I am leaning strongly toward Sen. Sanders: I am impressed with his integrity and I really "feel" that when I listen to him. I can't say either of those things about Sec. Clinton. I also increasingly think he is the more electable candidate, particularly against Donald Drumpf (I like entertain myself by imagining what those debates would look and sound like...). But I am not adamant about it and apparently the Indy is not the place to look for unbiased help with my decision. If the editorial board was indeed so divided, the "Team Hillary" "super-delegate" editor in chief must have put a pretty heavy thumb on one side of the scale. When you add in the condescending Indy cover with the bold print "Don' Fight It" I was left somewhere between aggravated and infuriated...Did anyone else find that choice of phrase odd...the classic phrase popular with men who force their unappreciated sexual attentions on women. Like other commenters, I think an unbiased vetting of both would have been more appropriate and I was personally pleased to see that the People's Alliance took the tact of endorsing Clinton OR Sanders. JW Finch
Folks at the Indy are probably basing this off the defeatist mindset of "We like Sanders but he wont win". And this is a mindset I dont understand. We arent voting in the general right now, we are voting in the Primary. If Sanders won the primary the polls show him doing best against all GOP candidates. So that defeatist mind set actually is false. Hopefully one day we can get a real progressive in the White House.
Or better yet. Maybe Hillary gets indicted so Bernie wins by default. That would be a big dose of Karma for the Clintons.
An publication named Indy, backing the Neoliberal Centrist Right candidate... Irony. Apparently the Editor in Chief needs to be fired, as he is driving the Progressive car right into neoliberal country.
You have a candidate you could barely mention anything bad about (minus him being more pragmatic about guns), and with lists and lists of bad things about Clinton, you still endorse Clinton? Endorsements are supposed to be based on evidence and facts... Seems like your Editor In Chief just chose to commit Propaganda suicide, judging from the other posters here. Very disappointing. I always do my own research on all candidates, but I know a few that take this publication seriously. I am quite sure their position will change after this rag hits their inbox. You blew this one... BIG TIME!
Bernie caucused with the Democrats for many years as an Independent Vermont Senator so I'm pretty sure he can work with Democratic legislators. At this point the Republicans aren't going to work with anyone.
I would rather vote for someone like Bernie who has great ideas for change. Even if he only accomplishes 10% of his goals, that is a massive improvement over Hillary. Hillary might accomplish 100% of her goals but her policies only continue to protect rich white people. I'd rather see someone represent the people even if we only move a few steps in the right direction. That's better than moving in the wrong direction.
I'm deeply saddened by this. I've always thought this source was antiestablishment. But you are endorsing Hillary, Ross, and Cooper of all people? I guess money is power.
How could you get this so wrong, Indy? It's a damn shame. I second others who have written that this ends my trust in Indy endorsements. The days of me taking your voter guides into the polls with me are over. It's telling, that the cover of your print issue reads "Don't fight it"—a phrase quite often used by someone trying to do something really bad to you against your wishes.
I will vote for the Democratic nominee. For those who insist on demonizing HRC, she is NOT the enemy. I admire both candidates. From Nate Silver's fivethirtyeight.com last year, Harry Enten wrote this article titled "Hillary Clinton was liberal. Hillary Clinton is Liberal." http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-was-liberal-hillary-clinton-is-liberal/
If we were voting for an Emperor, I would support Sanders - but we are voting for a President. Hopefully someone who might actually get something positive done. That is why I'm supporting Clinton. I think that even if Sanders were elected, he would be on the same path as Obama - someone who did not get much done because of implacable opposition from Republicans. I'm not even sure how deep his support would be among Democratic legislators since he is not and has not been a Democrat. I am not convinced that Clinton can accomplish much, but I think and am hopeful that she can get more done than Sanders.
I have serious reservations about Clinton - she is not a progressive - but this is not a progressive country, it is filled with very mean, very ignorant people. It is also filled with people who only show up during Presidential election years, pay no attention to local or state elections and therefore enable reactionary Republicans to take over state houses, redistrict Dem voters out of existence, etc, etc. ad nauseum.
Poll after poll shows that Bernie Sanders can win over any Republican candidate, while Clinton has a much less safe margin or loses outright. I'm so disappointed that your editor-in-chief "put his thumb on the scale" for your endorsement and more so that you perpetuate the myth of Clinton's electability. I'm a woman and a feminist who wants the candidate who will do the most good for everyone. That's Bernie Sanders by a landslide. See a collection of polls here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/la…
Hillary Clinton??? From what USE to be the progressive voice for North Carolina? So, what you're saying is: Vote for the oligarchy; Vote for Wall Street; Vote for corporate socialism; vote for more war that the defense contractors and their investors profit from and the middle class and working poor pay for; vote for Monsanto and the death of food; vote for fossil fuels and the death of the planet; vote to send more jobs overseas and to further privatize profit; vote for continued insurmountable student debt; vote for the 1% instead of voting for your own self interest; vote for Walmart wages as it'll be the only job you can get. There's a reason Alice Walton, Goldman Sachs, Citi bank, et al. are supporting her for president too. How utterly shameful. As a former native and 7th generation North Carolinian, reading this endorsement by the Indy completely affirms my decision to have moved to Oregon over 2 years ago. I no longer recognize it. Good luck!
