > I don’t want a politician who spends all their time lying and stalling like a Republican just to keep up with the Republicans. > > I want one that has principles, still gets legislation passed, and doesn’t run lie-fest campaigns. > > It’s Bernie, period. Bernie or bust. And the Clinton-is-inevitable people better get on board when reality strikes and Clinton-isn’t-inevitable. One of the reasons why I’m still more of a Clinton supporter than a Sanders one is I don’t know how Sanders will be able to fight the GOP machine that’s developed over the course of Obama’s presidency. I’m much more closely aligned with Sanders’ values than Clinton’s, but I see Clinton as being full of piss and vinegar and willing to play dirty to fight against the GOP. I cannot count on that with Sanders. There’s been some anti-Clinton sentiment from Democrats ever since she decided to go negative on Sanders and use more hardball tactics. I see that is what we need against the GOP and I know they’ll give her plenty of ammo to do it. Sanders is running a great campaign _for a Democratic primary_, we shouldn’t attack each other, but against the GOP? I see him maybe getting steamrolled as president. Even Obama, brilliant campaigner as he was, expected too much from the GOP and was a little overwhelmed when he first got into office. It took years for him to adjust to the new reality that the GOP isn’t a loyal opposition and more like petulant children I feel that Sanders might make the same mistake. Clinton, having been attacked for decades, being willing to fight dirty, will not. I’m more confident that Clinton will get more liberal things done in office despite being less liberal than someone like Sanders who is more liberal but possibly less able to fend off GOP attacks. I’m a big supporter of both of them though, I will be equally excited at whoever comes out of the primary and will support them vigorously. The difference is, if Clinton wins, I’ll be gloating at her inevitable triumph for months and if Sanders wins, I’ll be nervous and jittery until the day after the election. ---
**Author:** ![August\_West](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/august_west/32/18069_2.png) [@August\_West](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/August_West)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/88 "2016-01-13T19:44:06Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > One of the reasons why I’m still more of a Clinton supporter than a Sanders one is I don’t know how Sanders will be able to fight the GOP machine that’s developed over the course of Obama’s presidency. I’m much more closely aligned with Sanders’ values than Clinton’s, but I see Clinton as being full of piss and vinegar and willing to play dirty to fight against the GOP. I cannot count on that with Sanders. > > There’s been some anti-Clinton sentiment from Democrats ever since she decided to go negative on Sanders and use more hardball tactics. I see that is what we need against the GOP and I know they’ll give her plenty of ammo to do it. Sanders is running a great campaign _for a Democratic primary_, we shouldn’t attack each other, but against the GOP? I see him maybe getting steamrolled as president. Even Obama, brilliant campaigner as he was, expected too much from the GOP and was a little overwhelmed when he first got into office. It took years for him to adjust to the new reality that the GOP isn’t a loyal opposition and more like petulant children > > I feel that Sanders might make the same mistake. Clinton, having been attacked for decades, being willing to fight dirty, will not. I’m more confident that Clinton will get more liberal things done in office despite being less liberal than someone like Sanders who is more liberal but possibly less able to fend off GOP attacks. I’m a big supporter of both of them though, I will be equally excited at whoever comes out of the primary and will support them vigorously. The difference is, if Clinton wins, I’ll be gloating at her inevitable triumph for months and if Sanders wins, I’ll be nervous and jittery until the day after the election. Weirdly, I’m the exact opposite of you. I see Bernie as the kind of person who gets things done, and his record indicates that. Add in that he’s not beholden to anyone and it really opens the possibilities of what he might change. I fear that Hillary will do just enough to end up disappointing everyone without upsetting anyone (especially Wall St.). ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/89 "2016-01-13T19:55:44Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Clinton, having been attacked for decades, being willing to fight dirty, will not. This is a common belief. What are examples of Hillary fighting dirty against Republicans? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/90 "2016-01-13T19:56:07Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Can I get the cite on that quote? It’s not that I disbelieve you, it’s that I’d like to see other delicious ironies in the article. [4 years ago Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6%](http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/23/romney-promises-to-bring-unemployment-down-to-6/) > [@](#): > > “I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we’d put in place, we’d get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower,” the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday. Newt Gingrich also promised that Republican policies were needed to get gas prices under $2.50: [Gingrich’s $2.50 gas promise](http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/24/news/economy/gingrich_gas_prices/) > [@](#): > > “I’ve developed a program for American energy so no future president will ever bow to a Saudi king again and so every American can look forward to $2.50 a gallon gasoline,” Gingrich said during his self-introduction at Wednesday’s CNN debate. > […] > Gingrich’s plan for lowering prices revolves around increasing domestic energy production to levels that would make geopolitical concerns an afterthought. The way to do that, according to Gingrich, is by eliminating the EPA, building the Keystone pipeline and allowing more drilling. