• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Bernie Sanders Univision interview.

Status
Not open for further replies.
So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.

I disagree. Bernie shouldn't be able to get it both ways. If he had dropped out when the mathematics became overwhelming against his nomination, I'd be more than happy to dismiss continuing criticism as people simply being vindictive. However, he made the decision to stay in the race against all odds to promote a populist agenda at the expense of a progressive agenda. If he still considers himself a valid candidate for the presidency, he should get the same criticism and attention that a person who considers themselves qualified to be POTUS should be subject to. He doesn't get the privilege of being able to use his candidacy as a platform for his agenda while being shielded from any criticism because the failure of that candidacy is apparent and obvious to all but the most inner of inner circles.

Criticizing Clinton in 2008 was appropriate, criticizing Sanders in 2016 is appropriate.
 
I'm not sure if it's agenda driven that you post every negative news or spin about Bernie all the time in off topic. Like what's poligaf's point? I thought that's where Hillary bros hung out to congratulate themselves.

The internal politics of other countries that are not key allies or opposition to the us are not his priority to know as a candidate nor as president. All he needs to know is how to appoint a team to investigate and report to him the situation and possible solutions so the president can give the go ahead or not. The potential effects of deportations will be further studied while in office.

Would Hillary respond with something like "don't worry we can form a coup and settle a guerilla army to murder anybody who objects and to ransack everything in the name of order and that way we get priority trade deals to ensure that the new elected leader stays rich, don't worry, Kissinger told me all about it".

Like what would happen to off topic of every random news about every politician would get posted all the time? Results about primaries or key events or disruptive situations should be posted, but trying to post everything about the candidate you hate so you can lead an agenda filled discussion only helps generate the cesspools that have been the threads about the presidential elections.

I'm risking a ban on "thread whining", and in a way I suppose it is, but I'm gonna call you out on the bullshit that you are doing. So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.
Well the point to many of us, both Sanders and Hillary supporters is that Bernie still hasn't learned anything since his disastrous NYDN interview. Dude's more clueless than anything. And please don't push the party unity stuff to the other side when Bernie is the one who burned all the bridges. He's not only clueless, but also marooned a lot of his supporters in a Lord of the Flies type island where there is an inexplicable hatred formed at the outside world. Hillary Clinton has already agreed to Bernie's 5 chairs to her 6 at the convention. Don't blame it on her or her supporters when Bernie is displaying to the world his total lack of any international understanding.
 

Jenov

Member
This seems in line for Bernie. His details and nuance on foreign policy are usually pretty bad... I still remember at one of the first couple of debates he suggested that Iran and Saudi Arabia should ally together their armies to go against ISIS. Heh. The NY daily news interview was similar in exposing this lack of detail. I don't think it matters much at this point though, he's lost regardless. All the last minute hand wringing over Hillary's damn emails and a joke-debate with Trump is proof that it's over.
 

Slayven

Member
How you going to tank a interview on Univision right before the Cali primary? The one your math system says you need.
 
I'm not sure if it's agenda driven that you post every negative news or spin about Bernie all the time in off topic. Like what's poligaf's point? I thought that's where Hillary bros hung out to congratulate themselves.

The internal politics of other countries that are not key allies or opposition to the us are not his priority to know as a candidate nor as president. All he needs to know is how to appoint a team to investigate and report to him the situation and possible solutions so the president can give the go ahead or not. The potential effects of deportations will be further studied while in office.

Would Hillary respond with something like "don't worry we can form a coup and settle a guerilla army to murder anybody who objects and to ransack everything in the name of order and that way we get priority trade deals to ensure that the new elected leader stays rich, don't worry, Kissinger told me all about it".

Like what would happen to off topic if every random news about every politician would get posted all the time? Results about primaries or key events or disruptive situations should be posted, but trying to post everything about the candidate you hate so you can lead an agenda filled discussion only helps generate the cesspools that have been the threads about the presidential elections.

I'm risking a ban on "thread whining", and in a way I suppose it is, but I'm gonna call you out on the bullshit that you are doing. So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.

I can't wait for California. I expect far more hilarious posts like this.
 

smurfx

get some go again
Coming from a former Sanders supporter-- This scares me a great deal for 2 reasons:

1) You've spend 25 years in the Senate. You can't even come up with a skillful dodge to this question? Or... You know... Have any knowledge on the subject?
2) You couldn't foresee this question before coming into the interview? That means one of two things; that either you're incompetent or lazy. I don't like either of those answers.
it isn't even like univison throws softballs to other democrats running for office. they will often challenge anybody that is getting interviewed. guess his prep crew thought they would only talk about immigration or something.
 

Koomaster

Member
Like what would happen to off topic if every random news about every politician would get posted all the time? Results about primaries or key events or disruptive situations should be posted, but trying to post everything about the candidate you hate so you can lead an agenda filled discussion only helps generate the cesspools that have been the threads about the presidential elections.

I'm risking a ban on "thread whining", and in a way I suppose it is, but I'm gonna call you out on the bullshit that you are doing. So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.
If this interview had been a positive for Bernard I guess it would have been okay to make a thread on it or still no? The guy is still in the race for better or for worse so if he makes a gaffe expect NeoGAF to talk about it. Not really sure what you're saying other than; 'Please don't post bad information about my chosen candidate.'

Maybe when he drops out and stops trying to insert himself into the news cycle there will be no more threads about him. Till then you just have to put up with it. Don't go in political threads if you're really bugged by it and can't handle your candidate getting criticism.

Bernard supporters shouldn't need to be coddled. If they cared about the Democratic Party and it's policies they wouldn't need to hold this 'party unity' over our heads pretending they are going to snatch away their vote if we don't sit up and beg for it. Be adult, if you care about the issues Bernard has been preaching then you'd work to make that happen even if he doesn't get to be the nominee.
 

Blader

Member
I'm risking a ban on "thread whining", and in a way I suppose it is, but I'm gonna call you out on the bullshit that you are doing. So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.

Why do so many posters seem to think that party unity relies on GAF?
 

Cipherr

Member
Wait so now, when this guy who decided to stay in the race for the Presidency screws up in an interview AGAIN; its unfair for people to point it out? Really?

Bernie is getting the attention he asked for by both running for leader of the Country and by deciding to stay in the race. You can't try and label us all big meanies for pointing out when he makes himself look bad. That comes with the territory. If he doesn't want that type of criticism he could always do BETTER in these interviews than he has, or drop out of the race.


Edit: Interviews by Presidential candidates and people running for President is news and thread worthy. You don't get to change that because your favorite candidate botched one.
 
I'm risking a ban on "thread whining", and in a way I suppose it is, but I'm gonna call you out on the bullshit that you are doing. So please, give it a rest, you queen has won, and you're not helping at all to push this whole "party unity" you guys want by discrediting the other candidate everyday with whatever headline there is.

This interview is significant as it's part of a larger pattern of Sanders revealing himself to be a shallow, completely out of his depth, not ready for prime time candidate.

For me Hillary is not "my queen" but she is the more qualified and vastly superior candidate. I think one of the reasons that people continue to highlight Sanders' frankly embarrassing shortcomings is because people continue to refuse to face the facts about him. It's not about kicking dirt so much as it is splashing cold water.
 
Whoever it was, it's true.

Do you think the leader of any country, must or should know details about foreign affairs?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: No. There are people on the presidential staff that take care of those details. They provide the needed information on said topics, so the president can take a well informed decision.

But that's true of everything,

Energy, the economy, The enviroment, The military

What's a president supposed to know exactly?
 

Drek

Member
How is she good and prepared? What did she accomplish in her 7 years in the Senate? What did she accomplish as Secretary of State (other than convincing Obama to bomb Libya)?
Prevented Israel from eradicating Palestine a few years ago when they looked on the verge of all out war.

Myanmar is transitioning to a democratic government pretty much as a direct result of her actions as Sec. of State. The entire south pacific pivot Obama was calling for was executed by Hillary Clinton.

Substantial improvement of relations with our western allies was accomplished on her watch as well, following GWB the U.S. was pretty well disliked.

The Iran sanctions program that has led to a non-violent agreement on nuclear non-development was originally enacted by Hillary Clinton.

I'd say she's got a pretty strong resume as a Sec. of State. Better than that of Colin Powell or Condeleza Rice who were basically Cheney sock puppets.

You mean a military coup conducted in response to said democratically elected president wanting to re-write the constitution to make himself dictator, then started trying to use the military to threaten judges and politicians who opposed him, then fired said military leaders who refused? Passively allowing that to happen is a bad thing how exactly?

Clinton's record:

- Voted FOR the invasion of Iraq
As did many others, including the current VP, the current Sen. minority leader, and the #2 Dem in the senate. But lets ignore the whole fabrication of information by the Bush administration in the lead up to that vote and instead blame the politicians who voted based on false information given by up to that point sources considered above reproach.

- Voted FOR the bailouts
Like every sane politican did at the time.

- Voted FOR the Patriot Act
- Voted FOR renewing the Patriot Act
Well, unfortunately public sentiment is pretty willing to trade liberty for safety and that's pretty well squarely in the box of "if the people want it give it to them" as it only impacts those people.

People are uncomfortable with the actual spying but keep being in favor of the concept, so legislation based around the concept keeps getting renewed.
 

Emarv

Member
Man, those responses were rougher than I imagined. Especially right before California. Especially when dealing with breakdown of left-wing governments. Especially when Venezuela is all over the news.

Love how the reporter kept going "Well, what about this issue? You gotta know about this one, right?" "Nah, Univision man. American topics only."
 

studyguy

Member
Man, those responses were rougher than I imagined. Especially right before California. Especially when dealing with breakdown of left-wing governments. Especially when Venezuela is all over the news.

Love how the reporter kept going "Well, what about this issue? You gotta know about this one, right?" "Nah, Univision man. American topics only."

They're airing the plights of Latin America daily right now.
Also they're not holding back punches with headlines.


Sanders recognizes that he knows little regarding Latin American Issues

Not a good look.
 
I don't understand how Bernie didn't realize that issues in Spanish speaking-speaking nations would be brought up in a UNIVISION interview.
 

Kite

Member
lol it's like going into a job interview and not being able to answer "Tell me about yourself" or "what is your greatest weakness"... They're not "gotcha" questions, your ass was just unprepared.
 

Adaren

Member
They're airing the plights of Latin America daily right now.
Also they're not holding back punches with headlines.


Sanders recognizes that he knows little regarding Latin American Issues

Not a good look.

I was wondering how this was being received outside the GAF bubble; if there's any impact, it probably won't be here.

Thanks!
 
I'm not particularly surprised: During his pretty long tenure in the House and his stints in the Senate, he's never really seemed that interested in foreign policy. That's fine, I guess, but what concerns me is that foreign policy is one of the few areas in which the president is given broad constitutional powers. Hillary's FP worries me, but Bernie's seeming uninterest during this entire candidacy of actually grasping any of the intricacies of FP is also super worrying.

(I also think a lot of people are projecting their own dovish beliefs on to Bernie because he doesn't really have as coherent of a FP stance, but that's for another thread).

They're airing the plights of Latin America daily right now.
Also they're not holding back punches with headlines.


Sanders recognizes that he knows little regarding Latin American Issues

Not a good look.

This was a really bad idea to do right before California, just like the NYDN interview was a really bad interview to do right before New York. I'm sensing a pattern that when pressed on issues that Hillary's hasn't quite pressed him in for a variety of reasons, he gets angry and shows a lack of preparation. I don't like that.
 

Boney

Banned
I disagree. Bernie shouldn't be able to get it both ways. If he had dropped out when the mathematics became overwhelming against his nomination, I'd be more than happy to dismiss continuing criticism as people simply being vindictive. However, he made the decision to stay in the race against all odds to promote a populist agenda at the expense of a progressive agenda. If he still considers himself a valid candidate for the presidency, he should get the same criticism and attention that a person who considers themselves qualified to be POTUS should be subject to. He doesn't get the privilege of being able to use his candidacy as a platform for his agenda while being shielded from any criticism because the failure of that candidacy is apparent and obvious to all but the most inner of inner circles.

Criticizing Clinton in 2008 was appropriate, criticizing Sanders in 2016 is appropriate.

Oh don't get me wrong, any candidate needs to go through intense scrunity and discussion about the platforms and policies is important and needed. Criticising him or Hillary or whoever else natural and should always be fomented. I completely disagree with how you define his policies as populist but it's certainly understandable when viewed fromm a certain optic. I'm not saying he should be shielded or coddled ot that other people who support them need to be either, my point is more on how to get discussions rolling and how to make use of the off topic

Well the point to many of us, both Sanders and Hillary supporters is that Bernie still hasn't learned anything since his disastrous NYDN interview. Dude's more clueless than anything. And please don't push the party unity stuff to the other side when Bernie is the one who burned all the bridges. He's not only clueless, but also marooned a lot of his supporters in a Lord of the Flies type island where there is an inexplicable hatred formed at the outside world. Hillary Clinton has already agreed to Bernie's 5 chairs to her 6 at the convention. Don't blame it on her or her supporters when Bernie is displaying to the world his total lack of any international understanding.

Well for starters the NYDN interview was played out as a much greater disaster than it actually was and many news outlets like the New York Times immediatly published how bernie handled most of the interview in an accurate way and how the actual questions were sometimes nonsenical. Can't speak for anybody but I find the deal with the chairs at the convention to be incredibly positive to help provide a balanced agenda between the candidates in a very split race, and from the GAF thread many Hillary supporters think of it as a dirty tactic that doesn't have any base on reality as he lost the primary instead of focusing how the constituency is pushing for policies for both candidates and it'll only benefit the base and the people to struck a nice balance between the policies.

And honestly, his "lack of international understanding" is again a media spin. Take the populist Latin American countries. Anybody would be able to answer that it's because of incredibly high levels of corruption that are made even easier by demagoging the constituency or enforcing heavy military control and that they cannot function as autopoietic systems without having developed a strong service based economy. But every answer he gives need to be given in context of diplomatic relationships, in which you can't give those type of answers on a news media. The deportation element is also a big one, for starters, Obama has made the most deportations than any other president, so it's not like it's slowing down at all. The US needs to deportate illegal aliens that aren't positive factors for the country or they are living in incredibly dangerous circumstances as illegals. Dangerous individuals that once reported cause havok on their native countries are sad circumstances of the region due to different economic and social elements, and while the US would obviously be sympathetic they cannot take care of the situation financially speaking. How and what to do with them is an incredibly complex issue that most experts would not even agree on the solution, hence why it is happening today, and I believe that not answering questions when prudent is completely fine, but that does not mean it's not going to be a preocupation at all when in government.

I can't wait for California. I expect far more hilarious posts like this.

Ok? why is so hilarious to hope for better tone for discussing this type of stuff.

If this interview had been a positive for Bernard I guess it would have been okay to make a thread on it or still no? The guy is still in the race for better or for worse so if he makes a gaffe expect NeoGAF to talk about it. Not really sure what you're saying other than; 'Please don't post bad information about my chosen candidate.'

Maybe when he drops out and stops trying to insert himself into the news cycle there will be no more threads about him. Till then you just have to put up with it. Don't go in political threads if you're really bugged by it and can't handle your candidate getting criticism.

Bernard supporters shouldn't need to be coddled. If they cared about the Democratic Party and it's policies they wouldn't need to hold this 'party unity' over our heads pretending they are going to snatch away their vote if we don't sit up and beg for it. Be adult, if you care about the issues Bernard has been preaching then you'd work to make that happen even if he doesn't get to be the nominee.

No, you're misunderstanding me. My problem is to how the discussion needs to be handled, what would happen to off topic if we made 3-4 threads daily per candidate about whatever issue to help push an agenda and start a fire instead of a discussion.
This could have been focused much better by trying to discuss the issue about massive deportations and the latin american populist governents, and what are Hillary's stance on it she has, and why it is a priority agenda for a US president. Framing it as "check this guy out he's so incompetent lolz" just devolves into nasty stuff that can be avoided by trying to not push an agenda before setting up the discussion. There's stuff that needs to be saved for PoliGAF and stuff that should get in here in my opinion.

Why do so many posters seem to think that party unity relies on GAF?

I'm talking about the small GAF universe here, but you could always expand it on other ways from the usual he should drop out or look at these violent bernie bros from nevada

This interview is significant as it's part of a larger pattern of Sanders revealing himself to be a shallow, completely out of his depth, not ready for prime time candidate.

For me Hillary is not "my queen" but she is the more qualified and vastly superior candidate. I think one of the reasons that people continue to highlight Sanders' frankly embarrassing shortcomings is because people continue to refuse to face the facts about him. It's not about kicking dirt so much as it is splashing cold water.

I disagree with the idea of him being a demagogue or an incompetent politician when he has a great record behind him. But obviously it's debatable as to how qualified any candidate is based on x factors and it's fair to argue for a candidate.
 
I elaborated in a following post. And in this case knowing about foreign policy didn't keep her from making choices in regards to Egypt and Libya that will haunt her legacy.
Then why couldn't you have put that elaboration in your first post? Would have made your post look a lot less unintelligent.
 

zelas

Member
So I guess Hillary and her emails aren't the only example of a democratic candidate showing a lack of competence requested for the job. I wonder if this and the NY Daily News incident will matter to the anti-Hillary crowd of will they continue to say she has more in common with republicans than Bernie?

But seriously, how can he have a campagin focused almost exclusively on helping out the disadvantaged while not having an understanding of their situation to begin with? Maybe he should be campaigning for a job at the Fed or a Treasury position instead of just ignoring certain minority groups wholesale once again. A lack of understanding about the world just outside our borders can be just as problematic as a reality tv host threatening to upend relationships with important allies. A presidential candidate should be taking all of these issues seriously, not putting them on the back burner. You would think he'd see it as an important enough issue to at least pretend its important.


Edit: And this is the Bernie we get to see without republicans focusing on him!
 

pgtl_10

Member
Prevented Israel from eradicating Palestine a few years ago when they looked on the verge of all out war.

Myanmar is transitioning to a democratic government pretty much as a direct result of her actions as Sec. of State. The entire south pacific pivot Obama was calling for was executed by Hillary Clinton.

Substantial improvement of relations with our western allies was accomplished on her watch as well, following GWB the U.S. was pretty well disliked.

The Iran sanctions program that has led to a non-violent agreement on nuclear non-development was originally enacted by Hillary Clinton.

I'd say she's got a pretty strong resume as a Sec. of State. Better than that of Colin Powell or Condeleza Rice who were basically Cheney sock puppets.


You mean a military coup conducted in response to said democratically elected president wanting to re-write the constitution to make himself dictator, then started trying to use the military to threaten judges and politicians who opposed him, then fired said military leaders who refused? Passively allowing that to happen is a bad thing how exactly?


As did many others, including the current VP, the current Sen. minority leader, and the #2 Dem in the senate. But lets ignore the whole fabrication of information by the Bush administration in the lead up to that vote and instead blame the politicians who voted based on false information given by up to that point sources considered above reproach.


Like every sane politican did at the time.


Well, unfortunately public sentiment is pretty willing to trade liberty for safety and that's pretty well squarely in the box of "if the people want it give it to them" as it only impacts those people.

People are uncomfortable with the actual spying but keep being in favor of the concept, so legislation based around the concept keeps getting renewed.

Lol no at bolded. Hillary is not Palestinian saviour.
 
Wait, the POWER RANGERS guy owns Univision?

You learn something new everyday...

Interesting cat. A long history with Clinton:

Political views and fundraising
Saban says his greatest concern is to protect Israel. At a conference in Israel, Saban described his formula. His three ways to influence American politics were: make donations to political parties, establish think tanks, and control media outlets.[22]

Saban became involved in politics in the mid-1990s when he felt that support for Israel was slipping in the United States.[5] He says his views have shifted over the years:[2] "I used to be a real leftist. I remember Arik Sharon [the leader of Israel's right-wing Likud Party] coming here, to my house, a few months before Camp David, when he was still leader of the opposition. He told me there would be no deal because [Yassir] Arafat would not sign. I told myself that there was nothing to be done – these right-wingers were simply insane. I had no doubt that there would be a deal and the problems would be resolved. History proved that Sharon was right and I was wrong. In matters relating to security, that moved me to the right. Very far to the right...When there is a terrorist attack, I am [Avigdor] Lieberman. Sometimes to the right of Lieberman. For two days I really love Lieberman. But afterward I come back to reality. Look, I don't see a solution today."[2]

Saban has been a generous and consistent donor to the United States Democratic Party according to his mandatory Federal Election Commission filings. Mother Jones, in an analysis of the major donors to the campaigns of 1998 election cycle, ranked Saban 155th among individual donors.[23] Amy Paris noted that Saban's Clinton-era "generosity did not go unrewarded. During the Clinton administration, the entertainment executive served on the President's Export Council, advising the White House on trade issues."[23] The New York Times reported that Haim and his wife "slept in the White House several times during President Clinton's two terms." Saban remains close friends with the former President. Clinton described Saban as a "very good friend and supporter."[5] Saban contributed between $5 million to $10 million to the William J. Clinton Foundation.[24]

During the 2000 presidential election, Saban increased his rank to 5th among individual donors with a combined contribution of $1,250,500.[23] Matthew Yglesias wrote that "Saban was the largest overall contributor to the Democratic National Committee during the 2001–2002 cycle." [25] Saban's donations during that 2001–2002 period exceeded $10 million, the largest donation the DNC has received from a single source up to that time.

In September 2004, Hillary Clinton described Saban as a very good friend, supporter and adviser: "I am grateful for his commitment to Israel, to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and to my foundation's work, particularly on reconciliation issues."[5] In May 2007, Haim publicly declared his support for Clinton in 2008 presidential election.[20] In June 2007, Saban and Steven Spielberg co-hosted a Hillary Clinton fundraiser at the house of Peter Chernin, the President of News Corporation.[26] According to the Los Angeles Times,[26] the fundraiser brought in over $850,000.

In March 2008, Saban was among a group of major Jewish donors to sign a letter to Democratic Party house leader Nancy Pelosi warning her to "keep out of the Democratic presidential primaries."[27] The donors, who "were strong supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign", "were incensed by a March 16 interview in which Pelosi said that party 'superdelegates' should heed the will of the majority in selecting a candidate."[27] The letter to Pelosi stated the donors "have been strong supporters of the DCCC" and implied, according to The Jewish Telegraphic Agency,[27] that Pelosi could lose their financial support in important upcoming congressional elections.

On May 19, 2008, it was reported that Haim Saban had "offered $1 million to the Young Democrats of America during a phone conversation in which he also pressed for the organization's two uncommitted superdelegates to endorse Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee for president."[28]

Saban has also made donations to members of the Republican Party including a 2003 contribution to George W. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haim_Saban )


It's good that Hillarys views on Foreign Policy to the likes of Israel is not affected by things like this. Guy is just a wonderful philanthropist <3
 
I find interesting that people find Hillary is more experienced yet this board was very Pro-Obama in 2008.

That was also a very legitimate criticism of Obama, and Obama did his research in ways that Bernie has not, or has not seemed interested in doing.
 

Armaros

Member
I find interesting that people find Hillary is more experienced yet this board was very Pro-Obama in 2008.

Obama was from all accounts an eager student on topics he had limited knowledge of during the 2008 election.

He made sure he was ready for whatever questions and topics was asked of him.
 

kirblar

Member
I don't understand how Bernie didn't realize that issues in Spanish speaking-speaking nations would be brought up in a UNIVISION interview.
Especially given Venezuela's meltdown and Brazil's insane drama.
That was also a very legitimate criticism of Obama, and Obama did his research in ways that Bernie has not, or has not seemed interested in doing.
After Dubya, a lack of intellectual curiosity should be an immediate DQ for anyone running for the office.
 

Slayven

Member
Man another thing is the reporter came in on point and bernie just disrespects him. Not dude's fault he was unprepared
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom