In last night’s townhall debate, Clinton again burnished her bipartisanship credentials with the following statement:
"You know, when I'm actually in office, they say really nice things about me," Clinton said to a few laughs. "We have a whole list of the nice things they say. What a good colleague I am. How easy I am to work with. How willing I am to try to find common ground. And then when I run, oh my goodness, it's just unbelievable."
Clinton said the bottom line for being an effective leader is building relationships, which is one of the "hardest things to do in politics" when people have preexisting ideological and partisan lines. And if she can't reach an agreement with Republicans through words, she's willing to hug it out.
"I'm going to be just giving them all bear hugs whether they like it or not," Clinton said. "We're going to get together. We're going to talk about what we can do."
That’s very nice that Clinton thinks that Republicans can work with her. I believe that President Obama said the same thing before he entered the White House, and that he was stunned when Republicans said they would oppose all of his agenda in his first term as President.
Will Clinton be able to work with Republicans in her term as President? I’m sure she’ll try, and they will oppose her agenda at every turn except on corporate issues. Not much will get done in terms of progressive issues. Will Clinton call out the Republicans and make use out of the bully pulpit to push voters to contact their Members of Congress in support of progressive legislation?
I really don’t see that happening. Since Clinton has called progressive issues “pie-in-the-sky” hopes, and not grounded in realism. She will not fight for them to happen.
Both Clinton and Bernie Sanders will face entrenched Republican opposition in Congress if elected to the White House. The difference is that I can see Bernie Sanders using his theory of change if elected to the White House.
He frequently talks about a “political revolution” that means vastly increasing voter turnout and participation in political activities so conservative lawmakers and Big Money are unable to overwhelm public opinion. During the Democratic debate, this line had its doubters, from former Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) to a skeptical Anderson Cooper.
Sanders is probably not so unsure of himself. After all, he's done it before. When Sanders was mayor of Burlington, Vermont, one of his big accomplishments was to increase civic life in the city. During the course of his terms, voter turnout doubled. In his eight years as mayor, he rejuvenated a city that was considered by many to be dying, laying out progressive policies that cities around the country later adopted, and he did all this without particularly alienating Republicans. As one former GOP Alderman noted, he implemented ideas from the Republican party that he felt were not particularly harmful to working people, such as more efficient accounting practices.
So, we have two Presidential candidates here — one who says that one shouldn’t shoot for the moon since it’s not worth the effort, and the other who wants to shoot for the moon, and bring voters along with him to support his goals.
President Obama has tried incrementalism, and instead, we have lost far more ground on the progressive agenda from his pre-compromising, capitulating, and bargaining from the center-right with Republicans. Voters are tired of that, and they are looking for actual change and leadership on their priorities.
It’s time to stop repeating the same steps that lead to madness, and take on a different approach for once, where we increase civic participation in our legislative process.