Bernie Is Not Self-Centered and Haughty, Hillary Is No one has accused Bernie Sanders of being hard to work with. The same cannot be said of Hillary Clinton.
When Hillary Clinton is out of the public eye, her behavior is that of the superior elitist who can do no wrong. She loses her temper, and takes her anger out on staffers. Joan Baggett served as an assistant to President Bill Clinton. She had this to say about Mrs. Clinton,
“People didn’t feel comfortable disagreeing the first lady, even when she was wrong.”
“She would blow up over something that she misinterpreted. Again, you can’t take her on, she’s not my boss. You can’t take on the First Lady. I remember one time in one of these meetings where she was blowing up about staff and how we were all incompetent and he was having to be the mechanic and drive the car and do everything. That we weren’t capable of anything.”
Bernie Is Often Described As Genuine And Honest, Hillary Is Not Being genuine is Bernie Sander’s trademark. Hillary Clinton is always having her honesty questioned, and for good reason.
Mrs. Clinton’s pattern of taking bribes in the form of donations includes her super PACs and the Clinton Foundation. For a FEC investigation into this relationship, click here.
Hillary Clinton is accused of lying on a regular basis. This has been widely acknowledged among people who aren’t on her payroll. Roughly 20 years ago, a New York Times columnist named William Safire wrote,
“Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our first lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation – is a congenital liar.”
She states she stood up for the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transsexuals. When? The Clinton administration stated publicly they were against same-sex marriages. Mrs. Clinton only came out for marriage equality in 2013.
Mrs. Clinton Will Drag Us Into Another War Sanders and Clinton have disagreed on some the biggest issues of our times, including issues such as continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The two have very different perspectives on military and foreign policy issues.
Before Mrs. Clinton became Secretary of State, Saudi Arabia contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. After becoming Secretary of State, the Saudis asked her for military jets. Two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing, who manufactures the F-15, contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation (according to a company press release). This finalized the deal, with Mrs. Clinton playing middle man and making a hefty profit.
The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, putting weapons in the hands of governments who had donated money to the Clinton Foundation. Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation. While Secretary of State, she also authorized $151 billion in deals for 16 countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation. In essence, a foreign nation makes a donation to the Clinton Foundation, later they request weapons. A major business, typically listed on Wall Street, then makes a donation to the Clinton Foundation (or perhaps to her son-in-law’s hedge fund) to get the contract, and finalize the deal. (Are these donations tax-deductible? Are “we” ultimately paying for Boeing’s donations/bribes?)
If a person has a history of repeat behavior, there’s a real good chance they will do it, again. Mrs. Clinton has discovered selling weapons makes new friends for her and puts money in her slush fund, the Clinton Foundation. There is a good possibility she will draw the U.S. into war, as there is no shortage of invitations, and she does not want to be seen as “weak.”
Bernie Sanders has no history of selling arms, let alone making profit off of it.
Death Penalty Presidential-hopeful Hillary Clinton has long endorsed the death penalty, and this may provide some insight regarding her support for war and selling weapons. Bernie Sanders, with one exception, has voted consistently against death penalty legislation.
The Wall Street Bailout During the depths of the Great Recession, Senator Sanders was opposed to the wall street bailout. Senator Clinton voted for the bill, which also created a $700 billion emergency fund, called the Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP.
Hillary Clinton Is Ridiculously Rich Hillary Clinton, early on, opposed the Bush tax breaks for the rich, but her position later changed. By the time the temporary tax breaks came up for renewal, Senator Clinton’s position had evolved into a “maintain the status quo” philosophy. Senator Bernie Sanders has never supported the Bush’s tax breaks for the rich, and voted against their extension.
The different plans for income disparity the two candidates describe are what will have the most impact on our day-to-day lives. Sanders wants to “level the playing field” by increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour, across the nation, and by providing free college educations. Clinton seems to have no real interest in redistributing America’s wealth, though when pressed, she suggests a minimum wage of $12 per hour would meet the needs of most working poor, adding large cities could set their own minimum wage at a higher rate than the rest of the nation. Hillary Clinton’s plans for dealing with income disparity are vague, lack detail, and are “wimpier.”
While Bernie Sanders’ politics and practices have evolved with time, his support for “we the people” has remained consistent, as have his core beliefs. Hillary Clinton is the status quo candidate. and seems to have no core beliefs, with perhaps the exception of me, me, me.