What are the policy differences between Hillary & Bernie? (besides single-payer)

[Bull Moose Base]

They are equally unlikely to get anything they want through a GOP House. The difference is on executive orders, as Commander-in-Chief, what they compromise/refuse to compromise on, what they talk about.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I see stuff like this all the time on Reddit:

Ok, so mostly past legislation so it's completely moot (Sanders being an anonymous backbencher would have had the ability to just block anything slightly controversial). What difference would he do NOW if elected? That chart reminds me of dudeabides going on and on about Yeb!'s record in Florida, as if that matters at this point.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Significant 'policy' differences, not that many. The Sandernistas will pick and choose what they want to show Hillary as the she-beast.

[Bull Moose Base]

Significant 'policy' differences, not that many. The Sandernistas will pick and choose what they want to show Hillary as the she-beast.

Most Sanders supporters feel positively about Hillary. They just prefer Sanders.

[Averroës Nix]

Differences in policy are less important that differences in priorities. Sanders has placed inequalities in wealth and political power at the center of his campaign. Clinton has not. This is not merely a matter of "style."

Moreover, Marokai is correct to criticize Clinton's credibility. Clinton is outright incoherent when pressed on her more notable political shifts. But even this is supposedly a virtue, as it makes her a "good politician"? Someone who will get more Democrats elected and "know how to work with Congress"? I don't understand the basis for this claim, and I didn't understand it even before Clinton chose to spend the first several months of her campaign apologizing to Republicans and hack journalists for sending some e-mails.

[/]

Significant 'policy' differences, not that many. The Sandernistas will pick and choose what they want to show Hillary as the she-beast.

Most Sanders supporters feel positively about Hillary. They just prefer Sanders.

Except for the Atlas ones...

[Bull Moose Base]

Significant 'policy' differences, not that many. The Sandernistas will pick and choose what they want to show Hillary as the she-beast.

Most Sanders supporters feel positively about Hillary. They just prefer Sanders.

Except for the Atlas ones...

Yes but if this place were representative, the GOP nomination would be a close fight between Paul and Kasich.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Both Hilary and Bernie possess significant flaws in terms of politicking - neither are, say, an Obama or such.

sanders, to his credit, is good at weaving a cohesive narrative around inequalityn (although he sometimes struggles on less familiar turf). He is good at prescribing prescriptions, and makes an effort to "mainstream" his policy choices (one of the key errors of the Dr Paul campaign is that his showy promises were never elaborated beyond the Paul campaign itself, and I think Sanders learnt from that). However, I fail to see that the difference isn't basically stylistic - and I'm not saying that to condemn Sanders. Style and personality is far more important for an executive role than their wonkish legislative proposals.

In fact, I think Sanders has just as much chance of winning as Hilary. Sanders personality has some good qualities you want in an executive, but is relatively untested in making big decisions. He is basically a nice guy - far from what you might expect, he's no Far Left rabble rouser, or a bomb thrower. That is good in some respects, although that may go wrong if he is personally unable to follow through in his plans against established interests in Washington.

Clinton has the opposite problem. I think she fancies herself a sneaky Machiavelli type, the sort of person who wheels and deals and gets the greater good. Unfortunately I think she overrates her own skill. Her campaign also constantly struggles with very basic issues like damage control and forming a cohesive narrative; and of course the disaster of the 90's Clinton years confirms that couple are a pair of snakes at the best of times, and chaotic snakes at the worst of times. She is a capable politician herself - a relatively decent tenure in the cabinet, isn't terrible at debating etc. but she, like Sanders, and like Biden should he enter, need polish.

As a left-leaner my main priority is defeating Republicans to protect Obama's legacy. Does that make me a hack? Maybe, although the Repugs are the ones that want to subvert the Iran deal, the Clean Power Plan, labor rights etc. The most important thing for Democrats is finding some relatively decent, electable and charming person; and lending him or her a nice congress.

[Donald Trump 2016 !]

Both Hilary and Bernie possess significant flaws in terms of politicking - neither are, say, an Obama or such.

sanders, to his credit, is good at weaving a cohesive narrative around inequalityn (although he sometimes struggles on less familiar turf). He is good at prescribing prescriptions, and makes an effort to "mainstream" his policy choices (one of the key errors of the Dr Paul campaign is that his showy promises were never elaborated beyond the Paul campaign itself, and I think Sanders learnt from that). However, I fail to see that the difference isn't basically stylistic - and I'm not saying that to condemn Sanders. Style and personality is far more important for an executive role than their wonkish legislative proposals.

In fact, I think Sanders has just as much chance of winning as Hilary. Sanders personality has some good qualities you want in an executive, but is relatively untested in making big decisions. He is basically a nice guy - far from what you might expect, he's no Far Left rabble rouser, or a bomb thrower. That is good in some respects, although that may go wrong if he is personally unable to follow through in his plans against established interests in Washington.

Clinton has the opposite problem. I think she fancies herself a sneaky Machiavelli type, the sort of person who wheels and deals and gets the greater good. Unfortunately I think she overrates her own skill. Her campaign also constantly struggles with very basic issues like damage control and forming a cohesive narrative; and of course the disaster of the 90's Clinton years confirms that couple are a pair of snakes at the best of times, and chaotic snakes at the worst of times. She is a capable politician herself - a relatively decent tenure in the cabinet, isn't terrible at debating etc. but she, like Sanders, and like Biden should he enter, need polish.

As a left-leaner my main priority is defeating Republicans to protect Obama's legacy. Does that make me a hack? Maybe, although the Repugs are the ones that want to subvert the Iran deal, the Clean Power Plan, labor rights etc. The most important thing for Democrats is finding some relatively decent, electable and charming person; and lending him or her a nice congress.

You should go with a Chafee/Lessig ticket. Winning potential right there.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

"I like my national tickets like I like my wine: old, white and delightfully obscure."

[7,052,770]

Hillary doesn't fan the flames of anti-GMO hysteria to win votes, so she's got that going for her.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Significant 'policy' differences, not that many. The Sandernistas will pick and choose what they want to show Hillary as the she-beast.

Most Sanders supporters feel positively about Hillary. They just prefer Sanders.

Except for the Atlas ones...

I mean here.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Ok, so mostly past legislation so it's completely moot (Sanders being an anonymous backbencher would have had the ability to just block anything slightly controversial). What difference would he do NOW if elected? That chart reminds me of dudeabides going on and on about Yeb!'s record in Florida, as if that matters at this point.

There was something Obama himself used to say when campaigning against Clinton in 2008: Judgment and temperament are more important than experience. Knowing how a person will react in future crises, in legislative battles we can't predict, is more important than whatever smoke is being blown up our asses during a campaign. I look at that list and I see a type of policy judgment and foresight in Sanders that I trust infinitely more than Clinton. You can dismiss this as "style" if you wish, but I think that's stupid. There is a distinct difference in how they've reacted to major issues in the past that will undoubtedly carry forward in how they respond to events in the future.

[dudeabides]

Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders all support:
- Government-Run Health Care
- Federal Funding of Planned Parenthood
- Higher taxes on the rich
- Protectionist trade policies
- Obama's foreign policy, though Sanders is slightly more isolationist
- Banning assault weapons

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders all support:
- Government-Run Health Care
- Federal Funding of Planned Parenthood
- Higher taxes on the rich
- Protectionist trade policies
- Obama's foreign policy, though Sanders is slightly more isolationist
- Banning assault weapons

Hmm, all good things.

[Donald Trump 2016 !]

Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders all support:
- Government-Run Health Care
- Federal Funding of Planned Parenthood
- Higher taxes on the rich
- Protectionist trade policies
- Obama's foreign policy, though Sanders is slightly more isolationist
- Banning assault weapons

Your rage boner for Trump needs to stop.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders all support:
- Government-Run Health Care
- Federal Funding of Planned Parenthood
- Higher taxes on the rich
- Protectionist trade policies
- Obama's foreign policy, though Sanders is slightly more isolationist
- Banning assault weapons

I see no issue with 3, 5, and 6. And stop being obessed with Trump or ask to be paid to campaign for ¡Yeb! and against Trump on a different website.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I see stuff like this all the time on Reddit:

Ok, so mostly past legislation so it's completely moot (Sanders being an anonymous backbencher would have had the ability to just block anything slightly controversial). What difference would he do NOW if elected? That chart reminds me of dudeabides going on and on about Yeb!'s record in Florida, as if that matters at this point.

Records do matter. They need to be carefully examined to see if they are as good as the candidate claimed, and they allow one to see if a candidate is actually prepared to be a President who can get big things done.


Now, in terms of positions, yes, a candidate's campaign should be more than "look at my record", but a candidate's record isn't something we should view as useless to determine if they should be President.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Very little. Sanders positions himself as an "outsider" within Congress, but that won't help him get his idealistic, pie-in-the-sky policies passed. I sincerely doubt he is at all popular in Congress.

The point is moot, though, since Sanders won't win.

[Oak Hills]

Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Bernie Sanders all support:
- Government-Run Health Care

This is a lie.  Trump does not support government-run health insurance even, and neither does Clinton.  Sanders supports government health insurance, not completely government-run healthcare.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll give you this one for Clinton and Sanders, but I'm not aware of Trump's position on this, but I would suspect he is now against.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clinton and Sanders do, not sure about Trump.  Regardless, this position has overwhelming popular support.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fair trade and protectionism are not the same thing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Dovishness has nothing to do with isolationism, and Trump's foreign policy is utterly unknown as far as I'm aware, aside from "I'm going to be a better negotiator.  Derp."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If Trump ever supported this, he does not now, and at the time Trump supported it, Sanders was strongly opposed.

This is the last time I am going to explain to you that positions in 1995 do not equate to holding the same positions in 2015.  Until you acknowledge this simple fact, I am no longer going to engage with you on politics.

[angus]

I guess I'm not entirely clear on "leaves it all on the mat."  Is this a scatological reference? 

[Blue3]

So after a months-long contest, in which Sabders said he wanted to focus on the issues... Have any other significant policy differences between him and Hillary emerged?

[Lief 🗽]

Clinton wants to actually regulate the financial sector, while Bernie wants to yell about the evil banks.

[Ebsy]

I see stuff like this all the time on Reddit:

Wow, this list reminds me why I am a Clinton supporter.

[Averroës Nix]

So after a months-long contest, in which Sabders said he wanted to focus on the issues... Have any other significant policy differences between him and Hillary emerged?

Just to pick a couple of notable examples:

• Clinton supports debt-based higher education with part-time work requirements, while Sanders does not.
• Clinton believes that households earning $250,000 per year are "middle class" and can't handle an income tax increase, while Sanders does not.
• Sanders supports "auditing the Fed" (whatever that means), while Clinton does not.
• Sanders plan for Syria involves vague efforts to bring together some kind of international coalition to take largely unspecified actions; Clinton's plan is much less contingent on having that kind of cooperation.

..and so on. And that's without even getting into campaign finance laws or financial regulation. You can describe these differences in ways that are more favorable to one candidate or the other, as I have, and you can argue about how important these differences are in more practical terms, but they definitely exist.

I'm sure that whichever comic-book villain the Republicans nominate will insist that there are no important differences between Clinton and Sanders, but if you're confused about what those differences are at this point, it's because you're not paying attention.