How should Hillary respond to the Bernie challenge?

[oeoyeleye]

I think a lot of the "white, educated liberals" who say they support Bernie over Hillary, will get to the voting booth and not be able to push the lever for him. When faced with the actual choice, I think a lot of them will vote for Hillary.

[Famous Mortimer]

How do I think she SHOULD counter Sanders: Just take all of his positions. Support single payer. Support a $15 an hour minimum wage. Support higher taxes on the rich. She is too much of a coward to do this.

How I think she WILL counter Sanders: She's clearly doing this already, playing up a lot of SJW crap to kill of Sander's natural base. He's a WHITE MALE and his supporters are well educated, middle class White people. Nothing well educated, middle class White people hate more than being called out on being well educated, middle class White people.

What I think is the best strategy for her, regardless of whether or not I support her: Actually, probably still just moving to the left and taking his stances.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The only logical course of action would be to have Bernie Vince Foster'd.

[Adam Griffin]

She'll continue adopting the softest of his policies to take some of the wind out of his sails (as he is doing with her; at the Madison event, he actually discussed police brutality and broke down youth unemployment by race) as long as the polls show what they currently show. She's not going to alienate Wall Street because she believes what they believe largely on economic matters, not because she's afraid of losing their money. In addition, nobody who might vote for Sanders would honestly believe Hillary had a sudden, leftward change of conscience.

If/once he begins to close in even more, then she will do what the Clintons always do when put in a tough position: scorch the earth. Yes, she herself might not do it, but anyone with a lick of sense or political awareness will know damn good and well it's Clintonland. Of course, this will indicate to the world that she is genuinely vulnerable and afraid (and in a real way - not that whole "we're not taking this for granted" series of talking points we heard from the campaign at the onset).

Remember, however, that Clintons not only survive, but thrive in controversial situations. The only reason Hillary Clinton isn't President today is because of a technicality where two states screwed themselves out of being able to seat their delegates (and had the Clintons been able to know just how close it was going to be throughout the entire primary beforehand, those states would have fallen in line in 2007).

[Famous Mortimer]

She'll continue adopting the softest of his policies to take some of the wind out of his sails (as he is doing with her; at the Madison event, he actually discussed police brutality and broke down youth unemployment by race) as long as the polls show what they currently show. She's not going to alienate Wall Street because she believes what they believe largely on economic matters, not because she's afraid of losing their money. In addition, nobody who might vote for Sanders would honestly believe Hillary had a sudden, leftward change of conscience.

If/once he begins to close in even more, then she will do what the Clintons always do when put in a tough position: scorch the earth. Yes, she herself might not do it, but anyone with a lick of sense or political awareness will know damn good and well it's Clintonland. Of course, this will indicate to the world that she is genuinely vulnerable and afraid (and in a real way - not that whole "we're not taking this for granted" series of talking points we heard from the campaign at the onset).

Remember, however, that Clintons not only survive, but thrive in controversial situations. The only reason Hillary Clinton isn't President today is because of a technicality where two states screwed themselves out of being able to seat their delegates (and had the Clintons been able to know just how close it was going to be throughout the entire primary beforehand, those states would have fallen in line in 2007).

Sanders cares about police brutality and racial inequality more than Clinton. He is saying these things because he believes them, not just to counter Clinton. If anything, he cares more about this issues than she does. He talks about them whereas Clinton only talks about them to say "Sanders isn't talking about them" (which again, isn't even true).

[JerryArkansas]

Best way to do it is take a few of his positions from him, then burn him to the ground.  Like Adam said, she and Bill thrive in that type of environment.  They did it in 78, 82, 92, and even to some extent 2008.  When they have a hard race, they will get dirty.

[Adam Griffin]

Sanders cares about police brutality and racial inequality more than Clinton. He is saying this things because he believes them, not just to counter Clinton. If anything, he cares more about this issues than he does. He talks about them whereas Clinton only talks about them to say "Sanders isn't talking about them" (which again, isn't even true).

Could've fooled me, and that's kind of the whole point. This is the first time I've heard him actually talk about it; Clinton has a pretty established track record of speaking on these issues. His difficulty addressing social issues as a whole - particularly those involving minorities - is well-documented, as are the reasons why.

[Famous Mortimer]

His difficulty addressing social issues as a whole - particularly those involving minorities - is well-documented

No it isn't.

But here's an example of that strategy I was talking about.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think one of the messages of the Romney campaign was that the "scorched Earth" campaign against primary foes is counterproductive. Most american's first exposure to Romney 2012 was as a paranoid, well-funded, almost mean-spirited force of nature.

[/]

Drop out  and endorse him.

[Del Tachi]

Do nothing.  Treat Sanders like the non-factor he is.

[dudeabides]

For the time being, Hillary Clinton should try to focus on defining herself. On the Republican side, Jeb Bush already seems to be concerning himself more with defining himself in a way he could not just in a primary, but also a general election - as a center-right pragmatist committed to reform and economic growth. Hillary Clinton can't allow herself to be moved to the far left by Senator Sanders. She should try to show primary voters she can win the general by losing the primary much the way Bush is in the other party. That means she needs to be very serious about policy and not get bogged down in an ideological fist-fight with Sanders. A good focus for her would be the area of education - she doesn't have to run for cover from Obama's economic policies, nor does she have to defend her tenure as Secretary of State.

[The Mikado]

For the time being? Clinton needs more exposure. The GOP candidates and Sanders are all anyone's talking about. Clinton has a serious old news problem...she's been a national political figure since 1991 and even before that was First Lady of Arkansas. Clinton needs some genuine enthusiasm or spark...right now her campaign's theme seems to be "Vote Clinton because I've waited my turn."

If she goes negative on Sanders, the time to do it is in September/October, not now. Right now, she needs Americans to view her as something other than that lady who has been in the spotlight since before many voters were even born.

[Ogre Mage]

There's always going to be an element of the base which is dissatisfied with Clinton and the question is which candidate, if any, could coalesce that vote.  It looks like that is Sanders.  His rise is probably more harmful to the other potential rivals, like O'Malley, than Hillary.  And if the Sanders challenge moves Clinton to the left somewhat that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.  

But Sanders seems uncomfortable and not very good at making identity politics appeals.  That's not helpful when you represent a state which is 95% white.  Hillary is an old pro at this, has been working the black, Latino and Asian political scene for a long time and has made many connections there.  Almost no one in those communities knows who Sanders is.  Hillary also represented New York, an extremely diverse state and through her work as Secretary of State is very familiar with many different cultures.  And obviously there is a natural bridge between her and women voters which isn't there for Sanders.  The Democratic Party is a coalition party and unless you can appeal to the different factions you are going to fail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/politics/bernie-sanders-lags-hillary-clinton-in-introducing-himself-to-black-voters.html?_r=0

http://www.latimes.com/nation/immigration/la-na-democrats-latinos-20150620-story.html#page=1