February 12, 2016

Hillary Clinton delivers a "low blow" to Bernie Sanders.



"Low blow" is his term.

ADDED: Here's the text of that clip:

CLINTON: [Y]ou know, today Senator Sanders said that President Obama failed the presidential leadership test. And this is not the first time that he has criticized President Obama. In the past he has called him weak. He has called him a disappointment. He wrote a forward for a book that basically argued voters should have buyers' remorse when it comes to President Obama's leadership and legacy. And I just couldn't agree -- disagree more with those kinds of comments. You know, from my perspective, maybe because I understand what President Obama inherited, not only the worst financial crisis but the antipathy of the Republicans in Congress, I don't think he gets the credit he deserves for being a president who got us out of that, put us on firm ground, and has sent us into the future. And it is a -- the kind of criticism that we've heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans. I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama.

SANDERS: That is... Madam Secretary, that is a low blow. I have worked with President Obama for the last seven years. When President Obama came into office we were losing 800,000 jobs a month, 800,000 jobs a month. We had a $1.4 trillion deficit. And the world's financial system is on the verge of collapse. As a result of his efforts and the efforts of Joe Biden against unprecedented, I was there in the Senate, unprecedented Republican obstructionism, we have made enormous progress. But you know what? Last I heard we lived in a democratic society. Last I heard, a United States senator had the right to disagree with the president, including a president who has done such an extraordinary job. So I have voiced criticisms. You're right. Maybe you haven't. I have. But I think to suggest that I have voiced criticism, this blurb that you talk about, you know what the blurb said? The blurb said that the next president of the United States has got to be aggressive in bringing people into the political process. That's what I said. That is what I believe.President Obama and I are friends. As you know, he came to Vermont to campaign for me when he was a senator. I have worked for his re-election. His first election and his re-election.  But I think it is really unfair to suggest that I have not been supportive of the president. I have been a strong ally with him on virtually every issue. Do senators have the right to disagree with the president? Have you ever disagreed with a president? I suspect you may have.

CLINTON: You know, Senator, what I am concerned about, is not disagreement on issues, saying that this is what I would rather do, I don't agree with the president on that, calling the president weak, calling him a disappointment, calling several times that he should have a primary opponent when he ran for re-election in 2012, you know, I think that goes further than saying we have our disagreements. As a senator, yes, I was a senator. I understand we can disagree on the path forward. But those kinds of personal assessments and charges are ones that I find particularly troubling.

IFILL: Senator, if you would like respond to -- you may respond to that but it is time for closing statements and you can use your time for closing statements to do that.

SANDERS: Well, one of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.
ADDED: I felt motivated to put that through a "readability score" calculator. There just seemed to be a distinctively different style of expression that I thought would show up. The text of Hillary's spoken word is above the 11th grade level. Sanders is just under the 7th grade level.

Here's a post of mine from October 2008, about a debate between Obama McCain. Obama spoke at the 9th grade level and McCain at the 7th grade level. And in the VP debate, Biden was at 7.8 and Palin at 9.5. At the time, I said:
Now, of course, speaking is different from writing. You edit writing, and you get to think about whether you want to be expansive and sesquipedalian or whether you want to adhere to Strunk & White rules like "Omit needless words" and "Avoid fancy words." Speaking is harder to control. You may find yourself babbling or losing your place and wondering how am I ever going to bring this sentence in for a landing, and you don't get to go back and break it up into separate sentences and cut the filler. So the seemingly higher level of speech that tests at a higher level does not necessarily represent higher brain power. Nor can we say that the man speaking at the lower level has a lower capacity for complex thoughts. He may be applying a fine intelligence to composing his sentences well.
I think if you have a good emotional connection with people either high or low can work. If you have a bad emotional connection, both high and low fail, but for different reasons.

But 7th grade is not a very low level for political speech. Apparently, Trump goes down to the 4th grade level:
The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls....

Mike Huckabee and Jim Gilmore, who are struggling in the polls, are both spinning sentences above a 10th-grade level, according to the algorithm. Ben Carson, who has surged and maintained a second-place standing in the polls, communicates with voters at a sixth-grade level — despite a medical degree and career as a brain surgeon.

Among Democrats, Hillary Clinton’s speeches are just right for eighth-graders; Bernie Sanders’s strong critiques of Wall Street and American capitalism are aimed higher, at the 10th grade.
I'm quoting an article in the Boston Globe from last October, which finds an explanation for Bernie's 10th grade level speech. I wonder how they'd react to Bernie now being down at 7th grade and Hillary all the way up to 11th grade. You can explain anything, of course. Once you know what happened, you can say why. It doesn't have to be true. What happened happened.

The previous 4 sentences are written below the 4th grade level, by the way.
By every criteria in the algorithm, Trump is speaking at the lowest level. He used fewer characters per word in his announcement speech, fewer syllables per word, and his sentences were shorter than all other candidates.
His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance....

48 comments:

Big Mike said...

Well, one of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.

What a brilliant riposte!

Unknown said...

Sanders is much more direct. Clinton uses too many big words.

jaydub said...

Yeah, there was blowing going on there, but I think Obama was the one getting blown by both of them.

Shouting Thomas said...

What's the difference between this kind of dithering and your endless dithering over the various schisms of the idiot religion of feminism?

The one thing you can't seem to do, in all your various attempts to fix the "sex negative," "man hating" aspects is to admit that you have made a lifelong mistake and the whole idiot religion is a pile of shit.

Same fucking idiot process.

And, your dithering arises from the same source. Obama is a black, a sanctified minority. Your dithering over feminism represents your loathsome, greedy and completely unjustified attempt to crown yourself as a pseudo-black.

You're just as incapable of letting go of the bullshit as these two morons.

dwick said...

"...calling the president weak, calling him a disappointment, calling several times that he should have a primary opponent when he ran for re-election in 2012, you know, I think that goes further than saying we have our disagreements. As a senator, yes, I was a senator. I understand we can disagree on the path forward. But those kinds of personal assessments and charges are ones that I find particularly troubling.

Well, we know Hillary has always had an aversion to the truth...

Brando said...

He nailed her on that one. She's trying to tie herself to Obama (not a smart move for the general election) but everyone remembers their bitter (as far as Democratic races go) fight eight years ago. Sanders' campaign is much more reminiscent of Obamas than Hillarys was, and she's making unconvincing attempts to tie in to Obama, obviously to pander for black votes.

David Begley said...

Defend OUR President at all costs. He's done a great job for America.

That was a poll-tested attack.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

James Taranto just read "Hillary delivers blow" and one section of his next Best of the Web is done already.

No fair comparing me to a Republican! They're barely human, low blow, low blow!

Keep huggin' Barack real tight, Hillary, that'll save you--or at least make sure you don't see an indictment any time soon.

Bay Area Guy said...

It's very Seinfeld-esque - a debate about nothing.

These 2 leftist clowns clowns are clueless and dangerous

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Remind me, Madam Secretary, what was it your husband said about candidate Obama?

I know its tempting to pander, Hillary, I know you see the same polling data I do, but I want this campaign to be about ideas and not about name calling. I have had my disagreements with President Obama just as you have, but I have consistently supported a Progressive agenda and when President Obama didn't pursue that agenda strongly enough I was not afraid to hold him accountable. I don't apologize for my dedication to those ideals because I think they're what's best for our country. If you want to try and spin my consistent hard work for the American people as something I should be ashamed of I guess you can try, but I'm proud of what I've stood for and I'm proud to be the candidate Progressives are supporting today.

Henry said...

Obama inherited the Tampa Bay Rays as World Series Champions. If it wasn't for him, baseball would have collapsed.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

calling several times that he should have a primary opponent when he ran for re-election in 2012

That's right, Mrs. Clinton, I did say President Obama should have a primary opponent in 2012 and I think it's a good thing when politicians have to answer to their party and the American people. I strongly believe in accountability, Hillary, and when a Progressive runs against a Democrat in the primary and makes that incumbent explain how he'll pursue a Progressive agenda I think that's good for the nation. Accountability matters to me, Hillary, and if it doesn't matter as much to you then that's just a fundamental difference between us and the voters will have to decide whether it matters to them.

Limited blogger said...

Will future Democrats try to be seen as 'Obama-esque', as Republicans aspire to be seen as an heir to Reagan?

Jupiter said...

While I was listening to Hillary Clinton, Bernie definitely had my vote. Then he went and opened his big mouth.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

You can explain anything, of course. Once you know what happened, you can say why. It doesn't have to be true. What happened happened.

This is how I feel about Scott Adams' blogging on Trump.

MaxedOutMama said...

The old man is surprisingly good on his feet!!! I cheered at that comeback!

I can't help but like him, even as I recognize the failures of his math. But I do like him and I do respect his ethical focus.

Brando - this is about the black vote. Blacks are very unlikely to vote for Sanders if they believe Sanders is "against" the black president. Hillary is playing the race card here. I am sure her campaign is getting people to go around and talk about Sanders being Jewish on the ground in the southern states.


Humperdink said...

Nina Burleigh was unavailable for comment.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

When President Obama came into office we ...had a $1.4 trillion deficit.

Bullshit that has been repeatedly debunked. Over $200 Billion of that was the stimulus and cash 4 clunkers, both of which were entirely on President Obama's watch. Also, some of the appropriation bills were tied up in negotiations, and not signed into law until Obama took office. And while President Obama inherited TARP spending from Bush, Senator Obama voted for it, and encouraged Bush to sign it.

( Not to mention that TARP is really screwy to count toward the deficit. Most of the money 'spent' on TARP was paid back, with interest, in later years. This increased the deficit in 2009 and decreased it in later years. If you want to blame Bush for the TARP portion of increasing the deficit then you must credit him with the deficit reduction it caused as it was paid back. )

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

MaxedOutMama said... I am sure her campaign is getting people to go around and talk about Sanders being Jewish on the ground in the southern states.
If so they're forgetting Chris Rock's classic explanation that black people don't have Jewish people...

Laslo Spatula said...

Now if Huma delivered a 'low blow' there wouldn't be so much complaining.

Because most people would rather get a blow-job from Huma than from Hillary.

That includes most women too, I think.

Because every woman wishes she could get a blow-job, just once, and then is mad at God and Men because she is unequipped.

Also.

I have noticed something about Huma's face: in profile shots she looks hot, kinda exotic. Straight from the front she looks middling, a little too gaunt and not-quite-there, beauty-wise.

So if you were to have dinner with Huma sit to her side, rather than across the table from her.

If you were to have sex with her I bet the back of her head looks nice.

I am Laslo.

MrCharlie2 said...

Does Hillary have two sets of eyebrows?

Sanders comes off better, for me, in that exchange. He is honest and direct, what ever you think of his positions.

Meade said...

@ShoutingThomas,
Please use the same level of sensitivity, civility, and decorum here as you do on your own blog. Thanks.

MrCharlie2 said...

And the disdain in voice when she says "primary opponent", striking. Life has obviously been unfair to Hillary.

jr565 said...

To get a more accurate representation about the economy look to Sanders criticisms. He's, in fact running, against Obama's record. Obama was the steward over economy for the last 7 years. Why is there so much economic inequality? why are wages so low? why is REAL unemployment so high?
Because Obama's focus was never to address these issues. His stimulus plan never actually addressed these issues. Instead he pushed liberal agendas which don't really provide jobs.

its good that Sanders is running, if only to highlight Obama's actual failings.

coupe said...

Debt per Administration
Johnson - 42 billion, 13% increase
Nixon - 121 billion, 34% increase
Ford - 224 billion, 47% increase
Carter, 299 billion, 43% increase
Reagan - 1.9 trillion, 186% increase
Bush 1 - 1.6 trillion, 54% increase
Clinton - 1.4 trillion, 32% increase
Bush 2 - 5.9 trillion, 101% increase
Obama - 6.2 trillion, 53% increase

Unfunded liabilities (Congress no longer publishes this) is estimated at 300 trillion.

Dude1394 said...

She is trying so hard to call him a racist that she almost kills herself. It wasn't policy, it was personal and he is a black guy so...racist.

Humperdink said...

@Meade. I don't get it either.

Shouting Thomas said...

Please use the same level of sensitivity, civility, and decorum here as you do on your own blog. Thanks.

You could not have directed your wife to a post in my weblog more instructive in reference to my comment.

I suspect that the reason she's stuck with a hair shirt wearing scoundrel like you is precisely her lifelong pretense that she is an honorary black because she has a vagina.

Read my bit, prof.

You've been riding this hideous, greedy pretense that you've got a bitch for what... 45 years? It's damned shameful.

Shouting Thomas said...

You can also see within Meade's response the bizarre redirection of chivalry in stupid, weak men that keeps the idiot religion of feminism going.

It's not exactly an accident that the prof is married to a man who's wearing the hair shirt on behalf of other white men, is it?

coupe said...

We have 78 million baby boomers who, when fully retired in 2025, will collect benefits from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that, on average, will exceed per-capita GDP.

The annual costs of these entitlements will total about $4 trillion in today’s dollars.

“Something that can’t go on, will stop. See Greece.” - Herb Stein, Economist

The IMF has effectively pronounced the U.S. bankrupt. Section 6 of the July 2010 Selected Issues Paper says: “The U.S. fiscal gap associated with today’s federal fiscal policy is huge for plausible discount rates. Closing the fiscal gap requires a permanent annual fiscal adjustment equal to about 14 percent of U.S. GDP.”

That's 2.4 trillion each year. If that isn't paid, then you stick it on the end.

So the next administration will need to cut the budget 2.4 trillion, just to stay bankrupt, and not increase the problem. We need to cut the budget 4 trillion for the next 4 years (16 trillion) to keep out of default.

This means that baby boomers should all be buying a pistol, because when your Social Security checks stop coming and you can't get into a hospital, then you are going to have to check out.

Tom said...

I was I in the car listening to the debate. I'm not a fan of either candidate's policies (except sanders on criminal justice reform). Listen to the debate, I found Sanders far more endearing and human than I did Clinton. Sanders dreams big and we do wonder if any of that can actually happen. Clinton dreams small but claims she can make those small things happen. I doubt either can get what they want done so I'll go with the one who dreams big.

gspencer said...

Had shades of Bentson's "You're no JFK" moment.

Curious George said...

Hey, finally a google hit for clinton + blow that isn't about Bill.

Gusty Winds said...

I found Sanders far more endearing and human than I did Clinton.

I agree. She is just completely fake and disingenuous. She will not be President.

It's like nails on a chalkboard every time she opens her mouth.

Skeptical Voter said...

Ah heck. I hope the two of them take turns kicking each other in the privates. You go Girl~! Attaboy Bernie! A pox on both their houses.

Gahrie said...

Obama - 6.2 trillion, 53% increase

Obama took office on January 20, 2009. In January 2009, the national debt was 10.6 trillion dollars.

As of January 2016, the national debt was 19 trillion dollars. That's 8.4 trillion added, and by the time he leaves office it will be over 20 trillion dollars.

Obama will have added more money to our debt than all of the other presidents combined by the time he leaves office.

EMD said...

"Had shades of Bentsen's "You're no JFK" moment."

Quayle's comeback should've been: "You're right, I am faithful to my wife."

mikeski said...

I don't think he gets the credit he deserves for being a president who got us out of that, put us on firm ground, and has sent us into the future.

Twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!

coupe said...

Obama will have added more money to our debt than all of the other presidents combined by the time he leaves office.

No, I think it will be about 120%, which is more than Bush 2, but less than Reagan.

It's still a big number, and he has nothing to show for it. Everyone's still broke and bleeding. Except government wages.

Gahrie said...

No, I think it will be about 120%

1) 120% is more than doubling.

2) Again....when Obama took office the debt was $10.6 trillion. Today it is over $19 Trillion. When he leaves office it will be over $20 trillion...which is double what it was when he was sworn in.

3) Reagan used the money to restore America and win the Cold war. Bush 43 and Obama gave it to their cronies and the political establishment.

Mike said...

What the fuck is she wearing!

Anthony said...

I've seen this angle coming from many Lefties on Facebook, that Obama 'inherited' $1.4 trillion in debt. And then they argue that Obama is so great on deficits cuz he got it down to only a few hundred billion!

Never mind that he made that first $1.4 trillion.

And the next $1.3 trillion.

And the next $1.3 trillion.

And the next $1.1 trillion.

I know. Math is haaaaard.

AprilApple said...

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/media

Sammy Finkelman said...

Hillary Clinton mentioned this loyalty to Barack Obama in a bid at the black vote, but berneie Sanders saw this as an attempt at something the hard left - maybe even Communists - loyalty to the party. That's because Hillary didn't formulate it as pro-black, but a pro party line type of thing. Because he didn't see what she was aiming at, he gave a good answer, even when he got pressed to keep it short. Maybe better than if he had had more time.

coupe said...

Mike said...What the fuck is she wearing!

Kevlar

averagejoe said...

Harrumph- Clinton and Sanders arguing over who loves Obama more... The apogee of democrat party identity politics.

Eric said...

She is just completely fake and disingenuous. She will not be President.

It's like nails on a chalkboard every time she opens her mouth.


She won't be president if only people like you and I vote. But she does have a lot of support among various slices and subsections the electorate. If she cobbles enough of them together she'll win.