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/91 "2016-01-13T20:01:11Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Can I get the cite on that quote? It’s not that I disbelieve you, it’s that I’d like to see other delicious ironies in the article. [Here’s](http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/01/01/3607416/4-things-2015-obama-reelected/)where I got it, they link to the actual quotes. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/92 "2016-01-13T20:01:24Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > No true Scotsman would vote for Hillary. No true Scotsman COULD vote for Hillary, being ineligible to vote in a US Presidential election. If Hillary loses New Hampshire and Iowa big time, I would expect Biden to get back into the race. Presumably, that’s what’s behind his recent “I regret it every day” remarks. ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/93 "2016-01-13T20:14:02Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > [Here’s](http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/01/01/3607416/4-things-2015-obama-reelected/)where I got it, they link to the actual quotes. Thanks. I did indeed get more juicy ironies. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/94 "2016-01-13T20:52:44Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > No true Scotsman would vote for Hillary. Well, when your viewpoint doesn’t align with your base, as Hillary’s often do not … and yet, you support Hillary … maybe you aren’t in line with the Democratic base, either. Feel free to CALL yourself a Democrat all you want, however. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/95 "2016-01-13T20:56:06Z")
Ultimately the DNC decides and they have already chosen Hillary. ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/96 "2016-01-13T21:20:58Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > If Hillary loses New Hampshire and Iowa big time, I would expect Biden to get back into the race. Nonsense. He’ll simply become a powerful Sanders supported. ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/97 "2016-01-13T21:22:54Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Well, when your viewpoint doesn’t align with your base, as Hillary’s often do not … and yet, you support Hillary … maybe you aren’t in line with the Democratic base, either. Feel free to CALL yourself a Democrat all you want, however. Who the hell are you talking about? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/98 "2016-01-13T21:24:20Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Ultimately the DNC decides and they have already chosen Hillary. The DNC decides, but they try to make informed decisions. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/99 "2016-01-13T23:35:32Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Ultimately the DNC decides and they have already chosen Hillary. The name of Debbie Wasserman Schultz doesn’t exactly strike fear into anyone’s heart, other than the fear that she will screw up whatever opportunity the party has this cycle to capitalize on a Trump or Cruz nomination. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/100 "2016-01-13T23:46:30Z")
> [@August\_West](#): > > Weirdly, I’m the exact opposite of you. I see Bernie as the kind of person who gets things done, and his record indicates that. Add in that he’s not beholden to anyone and it really opens the possibilities of what he might change. I fear that Hillary will do just enough to end up disappointing everyone without upsetting anyone (especially Wall St.). There are 2 things that I take into account that may affect Sanders as president. First, anything he’s done in the past was with a more cordial congress, where people aren’t taking bribes or opposing things just because the opposition supports them. I don’t know if Sanders, given his more congenial disposition, has the ability to fight back as hard as someone like Clinton who’s pretty much been in the trenches for the last 2 decades. And second, doing things as a senator or house rep. is a lot different. There, you put your name on a bill or you sign on to other bills. You’re one face in a crowd of many. As president, you have to lead, and when Congress doesn’t do what you want, you have to pull and push. Sanders might be able to do that, I don’t know. But I know Clinton can do it. And sure, she might just do enough to still be able to call herself liberal, but if I believe Sanders wouldn’t be able to do anything at all, I’d rather settle for Clinton. > [@marshmallow](#): > > This is a common belief. What are examples of Hillary fighting dirty against Republicans? Not just against Republicans. As I said, I don’t like how she’s attacked Sanders in the primaries, but that kind of dirty fighting is what we need against the GOP. She doesn’t remain positive when her opponent does. She’s willing to go negative and do it early. Recently she’s said Sanders is against the ACA when she really means that, like many Americans, the ACA is a flawed middle step towards universal health care, but she omitted that last part. Some of her supporters, not her campaign itself, first looked into Obama’s birth certificate issue and the GOP ran with it. And this was when she was campaigning against Democrats. Imagine how much fun she’ll be campaigning against Trump. As for examples, she hasn’t had to run much against the GOP, so I don’t have examples off hand. Her role as SOS is also not one where she has to do much campaigning to get re-elected. But it would be foolish to assume that she can’t or won’t use her bag of tricks against any GOP who crosses her. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833.md?page=6)