Rachel Maddow Wonders if Hillary 'Too Far to the Right'

Only in the eyes of a radical progressive would Hillary be "far to the right."

Only in the eyes of a radical progressive would Democrat contender Hillary Clinton be considered "far to the right."

During Thursday's presidential debate, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow pondered this very notion when asking the candidate questions about her political positions. 

Maddow invoked Bernie Sanders' recent attacks on Clinton for not being "progressive enough" to be the Democrat nominee and asked Clinton if she is "too far to the right of the Democratic Party to be the party's standard bearer."

Newsbusters provides the clip and transcript: 

RACHEL MADDOW: Secretary Clinton, senator Sanders is campaigning against you now, at this point in the campaign basically arguing that you are not progressive enough to be the Democratic nominee. He's said if you voted for the Iraq War, if in favor of the death penalty, if you wobbled on things like the Keystone Pipeline or TPP, if you said single-payer health care could never happen then you're too far to the right of the Democratic Party to be the party's standard bearer. Given those policy positions, why should liberal Democrats support you and not Senator Sanders? 

HILLARY CLINTON: I am a progressive who gets things done. The root of that word, progressive, is progress. I've heard Senator Sanders comments and it's really caused me to wonder who's left in the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Under his definition, President Obama is not progressive because he took donations from wall Street. Vice President Biden is not progressive because she supported keystone. Senator Saheen is not progressive because she supports the trade pact. Even the late, great Senator Paul Wellstone would not fit this definition because he voted for DOMA. You know, we have differences, and, honestly, I think we should be talk about what we want to do for the country, but if we're going to get into labels, I don't think it was particularly progressive to vote against the Brady bill five times. I don't think it was progressive to give gun makers immunity. I don't think it was progressive to vote against Ted Kennedy's immigration reform. So, we can go back and forth like there, but the fact is most people watching tonight want to know what we've done and what we will do. That's why I'm laying out a specific agenda that will make more progress, get more jobs with rising income, get us to universal health care coverage, get us to universal pre-k, paid family leave, and the other elements of what I think that will build a strong economy and ensure Americans will keep making progress. That's what I'm offering and that's what I will do as president. 

The truth is that the Democrat Party has shifted further to the Left full-stop. Were he running today, JFK himself would not have even secured the nomination. But while Hillary Clinton is not a Barack Obama in terms of being a Marxist-ideologue, she is definitely the "radical" half of the Bill and Hillary duo. The fact that she is not considered progressive enough for Democrats only shows just how far the pendulum has swung for the party.