Many progressives have trouble believing Hillary Clinton given that she's had long and close relationships with wealthy political donors who are opposed to progressive values. She is the first Democratic candidate to fully embrace super PACs. She stands to gain so much from this system that Public Integrity named her "The Citizen's United Candidate" last year.

It's hard not to get the impression that Clinton is only saying what needs to be said. As Bloomberg observes, she is probably only saying this now to blunt the appeal of Sanders. That works if people aren't paying attention.

Remember how she feigned opposition to the TPP and released a statement urging Obama to "listen to Pelosi"? Just days later, Pelosi capitulated and paved the way for fast track status. In fact, Clinton undoubtedly knew what many Washington insiders already observed: Pelosi was actively looking to corral votes for TPP in a way that would minimize political damage. That is how politics gets done --- dishonest insiders like Clinton are experts at misleading the base. She got the benefit of appearing to be against TPP, taking soft positions, being vague, and ultimately inoculating herself on this issue for those who weren't paying attention. As it turns out, though she tried to pretend like she was against it, she was actually instrumental in negotiating TPP.

The campaign is barely underway, and she's already been caught misleading progressives. Why in the world would they continue to give her the benefit of the doubt. She only recently started taking a position on campaign finance reform, has been vague about actual solutions, and is a prime beneficiary of the current system. Like TPP, she has no commitment to the issue, in fact, the opposite is probably true --- she just happens to be very good at misleading people. Sanders, on the other hand has released a specific, much stronger position and has been a leading voice on this issue.

Why on earth would anyone trust Hillary on this?