-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Trump v. Bernie Debate
- Thread starter oatmeal
- Start date
- Status
SayItWithMe
Neo Member
LMAO it cites plenty of sites you would say as a good source...
If he's that pure, that means he never actually did that and that's why he's better than her.
if he's not then he's selling you a brand new bridge like his concern for minorities and the poorest right to leave a decent life.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
The GOP policy as of this moment is kill their families, bring back torture, bomb the shit out of them or until the sand glows, and give more nations nuclear weapons. That's what the current GOP policy is, so how is she representative of that?
She's been anti-gay marriage her entire political career up until recently for one. Two, her voting record and support of military action aligns directly with the GOP.
Clockwork5
Member
They were going to be built somewhere, why is Bernie at fault for brining incredibly good jobs to the state of VT?
I don't get this. Would you prefer she STILL be anti-gay marriage?
Sanders was too like pretty much the whole country so yeah.
If his goal is going to extend beyond himself maybe he needs to do something about support during local elections.
And that STILL won't give him the nomination.
D
Deleted member 80556
Unconfirmed Member
Do people still ignore the fact that Clinton was one of the more liberal senators of her time, and that her and Sanders agree on most topics?
Why is she centre-right politician again?
EDIT: Do people also ignore that politicians like Obama were against gay marriage because it was politically favorable for them?
Why is she centre-right politician again?
EDIT: Do people also ignore that politicians like Obama were against gay marriage because it was politically favorable for them?
Nice goal posts, guess he isn't against the war machine after all. As long as it brings jobs!
Because he rails against the military industrial complex and then courts them to go to his state to set up shop?!?
Guess directly profiteering from the US war machine is ok if you've voted against the Iraq war (and only the Iraq war)
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Cause it helps justify not voting or writing in Sanders.
SayItWithMe
Neo Member
I see you didnt read a thing...Here ill help.
https://archives.nbclearn.com/portal/site/k-12/flatview?cuecard=4136
MR. RUSSERT: But the former president, four years ago, laid out very specifically what he saw as the threat from Saddam Hussein. Let's listen:
(Videotape, February 17, 1998):
PRES. CLINTON: What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction?
Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: That was four years ago.
SEN. CLINTON: That's right. And I agreed then with President Clinton. I agree with President Bush's emphasis on this issue. And, you know, you remember sometimes a president has to do what he thinks is right no matter what anyone else says. In fact, when President Clinton went into Kosovo, he didn't have Security Council authorization. Tried to get it. Did not get it. Decided it was the right thing to do. But he had NATO. He had the NATO allies willing to support him. So what President Bush is now doing is exactly what should be doing. He's got to bring about at least greater acceptance among our key allies and hopefully among the Security Council. But at the end of the day, look, the United States and especially our president, who's put into the position of having to shoulder that awful responsibility, has to do what he believes is in the best interest of our country.
Clockwork5
Member
Some politicians don't let their ideological predispositions stand in the way of the welfare of the people they represent.
Livingskeletons
If I pulled that off, would you die?
I'd never thought the Democrats would be this divisive this election.
He's a hypocrite. Got it.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
You know you're not as doing as well in this discussion as you think you are. I said that in 2016, the GOP policy is what I stated as demonstrated by their two leading nominees (Trump and Cruz). Given those policies, how is she a Republican?
So you're saying that sometimes it's ok to be pragmatic?
So it's ok if Clinton make trade deals that brings markets to US products?
And here I thought Bernie was a man of his convictions. To quote now famous words: "Sad!"
I guess politicians will continue to be politicians.
Mael put it in much better works than I.
Clockwork5
Member
Sure, but what trade deals? If you don't mind me asking. I'm honestly not sure what you are referring to.
Good link. Thanks.
SayItWithMe
Neo Member
Sigh...just showing you her foreign policy and how she thinks...im done.
My wife always told me dont talk politics and religion....I need to listen to her more often.
Hasn't her stanc eon gay marriage pretty directly mirrored the democratic party's? She went from the same shift of supporting civil unions to marriage that most of the party did in the 00s to the 10s.
You realize that you essentially just said he's for sale, right?
Clockwork5
Member
He didn't get any money from having airplanes built in his state. But the people he represents sure benefited from the deal.
Isn't it good that she changed her position on gay marriage though? Isn't that what we want out of our politicians -- to evolve and better represent our interests as we evolve?
Obama was against gay marriage until after he was elected. I was against gay marriage when I was a dumb teenager. There's nothing wrong with people coming around to better, more inclusive ways of thinking. That's progress!
Any trade deals, WTH do you think all the free trade deals are about?
You do realize that when people say a politician is for sale THIS is what they're meaning and not that he got big bags with a dollar sign on it?
Jon Carter
Member
The argument I heard from BernieOrBust people is that with the way the US system works, Trump would get impeached. Hillary losing again and to Trump would be a devastating blow to the establishment. People shouldn't "vote blue no matter who" because it "is not a pledge against Trump. It is manufactured consent for the establishment."
GurgleBot20
Member
How would Trump get impeached by a republican majority?
Clockwork5
Member
Any trade deals? I'm done with you. You know nothing of which you speak.
And no. Bringing jobs to ones constituents is not what people mean by "being bought"
With the way the U.S. system works, a president is only impeached if they solicit a blowjob and lie about it. As long as Trump remains faithful to his wife, he's golden!
You're right. Having planes, that would've been built anyway, built in your state for jobs/whatever reasons is equivalent to consistently supporting military action whenever the opportunity arises. You're absolutely correct.
And now we're circling back around to Bernie hates minorities (as all white men are wont to do). And his record of railing against money in politics and speaking on behalf of the poor was all grandstanding in order to further his real goal of becoming exorbitantly wealthy off his political career... Wait, no that's not him. I guess his end goal was to run for president as an old man for the shits and giggles? It's amazing how plans come together sometimes.
SayItWithMe
Neo Member
So there is a possiblity....lol
That might be hard for him given his history.
excelsiorlef
Member
Sanders outraised as many folks like to brag and out spent Clinton
Of course it was. All he had to do was make an offhand comment. He knew it would drive another wedge into the Democrats and make them look stupid for a few days if Sanders actually responded.
Actually having the debate would be an actual risk given its unprecedented nature, albeit one that could pay off brilliantly if it's just 2 hours of Clinton bashing.
Look up the free trade deals the US signed in the last 2 decades, they're actually very interesting for the US.
The whole point is not for the pen pusher to line his pockets, how do you think the thing even goes on?
He means to be against the US war machine and say he was always against it in his speech BUT he enables the war machine by making sure it actually has the means to carry the policies he so strongly speak against.
This is the act of a hypocrite who cares little about the content of his own speech.
IAmAnAgnostic
Member
I'm watching Trump live, he is reasserting constantly "I'd love to debate Bernie!" Also he says they have had talks between the sides already.
EDIT: But he set a 10-15 million limit raised for charity.
EDIT: But he set a 10-15 million limit raised for charity.
So you don't care Bernie has directly and quantifiably approved of the US War Machine. Got it. Guess making killing machines ain't so bad after all! If it profits his state, who cares!
Ask the community who was going to get a nuclear waste disposal on their ground how much Sanders understood their plight.
hey we need to rein in Wall Street unless they mean to open half a dozen center in Vermont, then they're really swell!
Is it possibly because those posters know that the only person she was on the right of in this entire process going back to the beginning was Bernie Sanders? And that Bernie Sanders and And Hillary Clinton happen to hold views that are in line with one another almost entirely. And that Bernie Sanders isn't as leftest as he first appears.
You know, little stuff like that.
Sorry my post wasn't more specific, typing on my phone isn't optimal. Many have mentioned her flip-flopping on issues like gay marriage, gun control, etc. she has moved farther to the left, which is great. Her foreign policy is atrocious for a Democratic candidate, and when it comes to economic situations both at home and with trade deals, I am inclined to believe she will definitely lean right.
Don't get me wrong, she is a good candidate who IS the lesser of two evils. If she is the nominee I will absolutely vote for her over Trump. There just seems to be a group on GAF who defend Hillary Clinton ferociously, White-Knighting to a level I haven't seen anywhere else on the internet.(for Hillary atleast, we all know there are some Bernie/Trump crazies)
People are getting heated in here though... Y'all need to go play some Overwatch and destress.
excelsiorlef
Member
Guys Dreamwriter is way off with 68% too. That only nets Sanders 170 which still gives her a 100 lead not including PR, NJ and DC
Sanders needs to win with 80% about to just pass or tie Clinton on California alone,, the threahold of non viability. Thing is that's not counting NJ or PR sooo if he won with 81% then he'd pull it off due to non viability giving him them all.
Bernie has also changed his positions on both of those things.
Sanders and Clinton disagreed a grand spanking total of 31 times between 2007 and 2009, where you'll see Clinton takes a populist approach over Sanders' more cautious leanings.
http://nytimes.com/2015/05/28/upsho...vided-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders.html
Her foreign policy votes while in the Senate were the same as all other Democrats and she supported Barack Obama's initiatives while Secretary of State and currently even.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_War_+_Peace.htm
And she always been and has voted to the left in domestic economic issues, from the bank bailouts to the fighting for universal healthcare as First Lady.
Sigh.
But who cares about any of her actual accomplishments, and let's paint her as a right-wing political figure based on... Based on...
- Status