Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Uncle Joe

(58,414 posts)
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:44 PM Feb 2016

The PBS Democratic Debate Was a Tie, but a Tie Goes to Bernie at the Moment



My tie break, though, came not from a candidate's answer but from a question asked to Clinton by moderator Judy Woodruff toward the middle of the debate:

Secretary Clinton, your campaign has recently ramped up criticism of Senator Sanders for attending Democratic Party fundraisers from which you say he benefited. But nearly half of your financial sector donations appear to come from just two wealthy financiers, George Soros and Donald Sussman, for a total of about $10 million. You have said that there is no quid pro quo involved. But is that also true of the donations that wealthy Republicans give to Republican candidates, contributors including the Koch brothers?
Hillary responded first with the (absurd!) claim that she had nothing to do with the super PAC in question and then, shortly after, went from touting her own small-dollar network to hyping her opponent’s. “I am proud of Senator Sanders, and his supporters,” she said. “I think it's great that, you know, Senator Sanders, President Obama, and I have more donors than any three people who have ever run.” The answer was bad—though nowhere near her worst on the topic—and allowed Sanders to make his own case. But it was the question that packed the biggest punch. Millions of voters had just watched as a candidate who is promising to reform our campaign finance system dodged a question that made an implied comparison of her donors to the Koch brothers. That’s hardly an image any candidate wants, let alone one who is running against an opponent who promises to break Wall Street’s hold on Washington. For his part, Sanders capitalized on that tough question for Clinton with a series of snark bombs:

Let's not insult the intelligence of the American people. People aren't dumb. “Why In god's name does Wall Street make huge campaign contributions?” I guess just for the fun of it. They want to throw money around.
After nearly a year of campaigning—and after six debates—that moment is unlikely to significantly move the needle one way or the other. Nonetheless, it was a stark reminder that Sanders couldn’t have been handed a better candidate to challenge with his promise to upend the system.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/12/bernie_sanders_won_the_pbs_debate_thanks_to_a_tie.html

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The PBS Democratic Debate Was a Tie, but a Tie Goes to Bernie at the Moment (Original Post) Uncle Joe Feb 2016 OP
Bernie evoking the name Henry Kissinger, another MIC Angel, should put it in to orpupilofnature57 Feb 2016 #1
"A Sanders victory would be of some historic importance as well" Donkees Feb 2016 #2
 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
1. Bernie evoking the name Henry Kissinger, another MIC Angel, should put it in to
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:49 PM
Feb 2016

perspective for thinking people .

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The PBS Democratic Debate...