I think it'll be great. He's not the kind of person to be shady and call out people, but more so the points. It'll be interesting to see how the established way of things handles it. If we're going by now, it doesn't handle it well; Claire McCaskill and Martin O'Malley have both personally attacked Sanders, often with fucking pitiful results. One is already on the Hillary train and the other is a literally who also running for the democratic nomination.
I saw Bernie Sanders live in Madison tonight.
- Thread starter disastermouse
- Start date
- Status
I think it'll be great. He's not the kind of person to be shady and call out people, but more so the points. It'll be interesting to see how the established way of things handles it. If we're going by now, it doesn't handle it well; Claire McCaskill and Martin O'Malley have both personally attacked Sanders, often with fucking pitiful results. One is already on the Hillary train and the other is a literally who also running for the democratic nomination.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Love. Believe. Bernie's campaign and his life has been about those 2 words. NeoGAF should be proud.
Bernie's got my vote and support in Minnesota. Will be making my first donation to his campaign today. =)
My girlfriend watched the event last night with me and she said "this guy is great" and "I really like what he says about women." She had no clue who he was until I started telling her about him in recent days.
Bernie's got my vote and support in Minnesota. Will be making my first donation to his campaign today. =)
My girlfriend watched the event last night with me and she said "this guy is great" and "I really like what he says about women." She had no clue who he was until I started telling her about him in recent days.
And this is the big problem. The politicians (not even sure the Republicans themselves are responsible for this cause I think this happened more in the 50's) have done a good job of making the public equate socialism with communism. So to anyone uneducated/ignorant (which we have no shortage of), it's as good as the same thing to them.
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
It's also worth noting that everybody realizes the money is behind Hillary.
or maybe some of us want a country and a president that hasn't been bought by big business, yet were the stupid ones not the adults in the country who know whats up and keep putting shitty hypocritcial two faced presidents in office with supporters in the senate/congress or other aspects of the system. Outside of obama in my life time bush and clinton policies led to the problems we saw in the last decade and now.
Like I want to vote on one half of the clintons and the crap she wants to bring. If it wasn't for the fact republicans are literally infinity times worse I wouldn't be voting period.
So bernie supports are blind what labels describes willing ignorant people who vote for causes that is killing the country, besides cowards.
So fucking what? The candidacy should go to the best person, not just who put their time in. If they aren't a good candidate, I don't care how much time they put in. You aren't owed a candidacy just by being their first. You earn it (ideally) by being the one that is right for the country.
Hillary shouldn't get the candidacy just cause she lost it to Obama and many people thought she'd get it last time. That's now how it should work (not saying that's not how it works cause obviously that is what is happening *sigh*).
ErasureAcer
Banned
Which can't be counteracted with a sentence describing what democratic socialism actually is?
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
Half-serious question: Do you live in America or in another country?
Bernie's pretty well liked in the Upstate NY/Vermont/NH area. In his home state, the entire vibe around the cobblestoned Church Street is one of populism - you have Ben and Jerry's on the corner, maple syrup shops, etc. It's like Portland without the pretentiousness. Bernie's a product of this environment. The people here identify with that, more so toward younger audiences.
For those willing to listen. But many have it dead set in their mind even if you tell them that that you're just spouting communist propoganda to them.
Anyways, as for whether to vote for Hillary or not. I'm not excited for her. But the way I look at it is, if some how Bernie Sanders wins the nomination I'll be voting for him. If Hillary wins it (and I'm sorry, I'd be shocked if she doesn't), I'll be voting against the Republicans (basically voting Hillary but for me it would be more a sentiment of at least not the Republicans). Just because she's not going to do a lot of stuff that should be done doesn't mean she's at least not better than the Republicans. And I agree with people voting to make it worse (or not voting and allowing the worst to happen) isn't going to help make it better. It's just going to help make it worse.
I'm sorry, but if Hillary is the nominee and you don't vote for her you're basically saying you don't care if a conservative wins. That is not progressive. If you think a Bush or Walker or Rubio will give you progressive judges think again. You'll get more of Alito and Scalia and Roberts.
Progressive Americans don't seem to understand that the Tea Party movement and republican primaries have completely shifted the political narrative. When you play safe and vote for someone like Hillary Clinton, you are essentially playing into that existing dynamic. You vote for centrist corporatism (Hillary is supported by the biggest financial institutions, there will be no reform) while conservatives vote for ideologues who seem to believe in night-watchman state or some such.
Ok, and when Hillary wins the nomination and you just have her vs. whatever Republican candidate, what do you expect people to do? Just let the even worse candidate win and push the country over to the idealogues entirely? I don't think anyone here is saying Hillary is the ideal choice. Hell, even the one person who does seem to think she should win isn't even saying it's cause she's ideal, just that she is owed. Just that when it comes down to her vs. Republican, she's at least not the Republican.
(not that I wouldn't be ecstatic if Bernie wins the nomination).
Is this some sort of weird perception Bernie supporters are putting out, as if Hillary didn't talk about race, about equal pay, about immigration reform, or about voting rights. Or are those just PR bullet points and not sincere issues?
Bernie's website has these three on his "On the Issues" page: Income and Wealth Inequality, Getting Big Money Out of Politics, Climate Change and Environment. I agree these are important issues. But they are not the only issues. Moreover, they shouldn't be weighed as 'more sincere' over the issues Hillary talk about.
ideologues that wioudl spend the first year in the whtie house shitting over the progress made in the last 8 years.
Affordable healthcare for millions? Bye
Reproductive rights for women? Nope those old white dudes know better than you do women
Gay Marriage? Haha good luck having folks respect those rights.
InfiniteBento
Member
I've read all over how people really love Bernie. Anyone wanna give me a quick run down as to why? What are his policies and etc? How does he differ from Hillary?
I don't know shit about politics but I'm looking to get more involved with it.
I don't know shit about politics but I'm looking to get more involved with it.
Progressives will not lose the senate by such a wide margin. Losing an election does not equate political capitulation if you have principled people on your side. It only takes one person like Ted Cruz to throw a wrench in the works. You should learn that lesson from grassroots conservatives who are willing to fight for that they believe in. That is why I have more respect (political) for some of those right wing activists than lukewarm progressives who are too afraid to push for alternative policies.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Is this the secular version of calling Pres. Obama the anti-Christ?
gutter_trash
Banned
the Tea Party is not a grass roots movement.
the Tea Party were financially backed by the Koche Brothers and other right wing extremists to force the Republicans to veer further right
the myth of the Tea Party being ''grass roots'' is a that, a myth
PumpkinSpice
Banned
The senate's already pretty close to the 60 vote threshold, not to mention any republican president will bring in more Antonin Scalias to your supreme court.
This is what people in their own little media bubbles state to feel good about themselves (the only reason why we lost was these two or three influential billionaires on the other side) but the election results tell another story. Republican voters have ruthlessly voted out many establishment candidates in order to push for their own policy goals. Progressives might want to try a similar approach at least once in their lifetime.
So the answer is to essentially offer political capitulation? Let us vote for someone like Hillary who is completely in the pack pocket of all these largest financial institutions. I actually believe even a populist like Cruz could win against her for that exact reason.
Days like these...
Have a Blessed Day
His voting record over the past so many years. He actually walks the walk instead of just talking the talk. He is not a former corporatist like Clinton claims to be.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
He appeals to specifically populist causes, specifically wealth redistribution. He's not a demagogue like Elizabeth Warren is, but people have basically attached her form of populism onto Bernie Sanders, although in reality there isn't all that much policy disagreement between Sanders and Clinton.
Nothing Bernie says or does is going to actually hurt Hilary's prospects in the general really, people with cooler heads are just tired of the same Ron Paul-supporter memes being repurposed into Bernie Sanders-supporter memes, (e.g. "Sanders can win if all these completely improbable things happen!" or "Real liberal would vote for my candidate if they cared about CHANGE")
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
And if he wins or gets close to winning NH it's, it's going to boost his numbers national.
Bernie is not going to be the nominee and is unelectable. He can fill in over 60,000 people in a stadium and that wont change anything.
Hillary has the money, the infrastructure, the entire Democratic Party publicly and privately behind her, and the best chance to reassemble the Obama Coalition together to win next year. Democrats like to fall in love while Republicans fall in line. Sorry Democrats but this time its best to fall in line. You dont have to now but you will later.
Bernie is not winning a single state. Bill Bradley came close to beating Gore in NH and went on to getting slaughtered everywhere else in the country.
Hillary has the money, the infrastructure, the entire Democratic Party publicly and privately behind her, and the best chance to reassemble the Obama Coalition together to win next year. Democrats like to fall in love while Republicans fall in line. Sorry Democrats but this time its best to fall in line. You dont have to now but you will later.
Bernie is not winning a single state. Bill Bradley came close to beating Gore in NH and went on to getting slaughtered everywhere else in the country.
It's more than that. He has for the last 10+ years called out business for how they effect government and has voted this way his whole career. He is also pro-guns so there's a liberal and conservative appeal present. He has 'told it like it is' for his career that people are now gravitating towards him.
If he makes it past Hillary and puts E.Warren as his VP, then he has a shot. Loooooong shot but still possible.
Why do people keep spreading this FUD about the TPP? Giving fast-track approval just means that Congress can't amend the treaty when it is sent to them to vote on. They can read the finished draft before they vote on it. They can vote against it at that point if they want to.
This thread has a lot of socialists who are mad that America isn't socialist. If your lifelong dream is for the workers of the world to unite, then I guess there really isn't much difference between the candidates, because you exist outside of the political system.
Realistically. No viable candidate wants to lose, and they will likely lose against Clinton. Her support is just too strong this time compared to 2008.
They've looked at the past and current data and realize realistically, they would likely lose.
Biden really really wanted to run, but he isn't. If they thought they had a chance both Warren and Biden probably would have ran.
Good luck beating the Clinton machine.
In 2007/2008 Obama had to make up a 15 point or so deficit against Clinton.
Bernie has to make up a 40+ one.
Clinton was never polling over 50% in 2007/2008.
Clinton is now polling close to 60%. And no "scandal" has changed this.
Obama was one of the most gifted politicians we've had in a generation or more.
Bernie is no Obama.
Obama was also able to match or beat the Clinton $$$$
Bernie is nowhere near that.
Hillary was considered by most to have run a very mismanaged campaign.
Now Hillary has hired many of the Obama people that beat her.
Good fucking luck beating the Clinton machine. Obama BARELY did himself back in 2008 even with all those advantages.
Take a look at these final 2008 numbers.
^ Look at those final numbers. Those are SCARY for anyone that doesn't have Obama's hype or skills. And realize Clinton is in a MUCH stronger position now.
So don't be surprised when the Clinton machine wins the Democratic primary in 2016. They almost did against Obama in 2008.
Days like these...
Have a Blessed Day
I was definitely going to vote for Clinton if she gets the democratic nomination but now I'm not so sure. Maybe we do have to hit rock bottom? Maybe we do have to learn the hard way? Maybe 4 more years of getting fucked over so that the rich and corporations can keep having their tax cuts and subsidies will learn us.
Disclaimer: I'm fully aware that I would be cutting off my nose to spite my face.
Disclaimer: I'm fully aware that I would be cutting off my nose to spite my face.
To put it basically, he has a very European view on politics. It's a stark contrast to lobbied capitalism.
- Lead the world in dealing with climate change
- Wants the young to not suffer from the awful crime of wanting to learn by making public universities and colleges tutition free
- Wants us to join the rest of the developed world with a national healthcare system compared to the inexcusable mess we have today
- I N F A S T R U C T U R E for our crumbling social systems
- Wants to eliminate the "too big to fail" dilemma we have. In his words "if they're too big to fail, they're too big to exist"
These are the points that come to mind at present.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
All of these are impossible goals which have no chance of getting past anyone in the RNC or frankly, anyone in the DNC. Its sort of like voting for the Student Council President candidate who said she'd make sure the cafeteria had pizza every day.
Even European democratic socialists are "neoliberal" by the bitter socialist standards of the OP, considering they give at least implicit support to the current global economic system.
Gnome Scat
Member
OP needs more pics:
That's awesome. Glad to seem him getting so many supporters.
TheUntamedLegend
Member
But it is not just 4 years. The influence of holding office can last decades. We still have Justices on the bench nominated by Ronald Reagan.
If you believe that Ted Cruz could beat Hillary Clinton in a general election, you should stick to analyzing Finnish politics.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Socialism is like an Abrahamic religion. Nice in theory and politicians nod to the ideals for appearance sake, but out the window where the rubber meets the road. Even a socialist US president in office for four years wont change that.
Days like these...
Have a Blessed Day
Call me crazy but maybe just maybe we are ready for a change? Look at what's been going on: Obamacare upheld, same sex marriage legalized, Bernie drafting huge crowds everywhere, Weed being legalized, Nascar disavowing the Cofederate Flag. We are slowly but surely moving to the left.
Earthstrike
Member
It's insane that "supreme court justice nominations" are like one of the most frequently occurring themes in neogaf, yet somehow, you still manage to put forward the idea that a republican and democratic president would be the same.
Of course. By being an American, one should absolutely expect to be exploited and abused at all costs. His views would prevent that, thus it won't happen here. Instead, we are seeing and will continue to see measures that do more harm than good, and more of that isn't being hidden even in the veil of "it'll be good for you" anymore.
I wish to be surprised for I find Sanders' views very humane and honest, for they're absolutely grounded in reality. The problem? We don't live in a human or honest society, let alone a reality close to the facts, but instead a profoundly sick one. So long as money is seen as objective wealth above all, all logic and reason is doomed. After all, dogma cannot stand to logic and reason, and thus we act in ways that do not add up or make sense for living, breathing beings.
I imagine this country will also fight and struggle to adapt a guaranteed income model, which a large portion of the world is trying now, not only to end poverty but technological unemployment. If America has the worst health care in the developed world by far, I expect the exact same "quality" when it comes to the second largest social problem this century. We'll find a way to ruin that, too.
