Thursday, October 15, 2015

Sanders Defends Clinton: Weakness in Strategy?

During the first democratic debate, Hillary Clinton was barraged with questions regarding her scandal using a private email account during her time as Secretary of State.  To the surprise of many, Bernie Sanders jumped in to her defense by stating, "Enough of the emails, let's talk about the real issues facing America."  He thought it was much more important to get to the point of the debate, which is for each candidate to share his or her opinions of the issues.  This was the biggest applause line of the entire debate, yet it wasn't actually about himself or his stances.
Donald Trump later commented on Sanders' choice to side with Clinton by claiming that, "When you're losing that badly you have to go a lot stronger.  [The candidates] had to hit her hard.  They did not do that."  Trump argues that Sanders' strategy should've been to challenge Clinton in any way possible during the debate in order to make himself stand out and have a clear win.  Even if he defended Clinton simply for the purpose of getting back to the important topics, rather than harping on her "damn emails," Trump does not believe that he should have done so because it shows weakness and kindness to his competitor.  

Do you agree that Sanders should not have supported Clinton by defending her about the email scandal?  Does this show weakness in his campaign strategy as Trump believes?
 Does the kindness shown in the democratic debate show kindness and civility or the weakness of the candidates?

Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/democratic-debate-2015-best-moments-clinton-sanders/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/democratic-debate-donald-trump-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton/index.html

9 comments:

maybesarah said...

Trump's candidacy is almost exclusively about being contrarian. It's really, really easy to see why he wouldn't agree with (or perhaps understand) Sanders' method of conducting himself in this debate. In the first Republican debate, Trump was the only candidate on the stage who refused to pledge loyalty to the primary republican candidate. On the other hand, Bernie often was and is seen as an independent, but chooses to represent himself as a Democrat.

That said, I think saying that Bernie "defended" Clinton's email scandal is fallacious. He, as quoted in the original post, encouraged us (both the moderators and the American people) to move past the scandal and onto more pressing issues--the issues the candidates were up there to discuss. It is important that US citizens pay attention to Clinton's email but as we discussed in class, the question felt a bit like a reach for some of the outrageous Trump-y drama that Republican debates invariably have. It's entirely valid for him to insist that we focus on more pressing matters because, ultimately, we're not voting for who has fewer missing emails, but who will represent and serve our country the best.

Steve Irwin (JS) said...

I do not believe Bernie intended to "defend" Clinton and I also dont believe that is what he did. His statement about the "Damn Emails" was merely meant to change the topic and allow him to speak about the issues he felt were important. I actually believe this was a smart move for Sanders and was one of many instances throughout the night where he showed his common sense as a candidate. Its true that the we are all sick and tired of hearing about Hillary's emails, and the other candidates must be as well. Just as Trumps outrageous behavior has been focused on by the media causing the other republicans to receive a lack of press, Clintons email scandal and Benghazi scandal have done the same for the Democratic party and kept the attention away from Sanders and on Clinton. After the statement was made Bernie was able to speak his mind of the "real issues" and garnered massive applause from the audience.

On another note, I do not believe Trumps statements on the matter have any relevancy whatsoever. It is merely just another stunt to receive twitter attention. Sanders was not losing the debate, in fact, many people believe he was winning. Almost every online poll showed that the audience believed Sanders was the clear winner of the debate while the media reported Clinton was. It has been reported that the clintons relationship with some major news networks may have influenced this, but never the less, the media continues to put Hillary in the limelight and shove Bernie to the side.

Anonymous said...

I think that Trump has no business interfering with the choices of other candidates and they shouldn’t even begin to take into consideration what he saying about any of the other candidates or their positions. I disagree and think that Sanders did the right thing by saying enough with the emails because it has nothing important to do with the debate. Trump is wrongfully saying that it shows weakness because he has no authority really to say what is right and what is wrong in terms of social interactions. This statement doesn’t hurt Sanders and nor does it gain popularity for Trump.
The kindness shown in the democratic debate shows the political correctness of the people running and their ability to act civil instead of attacking each other’s scandals, like some of the candidates did.

Justin Time said...

I definitely do not agree with Trump. While I do not think Hillary Clinton should have a free pass on the email issue, I do agree that it should not be an issue for the other candidates to judge. Sanders did the right thing by putting the debate on track. He did not buy into the leading personal questions that CNN asked in the first debate. Instead, he made a bold statement to prove that he cares about the issues that plague the country more than petty personal relationships.
This power play was extremely effective by Sanders. It was an extremely important show of character. To Sanders, unlike Clinton and Trump, the campaign trail is about representing your interests as a politician, not about winning an election based on shock value and sensationalism. After Sanders' statement, all of the candidates were able to express their views in a civil and cooperative manner. No moment summed it up better for me than when after the debate all of the candidates stepped away from their podiums to shake hands with one another.
However, it should not be misconstrued that Hillary's email scandal should be considered a non-issue. The email scandal has the potential to be a felony, and Clinton should definitely have to undergo thorough FBI investigation. It should just not be the job of candidates to give their opinions on such issues when they do not know the FBI's findings on the case yet. Trump's comment shows that he cares more about a candidate seeming strong through his or her attacks on other candidates than whether or not his or her views should reflect the interests of the people of the United States.

El KittyCat said...

Sanders was absolutely justified in attempting to turn attention away from the Clinton email scandal. Although it is important that the truth behind this email scandal come to light, the debate was an opportunity for each of the candidates to evaluate upon their own ideas, not share their opinions regarding another candidate's blunder. Thus, this was a very respectable and dignified attempt by Sanders to redirect the focus of the candidates and the debate hosts back to the real issues. The democratic-socialist candidate is known for his devotion to spending time talking about the real issues, rather than disparaging other candidates. Trump's criticisms mean nothing, as he is simply a belligerent candidate with no filter and no sense of political ethics.
Sanders' blunt statement was not at all a sign of weakness in the Democratic Party, but rather a sign of great strength and civility. Unlike the Republican candidates, who are constantly attacking one another with personal remarks, this debate showed that the Democratic Party candidates are much more united than their GOP counterparts. Instead of continuously spewing insults at one another, the Democratic candidates are capable of uniting behind their common viewpoints, understanding that their overall agenda is much more important than who receives the party nomination.

WillyB said...

Whether or not Sanders' comments were conveyed weakness or not depends on the context within the Democratic and Republican parties. Many people have criticized the Republican candidates for being accusatory and petty during their debates, and while this is true, it doesn't prove them to be inferior human beings by any stretch of the imagination, for two main reasons. First, because of the sheer number of Republican candidates, America's polling votes are spread out across all of them. For this reason, each needs to be distinctive enough to provide something unique and noticeable, which sometimes means accusations of other candidates in order to give a soundbite to television stations. Remember, this is entertainment before politics. Second, Trump has changed the election in such a way that the other candidates are forced to "Fight fire with fire" by also being belligerent and aggressive.
On the other hand, the Democratic strategy is very different. While Sanders is much less pro-establishment than Clinton, frankness is part of his appeal to many people. His views matter less than his desire to cut back on political deception and corruption, so his decision to "get back to the issues" falls right in line with his strategy, not against it.

Stephen said...

Caitlyn, while I was watching the debate, I did not think Sanders intended to defend Clinton with his comments. In fact, I thought he was attempting to resonate with middle-class voters who did not care about Clinton's scandal. Clinton was quick to shake Bernie's hand as if he did her a huge service, but I think his motives were not for the benefit of Clinton. With that being said, I don't think he was weak, but he was in fact trying to make a stand.
Motives aside, it was truly refreshing to see signs of camaraderie between the candidates, in stark juxtaposition to the GOP debate. There was such a degree of respect, that many media outlets are portraying it as "boring" in comparison to the Trump Show (Salon). As an American who has respect for the political system, and takes a major interest in the well-being of his nation, I'm more interested in the policies, and promises of candidates, as opposed to their hot-takes and tweetable moments. I agree with Willy B, that the Republicans have been accusatory, and have attempted to nearly slander fellow candidates on stage. There was none of that in the Democratic debate, and it was a step in the right direction.
Sources:
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/14/trumps_america_vs_hillarys_america_the_most_shocking_contrasts_between_the_democratic_republican_debates/

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

While watching the Democratic debates, I actually thought that it was refreshing to see candidates who were not at each other's throats the entire time. While, of course, this is all a part of politics, I felt that it detracted from the real issues during the GOP debates. Every question seemed to be geared toward getting Trump to attack his fellow candidates. Of course, CNN could have organized their questions this way largely because they wanted the entertainment value, but I thought it made for a controversy-fueled debate. Still, I really think Sanders was defending Clinton more inadvertently than intentionally: "I think the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails.” He said what a lot of people were thinking: Let's focus on the real issues at hand. He wasn't being fluffy about it. As a matter of fact, he sounded frustrated. And, though I appreciated his focus and professionalism here, I will also say that I was personally not won over by Sanders during the debate. As a matter of fact, it felt as though all of the Democratic candidates were dancing around the questions. Of course, Sanders' policies are also very lucid and pretty impractical, but that's a topic for another day. All I know is, I think Trump is terribly misinformed in his thinking that the only way to have political success is by attacking his opponents. I would have to answer Caitlyn's second question positively; I do think that the conduct of the Democratic candidates in the debate was a display of civility as opposed to weakness.

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/the-atlantics-liveblog-of-the-democratic-presidential-debate/410413/