Who's qualified and who isn't? This chart helps clarify the issue.
I'm probably the last to see this chart, but I think it does a good job of laying out where the candidates for the Democratic nomination stand. It's kind of amazing how Bernie has been so right so often on the big issues while Hillary has been so consistently wrong. There's no reason I can see why this pattern won't continue if either of them becomes president.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/sep/02/11-examples-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-hol/
The fact-checker's guide to viral graphics contrasting Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders
By Will Cabaniss on Wednesday, September 2nd, 2015 at 10:35 a.m.
After a New York Times analysis found Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton voted in synch 93 percent of the time during their two overlapping Senate years, Sanders’ supporters have been pushing back on the notion that the two leading Democratic presidential candidates are largely the same.
Several readers asked us to look at graphics circulating on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit that attempt to differentiate Sanders and Clinton by highlighting differences in their voting records.
We’ve already looked at claims about the two candidates’ donors, which is mentioned in the lower half of this chart in particular. But we wondered if the claims about their voting records and policy positions were correct.
We found that many of the chart’s points are correct, though some either fail to capture Clinton’s flip-flops over the years or over-simplified her stance on issues where her public comments are really thin.
more...
= new reply since forum marked as read
UBS is a Swiss bank that is enjoying better days, thanks to the US taxpayer and a number of key US political leaders.
Sen. Clinton Helped UBS—and Then the Bank Funneled Millions to the Clintons.
Hillary Helps a Bank—and Then It Funnels Millions to the Clintons
The Wall Street Journal’s eyebrow-raising story of how the presidential candidate and her husband accepted cash from UBS without any regard for the appearance of impropriety that it created.
by CONOR FRIEDERSDORF, The Atlantic, JUL 31, 2015
The Swiss bank UBS is one of the biggest, most powerful financial institutions in the world. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton intervened to help it out with the IRS. And after that, the Swiss bank paid Bill Clinton $1.5 million for speaking gigs. The Wall Street Journal reported all that and more Thursday in an article that highlights huge conflicts of interest that the Clintons have created in the recent past.
The piece begins by detailing how Clinton helped the global bank.
“A few weeks after Hillary Clinton was sworn in as secretary of state in early 2009, she was summoned to Geneva by her Swiss counterpart to discuss an urgent matter. The Internal Revenue Service was suing UBS AG to get the identities of Americans with secret accounts,” the newspaper reports. “If the case proceeded, Switzerland’s largest bank would face an impossible choice: Violate Swiss secrecy laws by handing over the names, or refuse and face criminal charges in U.S. federal court. Within months, Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS ultimately turned over information on 4,450 accounts, a fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS.”
Then reporters James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus lay out how UBS helped the Clintons. “Total donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation grew from less than $60,000 through 2008 to a cumulative total of about $600,000 by the end of 2014, according to the foundation and the bank,” they report. “The bank also joined the Clinton Foundation to launch entrepreneurship and inner-city loan programs, through which it lent $32 million. And it paid former president Bill Clinton $1.5 million to participate in a series of question-and-answer sessions with UBS Wealth Management Chief Executive Bob McCann, making UBS his biggest single corporate source of speech income disclosed since he left the White House.”
The article adds that “there is no evidence of any link between Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the case and the bank’s donations to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, or its hiring of Mr. Clinton.” Maybe it’s all a mere coincidence, and when UBS agreed to pay Bill Clinton $1.5 million the relevant decision-maker wasn’t even aware of the vast sum his wife may have saved the bank or the power that she will potentially wield after the 2016 presidential election.
SNIP...
As McClatchy noted last month in a more broadly focused article that also mentions UBS, “Ten of the world’s biggest financial institutions––including UBS, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs––have hired Bill Clinton numerous times since 2004 to speak for fees totaling more than $6.4 million. Hillary Clinton also has accepted speaking fees from at least one bank. And along with an 11th bank, the French giant BNP Paribas, the financial goliaths also donated as much as $24.9 million to the Clinton Foundation––the family’s global charity set up to tackle causes from the AIDS epidemic in Africa to climate change.”
CONTINUED...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bankand-then-it-pays-bill-15-million-in-speaking-fees/400067/
About UBS Wealth Management
It's Buy Partisan
After his exit from the US Senate, Phil Gramm found a job at Swiss bank UBS as vice chairman. He later brought on former President Bill Clinton. What a coincidence, they are the two key figures in repealing Glass-Steagal. Since the New Deal it was the financial regulation that protected the US taxpayer from the Wall Street casino. Oh well, what's a $16 trillion bailout among friends?
It's a Buy-Partisan Who's Who:
President William J. Clinton
President George W. Bush Heh heh heh.
Robert J. McCann
James Carville
John V. Miller
Paula D. Polito
Anthony Roth
Mike Ryan
John Savercool
SOURCE: http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html
Some of why DUers and ALL voters should care about Phil Gramm.
A chart can't put in all the details, nor list all the issues where there are difference. For the above example, it might have room for:
Hillary: Friendly with Phil Gramm and his work at UBS.
Bernie: Not Friendly with Phil Gramm and his work at UBS.
can even legally coordinate with it. Or so her PAC claims.
Again, this was gone thru months ago on this board.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128067911
Given your transparency page, I will not expect an apology, though I am certainly owed one. 
My transparency page only shows that their are a ridiculous amount of racist assholes on DU.
Then again, your transparency page, with its eleven hides, many of them as crass and/or false as your post 49 to me, speaks volumes all on its own.
essay at link:
http://michaelmoore.com/MyEndorsementOfBernie/
