Bernie Bombs in NYDN Editorial Meeting, Reveals Just How Substance-Free His Campaign Is

[Alfresco]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-bombs-in-nydn-editorial-meeting-reveals-just-how-substance-free-his-campaign-is/

All in all, a simply pitiful performance from Sanders. It’s hard to read the entire thing and not agree with former Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer‘s take: “The transcript of Sanders’ meeting with the Daily News Ed Board is almost as damning as Trump’s with the WaPo.” But at least Trump was in hostile territory; Sanders was talking to a liberal tabloid.

It’s possible Bernie just had an off-day, that he actually knows all the answers to those very basic questions he was asked. But it seems much more likely that the reason he couldn’t answer those questions were because he lacks the seriousness and savvy one expects from a presidential candidate. I’m sure if you asked Sanders himself what went wrong, he’d give the same answer he gave for an hour straight: I don’t know.

[djean111]

1. Have not read it yet.

Still not voting for a Third Way Neocon Hawk. Not voting for war and fracking and the TPP, just to name a few things.

[Gothmog]

2. How Much Does Bernie Sanders Know About Policy?

Sanders is not clear on policy. He is good at sound bytes but cannot explain how to be break up the big banks
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/bernie-sanderss-rough-ride-with-the-daily-news/476919/

It’s striking that there hasn’t been more coverage of Sanders’s policy ideas so far during the campaign, even at this late date, with most of the primary season concluded. He’s even acquired a reputation as something of a wonk, the kind of guy who eschews soaring rhetoric for dry nuts and bolts on the stump—and gets people to love him anyway. The gaps uncovered by the Daily News are not just about pragmatism. (There have, of course, been plenty of accusations, not least from Hillary Clinton’s campaign, that Sanders is offering a deeply unrealistic program. He tends to answer that they fail to grasp that he is building a political revolution.) The question here is not how Sanders would enact policies, but what those policies would be. If the Sanders campaign has shied away from deep dives into policy, this interview might be why: The candidate reveals himself as a far defter diagnostician than clinician.

The most glaring example came early in the encounter, during a discussion of the problem of “too big to fail” banks. There is disagreement among economists on the left over how important, if at all, it is to break up large financial institutions. The board granted Sanders’s argument and asked him how he’d do it, producing an excruciating cat-and-mouse game:

Daily News: Okay. Well, let's assume that you're correct on that point. How do you go about doing it?

Sanders: How you go about doing it is having legislation passed, or giving the authority to the secretary of treasury to determine, under Dodd-Frank, that these banks are a danger to the economy over the problem of too-big-to-fail.

Daily News: But do you think that the Fed, now, has that authority?

Sanders: Well, I don't know if the Fed has it. But I think the administration can have it.

Daily News: How? How does a President turn to JPMorgan Chase, or have the Treasury turn to any of those banks and say, "Now you must do X, Y and Z?"

Sanders: Well, you do have authority under the Dodd-Frank legislation to do that, make that determination.

Daily News: You do, just by Federal Reserve fiat, you do?

Sanders: Yeah. Well, I believe you do.

The conversation detoured sideways a bit, as the board asked about what would happen to employees and investors in big banks and Sanders said, not unfairly, that it wasn’t his problem. But then it was back to how to break up the banks, and Sanders still couldn’t offer a coherent answer:

Daily News: Well, it does depend on how you do it, I believe. And, I'm a little bit confused because just a few minutes ago you said the U.S. President would have authority to order...

Sanders: No, I did not say we would order. I did not say that we would order. The President is not a dictator.

Daily News: Okay. You would then leave it to JPMorgan Chase or the others to figure out how to break it, themselves up. I'm not quite...

Sanders: You would determine is that, if a bank is too big to fail, it is too big to exist. And then you have the secretary of treasury and some people who know a lot about this, making that determination. If the determination is that Goldman Sachs or JPMorgan Chase is too big to fail, yes, they will be broken up.

Daily News: Okay. You saw, I guess, what happened with Metropolitan Life. There was an attempt to bring them under the financial regulatory scheme, and the court said no. And what does that presage for your program?

Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that

.

You do not advocate breaking up the big banks without considering how this will be accomplished

[beaglelover]

3. K&R!!!!!!!!

[closeupready]

4. Yawn.

[SidDithers]

5. DU rec...nt

Sid

[Lucinda]

6. It was painful to read the full transcript of the interview

The economic disparity is his primary issue and he comes across underinformed.

[CalvinballPro]

7. The end of the beginning, the beginning of the end. nt

[KingFlorez]

8. All he can do is talk

He doesn't seem to think outside of talking points that will get applause.

[SheenaR]

9. Serious question

Not a great performance there by the candidate I support.

Didn't most Clinton supporters though say the same thing about then Senator Obama? All speeches and rallies? Very little substance. These were common talking points from the Clinton campaign. I say this will absolute certainty because I worked extensively in the Edwards campaign and watched it happen. (Not to say we weren't saying similar)

[NurseJackie]

10. Wow. That's ... something. Very revealing.

I'm not at all sure what people actually see in him.

[beedle]

11. I think it's the NYDN and Hillary supporters

that are the ones that don't understand.

Of course it is the Administration (through the DoJ as one path, but there are others) that would bring the suit to break up the banks.

If they win the suit, and there's no obvious reason they wouldn't (but I suppose it could be stopped by the corrupt establishment class) then yes, the first step would be to go to the banks and have them come up with a break up plan, which the government would then have to approve (or reject as the case may be.) Then once a plan is created it would be implemented.

It's not like this has happened before.

It's like asking a 'tough on crime' politician how he would prosecute mass murders ... there is a general process, more than one actually, and feigning ignorance when the politician says "the prosecutor has the power to bring charges" does not make the politician wrong, or weak. It makes the person asking the question look stupid.

[JackRiddler]

12. It is unscrupulous to link to the spin and not to the interview.

Do both if you like, but where's your link to the actual thing your "mediaite" propagandist is prevaricating about?

READ Daily News interview with Sanders HERE.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511652764

[SFnomad]

22. The link to the interview is inside the article

It's in the second paragraph, if you had bothered to look.

[JackRiddler]

23. I did bother to look - at the actual interview.

I can make judgments without the doubtful mediation of "mediaite."

(The airs of blogs that think they're fancy!)

[Octafish]

13. Mortimer Zuckerman, the billionaire neocon?

That Mortimer Zuckerman?

[Dragonfli]

17. Yes, It would appear so

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer_Zuckerman

[Octafish]

18. He may be one of The Aspens

The aspens are connected, their roots under ground.

[Dragonfli]

20. LOL, yes indeed, those roots run deep and far and are as one under the surface. /nt

[msongs]

14. wind bernie up and he gives his stump speech...over and over nt

[GreatGazoo]

15. The part where he calls the last 8 years an "awful legacy" was really bad

Oh wait, that was Bill Clinton.

So the part where he feels sorry for young people who don't do their own research so they can find out that Nancy Reagan was secretly spearheading the campaign against AIDS... no..umm..that was Hillary.

[Sheepshank]

16. just one more annoyance

that seems a lot like the Trump Campaign annoyances.

[Jitter65]

19. But the kids will still follow the Pied Piper. Not to worry.

[Cha]

21. We knew it.. now New York knows it.

Mahalo Alfresco~

[oasis]

24. Just when will debate moderators expose Bernie's lack of knowledge?