Support NeoGAF

[Cheebo]

And the two different groups of people watching the debate by Fusion and Fox were just cherry picked people part of some grand conspiracy to show Hillary is weak when they picked Bernie as the winner of the debate. Maybe it's time you take off the tin-foil hat.

Except for the fact I have never once said those who pick Bernie are part of a conspiracy to prop Bernie up. There is no conspiracy at all. No one is the media is declaring the winner out of some sort of pro-corporate conspiracy mandate. Both for Bernie and Hillary.

All the media outlets like the NY times and the Washington Post pick her was the winner because to them she won the debate. Not because they want a pro-corporate candiate. There is no mandate from the owners of these papers that their reporters need to declare the corporate friendly candidate won.

 

[Blader]

Not that there's a media-driven conspiracy to make Hilary president, but there is a shifting and predictable narrative that journalists are -- whether they mean to or not -- very clearly infatuated with: from Hilary as the heir apparent, to Hilary's surprise challenge and Sanders' surging poll numbers (neglecting the enormous lead she maintained over Sanders at this time anyway) to, now, the comeback.

 

[Veritigo_X]

And the two different groups of people watching the debate by Fusion and Fox were just cherry picked people part of some grand conspiracy to show Hillary is weak when they picked Bernie as the winner of the debate. Maybe it's time you take off the tin-foil hat.

You're the only one here arguing about some grand media conspiracy.

 

[Pastry]

misread

 

[Maledict]

Hilary is a good debater. That was never a question.

Sorry but it absolutely was. I've posted repeatedly in the last few months about this. Sanders supporters have been claiming repeatedly he would destroy her in the debates, that she would come across as dreadful, that it would be the point where her campaign went into free fall etc etc.

All of which totally ignored Hillarys performance in 2008 and the fact she dominated a much stronger field, and repeatedly outperformed Obama and Biden whilst being the main target for the entire field.

I am fascinated by how the tone has changed from 'Sanders will crush her' to 'Of course she did well, she was always going to, but Sanders did better than hoped!'

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

We'll see when the actual scientific polls come out in a few days. As I said before, I'm quite certain Bernie is getting a boost in the polls based off this debate in the polls where Biden is not included from the previous polls where he was not included. In the polls where Biden was included Hillary might have won over some of Joe's support or maybe they have gone elsewhere(Sanders, O'Malley) with his no-show at the debate.

Just promise not to go with "I guess the public fell for the media narrative" if it doesn't go bernies way ok

 

[darknemus]

I like Bernie Sanders. I am glad he's in this primary cycle. He is helping drive conversation to the left, in general, and making a lot of good points that are being repeated by the media and should help, in time, others to realize that's he right about several things.

I'm not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton - to me, she comes off as stodgy, stiff (not Jim Webb stiff, that's a whole different level), and just, well, a bit 'fake' (I'm sure there's a better word to use here, honestly)

With that being said - Hillary is going to wind up the (D) nominee, barring some crazy unforeseen event and will basically crush whoever the (R) party puts up against her. The electoral battle is going to be fairly easily won and I just hope she has enough impact on down-ballot races to make a REAL difference.

In today's political climate - and ESPECIALLY with a media machine like Fox News pushing the Republican noise machine 24 / 7 - combined with Talk Radio and the general vitriol that comes from the right.. a guy like Bernie Sanders just doesn't stand a chance.. and I KNOW that sucks - but its still true. Listen, Hillary isn't our panacea for all the ills in this country, any more than Obama was - but she's going to be our best option after the primary season comes to a close.. if for some reason its Bernie up there instead of her, damn right I'm voting for him - but I just worry that any guy who has declared himself a "Democratic Socialist" will be shredded by the Republicans on that term, alone.. because one thing they LOVE to do is assign blame to others and never accept blame as a political party. That would only be 10x worse with Bernie, I think.

I would LOVE to be surprised and see Bernie get the nomination and win the general - I just fear its not possible in today's political world.

 

[ErasureAcer]

You're the only one here arguing about some grand media conspiracy.

Once again, saying the corporate media likes the corporate candidate is not a conspiracy. As I listed before they had 4 other options to choose from, 2 of which eliminated themselves. Leaving the "I'm not a capitalist"(Sanders) and the well prepared but playing second fiddle(to Sanders) O'Malley... Obviously the media picked Clinton as the winner. It's not a conspiracy it's in their best interest on many levels, ratings/clicks, actual policy should she become president, etc, etc...

 

[genjiZERO]

I thought it was so boring I cut out about half way. All of them sound like talking heads except for Sanders who also is the only one who seems the most sincere. Webb was probably second in his sincerity. Clinton sounds like an automaton whose buttons are being pressed by banking industry. She sounds competent, but not trustworthy at all. The rest were completely irrelevant.

 

[Damerman]

bernie addressing the poor turnout during local/midterm elections is definitely something that is being overlooked. I think the times he brought those up are definitely highlights

 

[Flo_Evans]

Wonder if O'malley will take some support from sanders as the non-Hillary option.

 

[Cheebo]

Once again, saying the corporate media likes the corporate candidate is not a conspiracy.

We are talking about the actual reporters. Not their owners. Your conspiracy theory is preticated on the fact that newspaper owners of the New York Times and the Washington Post push their reporters to declare corporate friendly candidates win the debate to try and decide the outcome of an election.

If Chris Cizilla of the Washing Post thinks Hillary won and his headline story says as much all it means is he thinks Hillary won the debate.

 

[entremet]

Sorry but it absolutely was. I've posted repeatedly in the last few months about this. Sanders supporters have been claiming repeatedly he would destroy her in the debates, that she would come across as dreadful, that it would be the point where her campaign went into free fall etc etc.

All of which totally ignored Hillarys performance in 2008 and the fact she dominated a much stronger field, and repeatedly outperformed Obama and Biden whilst being the main target for the entire field.

I am fascinated by how the tone has changed from 'Sanders will crush her' to 'Of course she did well, she was always going to, but Sanders did better than hoped!'

From Sanders supporters, I would agree. But, like you, I remember her strong debate performances in 2008. She was also ruthless during her law days.

 

[Amentallica]

Yeah, we're hopeless idealists. We all know it's never going to happen. America can't elect someone like Bernie. We're too far behind still.

But it's nice to hold onto something and hope, even if you know it won't happen.

Yeah, probably. It will be interesting to see where the true progressive nations will be by that time in comparison to the United States.

I guess I haven't given up the option of voting for her yet. She has grown on me a little, but as of now, I'm still undecided who I would vote for in the general with her as the Democratic candidate. I'll wait and see how things go.

If I understand you correctly, you're an idealist and would vote Bernie Sanders in in a heartbeat, but if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat nominee you may instead vote for a Republican nominee?

 

[ErasureAcer]

I would LOVE to be surprised and see Bernie get the nomination and win the general - I just fear its not possible in today's political world.

So the guy promising hope and change(who didn't deliver on either) can get elected but the actual guy also campaigning more or less on hope and change(who will actually do his best to deliver) stands no chance? Got it.

 

[dramatis]

This funny reverse characterization of the media that only spent the last few months gleefully perpetuating Emailgate, "Biden's running!" and "Hillary dropping in polls!" to "corporate media likes corporate candidate".

They're not aiming to support Hillary. They're largely aiming for bombastic headlines.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

We are talking about the actual reporters. Not their owners. Your conspiracy theory is preticated on the fact that newspaper owners of the New York Times and the Washington Post push their reporters to declare corporate friendly candidates win the debate to try and decide the outcome of an election.

If Chris Cizilla of the Washing Post thinks Hillary won and his headline story says as much all it means is he thinks Hillary won the debate.

Cizilla has/had the biggest hard-on for the emails story too.

 

[Cheebo]

Cizilla has/had the biggest hard-on for the emails story too.

Exactly. The email mania over the past few months is proof enough the media isn't in the tank for her.

 

[Interfectum]

If I understand you correctly, you're an idealist and would vote Bernie Sanders in in a heartbeat, but if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat nominee you may instead vote for a Republican nominee?

As one of those oft talked about "white liberal bernie supporters" I too get confused when someone says they support Bernie but they wont vote for Hillary if she wins.

I can't even fathom a situation where someone would support Sanders then vote Republican if he doesn't win.

 

[ErasureAcer]

This funny reverse characterization of the media that only spent the last few months gleefully perpetuating Emailgate, "Biden's running!" and "Hillary dropping in polls!" to "corporate media likes corporate candidate".

They're not aiming to support Hillary. They're largely aiming for bombastic headlines.

And trying to build her up again so they can tear her down again and rinse and repeat. It's a show.

 

[Damerman]

This funny reverse characterization of the media that only spent the last few months gleefully perpetuating Emailgate, "Biden's running!" and "Hillary dropping in polls!" to "corporate media likes corporate candidate".

They're not aiming to support Hillary. They're largely aiming for bombastic headlines.

yeah, giving the media the credit of having foresight is wrong. they are myopic and can only think 5 minutes ahead.

 

[darknemus]

So the guy promising hope and change(who didn't deliver on either) can get elected but the actual guy also campaigning more or less on hope and change(who will actually do his best to deliver) stands no chance? Got it.

Compare Barack's energy levels and general charisma and 'it' factor (and in so many ways, politics IS a popularity contest) to Bernie's and you'll see why I think that holds true. Its not that I don't like Bernie - he's passionate.. ABSOLUTELY... its just.. he's NOT a campaigner like Barack Obama.. and that's not an insult.. its very rare you find a guy who runs a campaign like Obama did - you probably won't see it again for 20+ years.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

So the guy promising hope and change(who didn't deliver on either) can get elected but the actual guy also campaigning more or less on hope and change(who will actually do his best to deliver) stands no chance? Got it.

It's almost like Obama and Sanders aren't even remotely comparable candidates!

 

[ErasureAcer]

Compare Barack's energy levels and general charisma and 'it' factor (and in so many ways, politics IS a popularity contest) to Bernie's and you'll see why I think that holds true. Its not that I don't like Bernie - he's passionate.. ABSOLUTELY... its just.. he's NOT a campaigner like Barack Obama.. and that's not an insult.. its very rare you find a guy who runs a campaign like Obama did - you probably won't see it again for 20+ years.

Except Bernie is exceeding Obama in many areas from amount of donors to crowd sizes this early, where they were in the polls at the same time and so on. Yeah, but Obama is the better candidate, right? Someone post all the infographics.

Bernie's main difference from Obama is he's not ruthless enough. He could have torn Hillary to shreds on her stances. But that's not how he campaigns.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

People are critical of Bernie and gun control when the man signed the Clinton assault weapon ban. Bernie being pro gun? HAHAHA

 

[Blader]

As one of those oft talked about "white liberal bernie supporters" I too get confused when someone says they support Bernie but they wont vote for Hillary if she wins.

I can't even fathom a situation where someone would support Sanders then vote Republican if he doesn't win.

They wouldn't vote Republican, they just wouldn't vote period.

 

[Arkeband]

It's pretty surprising to me that people feel Hillary was a strong debater when she routinely never answered the questions.

I guess being a good politician requires being slimy and evasive. I feel like the CNN question near the beginning where she changes her personality and views based on who she's talking to didn't even need an answer, you can find clips on YouTube of her talking to southerners and she adopts a ridiculous drawl to pander to them.

Bernie really had a great chance last night following "Let's define what democratic socialism is" to point out that the nation is already quasi-socialist, which means both economic systems have value, but he seems to double down and rely on his talking points about Sweden and Denmark. He basically assumes the average American has any fucking clue that there exists a functioning planet outside of the USA, which is naïve.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Once again, saying the corporate media likes the corporate candidate is not a conspiracy. As I listed before they had 4 other options to choose from, 2 of which eliminated themselves. Leaving the "I'm not a capitalist"(Sanders) and the well prepared but playing second fiddle(to Sanders) O'Malley... Obviously the media picked Clinton as the winner. It's not a conspiracy it's in their best interest on many levels, ratings/clicks, actual policy should she become president, etc, etc...

Wouldn't it be in the media's best interests to make the race seem closer by declaring Sanders the winner? They tried to do that with Fiorina on the republican side. I think you're looking too deep into this. Isn't it possible that Hillary actually had a better debate performance?

 

[thepotatoman]

There's a reason the media pushed the biden story for so hard along side their email scandal story. They want a horse race but they'd rather have a horse race with a candidate that's not even running than a horse race between Hillary and Bernie. They will never acknowledge Bernie as a serious candidate.

It's often amazing how blind they are to the real race when it doesn't fit with what they expect. They're not even acknowledging Trump or Carson as serious candidates, despite them clearly dominating the polls.

 

[benjipwns]

If I understand you correctly, you're an idealist and would vote Bernie Sanders in in a heartbeat, but if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat nominee you may instead vote for a Republican nominee?

As one of those oft talked about "white liberal bernie supporters" I too get confused when someone says they support Bernie but they wont vote for Hillary if she wins.

I can't even fathom a situation where someone would support Sanders then vote Republican if he doesn't win.

There are more than two parties who will have Presidential nominees.

 

[ChaosXVI]

To me, Bernie won the debate, but I've been in the Bernie camp since 2008 when I learned of his existence. Hillary is definitely swinging more to the left with her rhetoric, I only hope that will translate to policy if she does get the nomination. She did a decent job, and managed to give Sanders a jab without sticking the knife too deep.

Even though one of the things I love about Sanders is that he doesn't get dirty...I found myself wanting him to do that during the debate. And of course it didn't happen, which is probably more harmful than if he had. I don't hate Hillary at all, but I'd prefer Sanders, and I think either of them will crush any Republican challenger despite their baggage.

O'Malley did pretty good for someone who before last night was barely relevant. Probably could make a decent case for a VP spot. Chafee and Webb were just pitiful. Yes it sucks that Sanders and Clinton got most of the questions and a lot more speaking time, but that's because Lincoln "Block of Granite" Chafee and Jim "VETS" Webb are virtual non-entities at this point.

There are more than two parties who will have Presidential nominees.

Well that's entirely pointless. There is a mathematical improbability with our style of electoral system that makes it virtually impossible for any candidate not in one of the two parties to win the presidency. You will literally be throwing your vote directly into the trash. Hillary, while obviously not as far left as Sanders, is still a fairly progressive candidate on most issues, even if you believe the argument that she follows what the people want from her more than having her own real stances on issues (which I disagree with).

 

[darknemus]

Except Bernie is exceeding Obama in many areas from amount of donors to crowd sizes this early, where they were in the polls at the same time and so on. Yeah, but Obama is the better candidate, right? Someone post all the infographics.

Bernie's main difference from Obama is he's not ruthless enough. He could have torn Hillary to shreds on her stances. But that's not how he campaigns.

Get back to me after Bernie posts some actual #s in a primary election. You are right, he's NOT ruthless enough. We need a Donald Trump type (as in, doesn't put up with crap, calls people out on their idiocy.. fact checks them right there / then..) but that's generally not a Democratic politician trait. For the record, if it looks like Bernie has ANY shot at the nomination by the time the primary's are here in Florida, he's got my vote.. I just don't see him maintaining for a long haul - especially when denying Super Pac money - Citizens United has made that almost a necessity, even though it sucks and I hate it but until it changes, those Super Pacs and their cash are going to help skew election outcomes - so we might as well make the best of it.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Wouldn't it be in the media's best interests to make the race seem closer by declaring Sanders the winner? They tried to do that with Fiorina on the republican side. I think you're looking too deep into this. Isn't it possible that Hillary actually had a better debate performance?

I watched the debate twice, once live and again after. She did not have the better debate performance in actually answering the questions. She dodged left and right and when challenged never gave an answer. I would say O'Malley outperformed her in substance even.

 

[Interfectum]

There are more than two parties who will have Presidential nominees.

They wouldn't vote Republican, they just wouldn't vote period.

Ahh so they'll throw their vote away or not vote at all. Seems mature.

 

[Veritigo_X]

I watched the debate twice, once live and again after. She did not have the better debate performance in actually answering the questions. She dodged left and right and when challenged never gave an answer. I would say O'Malley outperformed her in substance even.

And I'm sure you were totally unbiased while watching it based on your comments on this forum.

 

[YoungHav]

I dunno what the internets or TV News been saying but after each debate the NY papers trashed trump in headlines.

 

[Amentallica]

They wouldn't vote Republican, they just wouldn't vote period.

Which is also just as stupid. You have to incrementally work toward a goal, not by leaps and bounds. What Sanders represents is not incremental change, and I say that as someone who would much rather have Sanders nominated because I agree largely with his policies over Hillary's; but the reality is that it's much easier to accomplish Clinton's goals versus Sanders'.

So I don't understand why Sanders supporters would either not vote or vote Republican when doing so would be against their own interests.

You won't be able to have the whole Bernie pie, but accept that you can have some of it through Hillary.

 

[FiggyCal]

It's pretty surprising to me that people feel Hillary was a strong debater when she routinely never answered the questions.

I guess being a good politician requires being slimy and evasive. I feel like the CNN question near the beginning where she changes her personality and views based on who she's talking to didn't even need an answer, you can find clips on YouTube of her talking to southerners and she adopts a ridiculous drawl to pander to them.

Bernie really had a great chance last night following "Let's define what democratic socialism is" to point out that the nation is already quasi-socialist, which means both economic systems have value, but he seems to double down and rely on his talking points about Sweden and Denmark. He basically assumes the average American has any fucking clue that there exists a functioning planet outside of the USA, which is naïve.

I'm sure Americans aren't as stupid as you make them out to be.

In what way is the country quasi-socialist? What are you talking about?

 

[ErasureAcer]

Ahh so they'll throw their vote away or not vote at all. Seems mature.

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Regardless of who won last night, this debate painted the democratic party in a very good light and I give a lot of kudos to O'Malley for using his closing argument to make that case. They came across as competent (Chafee notwithstanding), results-oriented, focused on the issues and simply more mature. Between the republican debates and their current fiasco in the house of reps and trump bull-in-a-china-shopping his way through the GOP, the republicans seem unable to cobble together something resembling leadership. I think/hope a lot of swing/undecided voters will notice this.

 

[benjipwns]

Well that's entirely pointless. There is a mathematical improbability with our style of electoral system that makes it virtually impossible for any candidate not in one of the two parties to win the presidency. You will literally be throwing your vote directly into the trash. Hillary, while obviously not as far left as Sanders, is still a fairly progressive candidate on most issues, even if you believe the argument that she follows what the people want from her more than having her own real stances on issues (which I disagree with).

Ahh so they'll throw their vote away or not vote at all. Seems mature.

You're "throwing you vote directly in the trash" no matter who you vote for. Your vote is mathematically meaningless. You have no way to confirm it was even counted correctly or at all.

Since there's a set threshold of votes for third parties to achieve ballot status, voting for them is ever so slightly more significant as inching them towards it if you actually want to feel like your vote determined an outcome.

 

[Veritigo_X]

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

Terrible example. This is politics where you have to constantly be compromising.

 

[lednerg]

The most trusted name in news aces it again:

2016 Dem Debate #1: Hillary Clinton vs Bernie Sanders in Democratic debate in Las Vegas - TomoNews

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

I'm voting for the candidate who requires background checks for analogy licenses.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

Choose the most tolerable.

 

[benjipwns]

I'm voting for the candidate who requires background checks for analogy licenses.

Registration is the first step to confiscation.

 

[FiggyCal]

The most trusted name in news aces it again:

2016 Dem Debate #1: Hillary Clinton vs Bernie Sanders in Democratic debate in Las Vegas - TomoNews

They are the top 2 candidates. Was it supposed to pretend like the rest weren't polling at 1 percent.

 

[Par Score]

It really is bizarre that some people's preferences apparently run Sanders > Republicans > Clinton. I honestly can't wrap my brain around that, but then I'm European, so I'll just chalk it up as another thing about US politics that makes no sense.

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

Pick the one that is going to stack the Supreme Court with liberal Justices.

 

[Amentallica]

You are given two choices for a spouse. You love neither...what do you do? Serious question.

It's not like either spouse can have considerable influence over your life via legislation. If you support Bernie or anyone for that matter, be it a Democrat, Republican or Independent, it would be foolish to waste your vote on someone who's entirely unelectable or dissimilar in ideals.

You don't have to love Hillary to understand that she's the closest person, ideally speaking, to Sanders who actually has the potential to win.

It really is bizarre that some people's preferences apparently run Sanders > Republicans > Clinton. I honestly can't wrap my brain around that, but then I'm European, so I'll just chalk it up as another thing about US politics that makes no sense.


Pick the one that is going to stack the Supreme Court with liberal Justices.

Some people are simply so idealistic that if they can't have it entirely their way, they become detrimental to themselves and do really stupid shit.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Which is also just as stupid. You have to incrementally work toward a goal, not by leaps and bounds. What Sanders represents is not incremental change, and I say that as someone who would much rather have Sanders nominated because I agree largely with his policies over Hillary's; but the reality is that it's much easier to accomplish Clinton's goals versus Sanders'.

So I don't understand why Sanders supporters would either not vote or vote Republican when doing so would be against their own interests.

You won't be able to have the whole Bernie pie, but accept that you can have some of it through Hillary.

Many Bernie supporters will vote for Hillary especially after they see what doofus the Republicans come up with. Some Bernie supporters will vote 3rd party. Perhaps a few won't vote at all. If Hillary is the nominee(it's still way too early) then she better put a progressive on the ticket to make sure enough progressives don't stray(because quite simply they don't like her). It's probably the only way I'd vote for her. I don't like Hillary. I hate her personality. I hate her corporatism. I hate her being spineless. Someone has to have a spine who is on the ticket with her.