We know that a good portion of Sander’s platform is going to be difficult impossible to pass, especially if the GOP maintains even a slight majority in Congress.

It’s not really based on that. It’s much more simple: whatever chances Bernie has of getting things through congress, Hillary’s are greater by a wide margin. No matter what he stands for or what he says, Bernie will always be the “socialist.” Agreeing with him on anything would be a political poison pill for…

I agree. Obama literally ran on a “Change” platform, was sworn in with Democratic majorities in Congress, and still had a lot of trouble getting things done. Political idealism is wonderful, but often unrealistic.

Lobbyists are already entrenched. Sanders isn’t going to change that unless he has a Congress that shares his ideals. That’s the exact opposite of what we have right now. If we had liberal majorities in both houses, I would welcome a Sanders presidency, but we don’t.

Thank you. Yes to all of this. I think she would be well-positioned to work with what we have now and make incremental changes. I know everyone is all about NOW! CHANGE IT ALL NOWNOWNOW!!!!! but I tend toward the more pragmatic approach to things.

Half the Republican establishment is probably still afraid she’ll murderize them if they don’t get her what she wants.

I agree with you. I wish there were more people like him in congress. I don’t see him as an effective executive. Some of the responses he gives when he’s pressed on how he’ll actually accomplish what he’s proposing are kind of trump-ian (Q: What will you do about ISIS? A: We need to get neighboring states to step up!…

I’m saying she can get things done because she plays the game. Sanders is an idealist. As much as I agree with him, ideals aren’t going to eliminate the influence of corporations and lobbyists anytime soon.

This one, from the original piece at the New Yorker, is almost unbelievable:

The message suggests that mature, realistic, practical people, seeing that they may be unable to accomplish what they want, just give up. And thus, they achieve all their goals, by not having any. Or as Bart Simpson said, “Can’t win, don't try."

Prefer Bernie’s policies but think Hillary is better equipped to win the Presidency in the general election.

Haha, I’ve actually used that argument before. I have no doubt that Hillary would have a hard time with Congress, but she has two things in her favor: experience in the executive branch and stronger ties to lobbyists and corporations. I’m not a fan of the latter having any influence in Congress, but it stands to…

I don’t think anyone (sane) thinks that. They do, however, think it more likely that a President can add positive building blocks to Lilly Ledbetter, Obamacare etc despite a hostile Congress, than that President can overcome a hostile Congress to smash up the entire banking system, double taxes on the rich and give…

the outsized political hope that “youth” have before they realize that every politician is a shill, nobody with real values is actually electable, and also that God Is Dead.

That whole entire song was just an excuse for him to make a Nabokov reference! I hate it so much.

Counterpoint : this would be an ideal party for a surprise paintball raid.

He is the thinnest one, so he gets to lead them.

If only for the palpable tension between the brothers Gallagher! Oh, and to near Noel’s stage banter.

To me a “dad band” is a band where any man can go to a their show while wearing slacks. Dave Matthews Band? Yeah. You can go there wearing slacks. Motorhead? Nope. You will be mistaken for a NARC and be beaten up in the parking lot by the local biker gang who was there to catch the show too.