Respectfully disagree. Secretary Clinton has evolved on far too many issues and claims to have learned from her Iraq war vote...yet has intervened in harmful ways in Libya and appears poised to do the same in Syria...all since the time of her Iraq vote.
As for Senator Sanders being a one issue candidate...he isn't. It's discounting his in depth discussions of ISIS, healthcare, poverty, race relations, mass incarceration, rights for LGBT community, and so so so much more. "One issue candidate" is a Clinton talking point, nothing more.
I was just talking with my wife who came home after I posted my earlier comments. We both realized that we have been relying on your endorsements for many many years. However, after your endorsement of Clinton we can no longer trust your judgement. We never just accepted your endorsement blindly, of course. But now we will do much more investigation and research before we go to the polls.
For the first time in my life we have a candidate who truly represents the needs of the working class and is openly confronting the corporate/multi-national control and abuse of our planet and the people living in it. If you haven't noticed, we are in a dire situation: climate change, global migration/migrant issues, massive wealth inequality... You know the list! Hillary will basically keep the status quo and this is no answer to the severe issues we face. I am deeply disappointed that the Indy has made this endorsement. Seriously, we have a choice this time. Why ignore it?
Here's the sort of info I'd've liked to have seen here...
Policy diffs only...
healthcare: Obamacare+/single-payer(Medicare for all)
allow to sue gun makers: support/oppose
college tuition: $17.5B in grants/free
marijuana: reschedule lower/states' right to legalize
Wall St.: loan risk fee & hi-freq. tax/risk tax & big bank breakup
ISIS: strongly support locals/leave up to locals
Syrian rebel training & no-fly: support/oppose
US troops in Afghanistan: stay/out
death penalty: support/oppose
total raised: $195M/$96M
small contributions: 18%/71%
personal wealth: $21.5M/$330k
"American voters back ... Bernie Sanders ... over (all viable) Republican candidates by margins of 4 to 10 percentage points in head to head presidential matchups... Hillary Clinton trails or ties leading Republicans in the November face-off..."
Quinnipiac, February 18, 2016
Sanders, Clinton Beat Trump In CNN/ORC Poll (Sanders more than Clinton)
March 1, 2016
Very disappointed with the Indy's (one of my favorite publications) democratic presidential endorsement. One thing you do have right is that it is time for a woman to be president but Hillary Clinton is not that woman.(Elizabeth Warren, Jill Stein are much better choices). Like a reader mentioned above, if the editors were split in their decision then maybe the Indy shouldn't endorse either one and do a fair and unbiased comparison between the two. I thought I was reading an article from the mainstream media not from a magazine named "INDY". Again I am extremely disappointed and really feel like this was wrong but I do appreciate the other information on other candidates.
And one more note. Since you said that your board was deeply split on Clinton/Sanders maybe the smart and ethical thing would have been to endorse no one and explain the pros and cons of both?
It is perhaps ironic, although telling, that on the same day the Indy endorses Hillary Clinton that Berta Cáceres, a Honduran environment and human rights activist, was murdered in her bed. Clinton, when she was Secretary of State, made the coup that brought Cáceres' murderers into power possible. While the Indy is of course entitled to its own opinion, it is not entitled to its own facts. Where does the Indy get its "fact" that HRC worked to pull the White House to the left? Is the Indy totally unaware of the dark history of the Democratic Leadership Council and Hillary's role in it? Are they unaware that she was selected to be the main voice of conservative Democrats when she was in the Senate? She was, she is and she always will be a pro-corporate hawk.
For the first time in my life I finally have the opportunity to vote for someone rather than against someone. Bernie Sanders is that candidate. For the first time I don't have to hold my nose when I walk into a voting booth. Hillary is no different than all the pro-corporate, pro-military right wing Dems than have come before her.
As for your final argument that it is time to put a woman in charge, I agree. But Hillary is not that woman. If you think Hillary is good for women, I am sure Berta Cáceres would disagree. Remember Margaret Thatcher?
Super disappointed in the defeatest mentality in endorsing Hillary Clinton. I've always come to the Indy for progressive guidance, not political opportunism.
Why no stated position on the Connect NC Public Improvement Bond? It was originally supposed to be a transportation infrastructure but has morphed into giving money to the the University of North
Carolina System, the North Carolina Community College System, water and sewer
systems, the State's National Guard, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, attractions and parks, and the Department of Public Safety to build new facilities. I'd be interested to hear what the Indy thinks about the switch in purpose for the bond funds and whether or not it is worth voting for.
Why the Critics of Bernienomics Are Wrong
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2016
"Not a day goes by, it seems, without the mainstream media bashing Berney Sanders’s economic plan – quoting certain economists as saying his numbers don’t add up. (The New York Times did it again just yesterday.) They’re wrong. You need to know the truth, and spread it. "
ROBERT B. REICH is Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. He endorsed Bernie Sanders.
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation