I know about that, but the fact that after that debacle he decides to go a bridge further with the outright.... Nonsense is disturbing. I mean, wha?
-
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.
Democrat Debate 8 [Univision] Agent Smith goes to Washington
- Thread starter Makai
- Start date
- Status
I know about that, but the fact that after that debacle he decides to go a bridge further with the outright.... Nonsense is disturbing. I mean, wha?
metalslimer
Member
up until Michigan there was always some evidence that he was closing the gap
Lord_Byron28
Member
While I agree and noticed. He handled the question well and it's really not that big of a deal. However this clip would air all over the place if Sanders was in the GE and would be devastating for a number of reasons.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
lol same here.
RustyNails
Member
Nah, it's a very strong talking point in the GOP. They pretend southern strategy never happened.
thehypocrite
Member
I agree it didn't look good on there, but that video has nothing that can be exploited for a full attack. It will depend on what other things are out there and how he responds to this issue to avoid unfair toxic association.
valkillmore
Member
Did you see Van's wtf face? Tells you all you need to know lol. I dig Van.
ShironRedshift
Member
And the sad thing is, there's no reason it should have been a OHKO. They gave him every chance to save himself there, but he still completely dropped the ball on that one for some reason. If his response to that question ends up hurting him in Florida, it really is just on him.
He'll probably respond tomorrow, but damn I think the damage is done.
Yea it's something I wish they'd go more in depth with. There is already this perception that democrats are soft on foreign policy.
JHoNNy1OoO
Member
Like I said in my previous response which you seem to have glossed over. His answer has very little to do with Cubans and everything to do with praising dictators.
You just don't do that if you want Hispanic votes to go your way. He just had to renounce and there would be no issue, he didn't, so it'll be used against him all over spanish radio and television if they feel they have to.
I missed this part of the debate. What happened?
Wasn't looking at the screen. Shame I missed that part.
It's election season man. It already wasn't a good look or response. GOP or anyone else can twist that to mean what they want. Not to mention it'll be easy to hit him on raising taxes. That'll KILL him.
Lord_Byron28
Member
Clip of him in the 60s praising Castro for how he treated his citizens in terms of socialist policies.
maabus1999
Member
Bernie lost Florida, Primary and GE if nominated. 1985 video shown him praising Fidel Castro and others, and he basically stood by and said his views are right. Then Hillary said he was supporting people that disappear people. Bernie didn't respond.
only right-wing cubans in Florida will care for that. For most other people, left policies in Latin America have always been better than pure capitalism. His stance about Puerto Rico was superb, vulture capitalist are destroying entire countries
Quality of living is better in Cuba (with embargo) than in all central american countries where USA has huge influence. That speaks volumes.
Bernie wasn't wrong.
The problem he had there, and I think he knows it, is if he says his views have evolved and disavows all that it completely neuters his sharpest attacks on Clinton and gives her space to avoid them all together. He's made his constant attacks on her consistency a double edged sword, the only reason this hasn't happened sooner is Clinton's team has been playing with kid gloves and refusing to hit him where it hurts.
JHoNNy1OoO
Member
Bernie was asked to renounce his praise for Ortega/Castro in a video from 1985 and he didn't. Why he chose to "stick to his guns" in 2016 on praising dictators who killed and imprisoned decenters is anyones guess.
Damerman
Member
Im pretty sure most bernie supporters on these boards know that hillary is using a shut down of cit. uni. to pick a justice. We spoke about this since the first debate. It was just one person who asked the question in this thread. We dont even know if the person who asked is a bernie or hillary supporter.
Well, they are.
thehypocrite
Member
I dunno, some things that could kill candidates before have been ineffective this cycle, so I'll just wait & see. However, I mostly agree with your thoughts that it can be damaging.
He was tapped to be Obama's Green jobs Czar but had to step down.
you realize USA did even worse things in Latin America during decades? And "democratic" regimes supported by USA in Latin America continue to kill people who don't support the government's corruption.
Bernie was being honest and he clearly stated that he was praising the good parts of what Cuba revolution gave to the people.
...Are they?
I found this debate very insightful about each candidate's foreign policy and I continue to like what I hear from Sanders.
valkillmore
Member
Really? Didn't know that. He seems like a legit dude.
Yes. Are you serious?
maybe among those who believe Hillary is winning these debates
Coriolanus
Banned
That's irrelevant, mate. That's most likely not how Joe McVoter will read the situation.
Yes.
Bernie praised the social care programs enacted by communist cuba, the question was how bernies socialism would be different, and since the obvious answer is 'not attached to a bloody revolution' the question never had any teeth to begin with.
Don't know why anyone is grasping at this straw.
as said before, only cubans in Miami will care. And those people are mostly right-wing republican nuts
ShironRedshift
Member
I also feel the same way. I'm particularly disappointed that Sanders is trying to turn the fracking thing into a talking point, where Hillary has the more nuanced and correct position. Fracking is bad, and they both seem to realize that. However, Hillary understands that change needs to be a gradual process and that until we have the infrastructure for clean energy sources such as wind, solar, etc, in place, we need to be getting our energy from somewhere, and that includes sources such as fracking. As long as it's well-regulated in a way that conforms to the standards that Clinton laid out in the debate on Sunday, I don't see the problem, as it's those type of regulations to make sure it's not abused that are the important thing in that interim period.
Yes, we should be getting off it eventually because it's not a great option. That's true. But it's not a black and white thing, like Sanders is trying to portray it as, and it's going to take time for cleaner energy sources to take its place. Until then, like it or not, it's going to get used because something has to and clean energy can't meet all of our needs yet. It will eventually, but that time is not yet, especially with tons of obstructionism from Republicans in both the federal and state Congresses and thus the most important thing to do is to realize that reality regardless of how much we hate it and do our best to regulate it to minimize the damage it does in that interim period.
Sanders answers to questions like that are just dishonest and reductionist and either he realizes that and doesn't care and is just going for the soundbites by going for the much more simpler answer, in which case he's more of a typical politician than he likes to let on, or he is really that misinformed on the issue compared to Clinton, which doesn't have him coming off well either. In either case, yeah, definitely felt Clinton had the more substance filled answers in Sundays and this debate.
People who believe any hit on Bernie will be the end of his campaign.
I'll just repeat the fact that Wallstreet was literally only brought up twice. Both times in direct relation to the matter at hand.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
Anyone know the time each of them got?
googleplex
Member
I don't think most Bernie supporters don't realize this. Hillary isn't really going to really rip into Bernie because she has to also think about the party after the Primary. Hillary IS going to to win the nomination, but he can't afford to burn and salt the earth of Bernie's base.
TheOohChild
Member
It looks like this boogieman bullshit is already starting to resonate with people. Pretty pathetic.
Because that's getting the most play. It wasn't a great response. He could have said all that but renounced Castro himself. He didn't. That's just not going to play well with the Cuban population.
Sorry but that's a softball in terms of how anyone will attack Bernie and he flubbed it. When the gloves come off shit is going to get nasty for him.
You act like nuance is going to matter. Look at the fracking thing from the last debate. They both came out against it, but Bernie's answer was far more straight forward and many here felt it was better as a result. We live in an age of soundbites. If he couldn't handle a meatball served up over the plate...
Because he was given the opportunity to clarify this, as the question posed very clearly pointed to a sympathy for Castro's regime.
It's worth noting that even after we stop using oil for fuel, we'll still need it. Like 25% of all oil produced today isn't used for any type of fuel.
IrishNinja
Member
as a miami native - i hear you man! just couldn't pass up the obvious joke of bernie supporters too easily dismissing minorities, haha
I thought I was the only one...
And to be quite honest simply opening up relations with Cuba is probably enough for them to vote Republican.
was he? they gave him like 10 secs to answer vs 2 minutes to hillary :lol
the whole thing was clearly set to make him look bad. As I said, people who run Univision are mostly right-wing expatriats
She's already spread lie after lie on his actual positions. She's doing a great job to insult him and those who support the views he expresses. I'll still vote for her because I more or less have to (and she is similar in some regards) if she gets the nomination but I am really not liking her at all right now.
You seem to have no clue what you are talking about. First, mere statements by the U.S. concerning foreign policy carry weight not simply military action. Second, why would we impose a no-fly zone over an allied country? Third, Obama called for and pushed for Mubarak to step down at which point Egypt fell into disaster. Nearly every Mid-East allied country, including Israel, saw this as a massive blunder by Pres. Obama as in their opinion he had "abandoned" an ally in need. This is exactly why all the other Mid-East Arab countries facing similar reform movements cracked down hard after Egypt as they felt they could not trust the U.S. to stand by them.
I believe even Pres. Obama considers his initial handling of the Arab Spring as a mistake.
Venezuelans will care too.
Keep in mind that we "right wing republican nuts" have a huge influence in the general election given that Florida is a swing state.
I'm telling you, Cuban democrats will care about this too.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked