Let’s be clear: Hillary Clinton is not just a more pragmatic insidery version of Bernie Sanders, i.e. a person with the same “ideals”, but a more “realistic” approach to change. The Clintons were two of the most prominent architects of the New Democrat, Third Way, DLC reconstruction of the Democratic Partyin the 90’s. They differ with Sanders not just on political strategy and tactics, but fundamental political philosophy. The Clintons represent the continuation of neoliberalism, while Sanders represents a return to the older, traditional left ideals of an egalitarian and democratic society, where capital is placed firmly under the thumb of the democratic political community.
The neoliberal political revolution of the past forty years has given us a dramatic widening of inequality, an ongoing destruction of the capacity of democratic government, an explosion in the power of plutocratic private capital, and the erosion of solidarity, community and even basic decency in American life. This has happened under both the right neoliberals of the Republican Party and the left neoliberals in the Democratic Party. It’s been 40 years of capital consolidating its power.
It’s not surprising that President Obama supports the continuation of these trends. He and his administration – which was staffed by the same Podesta machine that runs the Clinton campaign – have been firmly part of them.
I’ll add that when neoliberal positions on economics and politics are accompanied by liberal social views many Democrats and (nominal) liberals often find them acceptable. Social liberalism buys a candidate a lot of good will. In contrast, I’d accept a socially-conservative candidate if they’d end the perpetual state of war we’ve been in since 2003, committed to taking action to mitigate climate change and other forms of environmental destruction, and took traditional liberal stands on economic issues. In other words, I’d vote for Pope Francis in a heartbeat – not over Sanders or Warren but pretty much anyone else I think.