Under Sanders, income and jobs would soar, economist says

This is the problem with Hillary summed up in one comment over at r/Sandersforpresident:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/44rjms/morning_joe_bill_clintons_hatchet_job_on_bernie/czsc8db

You know, the sad thing is, there was a way for Hillary to run a campaign, which had a good chance of being successful in the primary and the general, and if she had taken this approach, I could have voted for her in the general in good conscience. All she had to do is run as a moderate with socially liberal positions. She could have said that Wall Street plays an important role in this economy just like working families, while still stating that we need increased regulations to prevent the moral hazards brought about by the bank bailouts. She could have admitted that 20 years ago, she was on the wrong side of DADT, DOMA, and LGBT rights due to her upbringing, but she's recognized that she was wrong and is prepared to fight for justice in 2016. She could have said that $15 dollar minimum wage today will hurt labor-intensive businesses but argued that fighting for $12 now and $15 over the next several years would give business time to adjust and adapt. She could have stuck to a position that Americans don't want to see more taxes when so many are still feeling the after effects of the Great Recession, and fought for more modest adjustments to fiscal policy. But unfortunately for her, she's a Clinton, and Clintonian Politics can be summarized as Triangulation, which is just a fancy term for bullcrap artistry, so far as I can tell. Or rather, trying to have her cake and eat it too - I'm really not quite sure which, which I think is the point, so in which case, well done. But a lot has changed between 1992 and 2016. Particularly in terms of camera/video enabled phones and the internet. The whole concept of political triangulation just makes you look like a flip-flopper when everyone has access to look up videos of speeches given 20 and 30 years ago. When you've got a lot of access to primary news sources, not whatever corporate media sees fit to publish, with the slant that supports its own best interests. And when called out for this triangulation, she resorts to dirty smears. She calls her detractors sexists, and heaven forbid I didn't realize that Hillary is female, because she certainly likes to point it out every three sentences. She seizes on the word "shouting" and tries to play the victim, while her husband's policies in the 94 crime bill, Welfare Reform, financial deregulation, and more, have had notable adverse effects, largely falling on minorities and women. If she had run as a proud moderate who was prepared to balance the interests of Wall Street and Main Street, no, I wouldn't have voted for her in the primary against Sanders. I'm proud to be a progressive, and I don't think moderate positions are good enough. But I would have been proud to campaign on her behalf if she had won the primary, because an honest moderate who runs a clean campaign is a lot better than what the GOP is likely to nominate. But no, after being personally attacked by proxy for being a Sanders supporter, no, she can kiss my vote in the general goodbye. If she wins, I will probably switch my party registration to Green and vote for Dr. Stein in the general, because a Democratic party run by dishonest triangulators doesn't represent me or my interests anymore.

/r/politics Thread Parent Link - money.cnn.com