It's a shame to see a country like this is really the numero uno of the world. What a ways we have to go as a society..
But you already have socialism with every public service. Because of corruption, it's now mostly geared toward corporate welfare.
The great infrastructure built in more representative times for US socialism is not being maintained or improved like it could be. A better country for all, or slightly more immediate profit for some.
The thing is that most people don't follow politics beyond the debates and a few ads. There are probably around 40% on each side who are completely entrenched while others might be convinced by some random soundbites and what have you.
A good positive (while also aggressive) campaign is possible regardless how degenerate or ignorant the nominee is at this point in time. Bush was able to win twice with his "compassionate conservative" messaging. It is unlikely that any republican will win, given how the different states are aligned, but it would be foolish to completely discount some of those populist loons. A lot can happen in one year. The general election is all about presentation. To most people past political events are rather meaningless unless they are packaged well into attack ads, because most citizens are not aware of all the intricacies. All this talk about Supreme Court nominations and what have you, probably a few hundred thousand people across party lines even care about that stuff if even that.
This is also the reason why any progressive candidate can win but for some reason people go on with this "he is not a viable candidate" - lunacy. The reality is that 40-45% will vote for her/him regardless and the less is all about grassroots campaigning, media presentation and makeup.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
There's basically no basis for this claim.
Supporters of maverick candidates always believe their guy is going to destroy in the debates, except they frequently don't because shooting from the hip all the time is usually a terrible idea in American politics. Debates are moderated. Even assuming, for the sake of argument, Sanders really showed up with a huge boner for wealth redistribution, he's not going to just get the chance to start talking about it because he wants to. Sanders and Clinton agree on virtually every major policy issue.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
I think the public wants enough social services to underwrite individualism in every other facet of life, eg living alone, not having kids to support us in old age, working as an independent contractor, etc. Obamacare serves that interest, which is why repeal will never happen now.
Even Europe is moving closer to neoliberalism due to bond markets. Bernie's success is based on nostalgia and idealism. He's 75 years too late.
I'm not even talking about his policy positions. The Republican establishment HATES him, and not just because he's a "maverick." He's pulled stupid stunts with no hope of success that have caused the entire party to look bad. Regardless of how successful you believe the Tea Party has been in the past decade, you still need your party's elites to at least be able to stomach your presence to win a presidential election.
Sirpopopop
Member
More of the same is better than GOP sponsored change.
I'd rather have a president who at least acknowledges that climate change is real, Obamacare is better for the country than nothing at all, we need to have a better energy policy, social issues, etc. than one who isn't.
Plus, Supreme Court Justices.
However, let's be honest, your mind isn't going to change. Someone made the same list of points I made earlier in the thread, but much more succinctly. You just ignored it to focus on pet issues. I'm posting this for people here other than you.
Pretty much this, if the Bernie train fails Hillary will be the next best option.
Or really whoever wins the Democratic nomination, only Republican I'd consider maybe is Chris Christie.
Sirpopopop
Member
PhoenixDark
Banned
Realistically. No viable candidate wants to lose, and they will likely lose against Clinton. Her support is just too strong this time compared to 2008.
They've looked at the past and current data and realize realistically, they would likely lose.
Biden really really wanted to run, but he isn't. If they thought they had a chance both Warren and Biden probably would have ran.
Good luck beating the Clinton machine.
In 2007/2008 Obama had to make up a 15 point or so deficit against Clinton.
Bernie has to make up a 40+ one.
Clinton was never polling over 50% in 2007/2008.
Clinton is now polling close to 60%. And no "scandal" has changed this.
Obama was one of the most gifted politicians we've had in a generation or more.
Bernie is no Obama.
Obama was also able to match or beat the Clinton $$$$
Bernie is nowhere near that.
Hillary was considered by most to have run a very mismanaged campaign.
Now Hillary has hired many of the Obama people that beat her.
Good fucking luck beating the Clinton machine. Obama BARELY did himself back in 2008 even with all those advantages.
Take a look at these final 2008 numbers.
^ Look at those final numbers. Those are SCARY for anyone that doesn't have Obama's hype or skills. And realize Clinton is in a MUCH stronger position now.
So don't be surprised when the Clinton machine wins the Democratic primary in 2016. They almost did against Obama in 2008.
I'd argue it wasn't that close. Obama ran a campaign entirely based on winning delegates, which is how you win a primary. Hillary's team seemed almost oblivious to how the process worked and instead focused a lot of attention on big states without many delegates, essentially running up the popular vote score.
Obama had 53% of the delegates, and was on pace to win months in advance due to his team's mastery of the primary/caucus rules. It was like a basketball game where a team is down 30 going into the 4th quarter; she racked up more points in the 4th quarter but it ultimately wasn't enough.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked