Support NeoGAF

[Izuna]

He says means about her because he's in love.

Spoiler

these leaks are disgusting and any constitution loving America shouldn't like that they're happening -- it's cyber watergate if Trump encourages them

 

[xxracerxx]

Bernie would not have wrecked Donald, too emotional, body language, appearance

Hillary did not even flinch, blink or flutter when Donald muttered ''What a nasty woman''

She destroyed Trump by being an Ice Queen and demonstrated calm, smarts and wit

Sanders would have gotten offended and get all angry on stage making Donald appear to be calmer.

This is how I feel. As much as I like Sanders, people who say he would destroy Trump must never have watched him speak/debate before.

 

[Aaronrules380]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-sanders-was-roll-call-amendment-king-1995-2/

This isn't really reflective of working with other parties as president, and doesn't address his main policy weaknesses

 

[fantomena]

Um, Bernie never won a single debate against Hillary

Well, that's your opinion. I think he was an overall much better candidate than Hillary.

 

[dramatis]

Well, that's your opinion. I think he was an overall much better candidate than Hillary.

Well, that's your opinion.

Let's be clear and factual. If Sanders was a "much better candidate" than Hillary, he would have won. But he lost, therefore he was not a better candidate than Hillary.

 

[fantomena]

Well, that's your opinion.

Let's be clear and factual. If Sanders was a "much better candidate" than Hillary, he would have won. But he lost, therefore he was not a better candidate than Hillary.

Sanders would never have won, not in the slightest. I was suprised he actually made it as far as he did.

The reason I support him is because he is much closer to my socialdemocratic views than Hillary. Hillary is way too righty on most views except gun control where Sanders is weak.

 

[RustyNails]

Well, that's your opinion. I think he was an overall much better candidate than Hillary.

In what way was Bernie a better candidate. He was a one trick pony that never appealed to outside white millenials and and their parents. He didn't win the largest prizes in the primary. So I'm surprised to hear when someone says he was a better candidate.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Well, that's your opinion.

Let's be clear and factual. If Sanders was a "much better candidate" than Hillary, he would have won. But he lost, therefore he was not a better candidate than Hillary.

Eh I wouldnt run with that logic even if I agree.

I think Kasich or Rubio would have been better contenders in the general over Trump, but they didnt win.

 

[Coriolanus]

I doubt it. I don't think he has a solid enough grasp on actual policy, and I think he'd be horrible at working with congress

fwiw bams showed us that you don't need to be able to work with congress to be a good pres (in domestic matters, anyway).

even if in his case it was more of congress being completely unwilling to work with him

 

[phanphare]

In what way was Bernie a better candidate. He was a one trick pony that never appealed to outside white millenials and and their parents. He didn't win the largest prizes in the primary. So I'm surprised to hear when someone says he was a better candidate.

one trick pony? lol, nope

yeah he repeated his stump speech at pretty much every turn but that speech included a multitude of talking points. I find boiling all that down to being a "one trick pony" to be either hilariously ignorant or depressingly reductive

 

[TestOfTide]

Bernie would have eviscerated him.

Trump wouldn't be able to call Bernie corrupt or a liar.
He could say he's another tax and spend politician, but that's about it.
The idea of a rigged system or rigged game wouldn't work against Bernie because he represents anti-establishment ideals far better than Trump.

Bernie would have probably done decently against Trump, but Hillary beat Trump so decisively in those debates for a few reasons:

1) Mindgames: Hillary was able to constantly bait Trump into making a fool of himself.

2) Experience: Hillary had a smart detailed for nearly everything because she knows so much.

3) Experience part 2: Hillary had a shitload of experience with both debates and small gatherings, and that paid off, especially during the second debate. She knew how to answer not just with detail, but with determination to connect to the votes.

 

[Hindl]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-sanders-was-roll-call-amendment-king-1995-2/

Attaching riders to bills in exchange for your vote and actually drafting up legislation are two completely different things

 

[MIMIC]

Heh, the people saying Sanders wouldn't have won are definitely living in their own reality. More often than not, early numbers vs. the other party are heavy indicators that the election is probably yours (should you win the primary, of course). Saying X, Y, and Z would have sunk his election is simply ignoring history that no: X, Y, and Z do NOT have as much of an impact as you think or feel.

Well, that's your opinion.

Let's be clear and factual. If Sanders was a "much better candidate" than Hillary, he would have won. But he lost, therefore he was not a better candidate than Hillary.

Hillary got more votes. Just like Trump. Says absolutely nothing about who was the "better" candidate.

 

[ModBot]

We already did the primaries, cut it out.