Support NeoGAF

[disastermouse]

Revolution also requires people to pay attention to the entire machine they want to take down, and not just pine for the top of the hill (the presidency)

The Presidency is not some dictatorship that can get everything done on a whim, so you have to get people elected in other parts of the government, and the entire Bernie Campaign seems disinterested in that fact even while calling for a political Revolution.

I think it's hard and also presumptuous for them to do that until they get the nomination, don't you? Bernie can stump for progressives as the party nominee, but I don't even think Clinton is currently stumping for Democrats in downballot elections yet.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Hah, I dont go into ot political threads so often so i dont see those people. I mostly here about how naive they are from disgruntled people posting here.

The two things that trouble me about supporting bernie is how he will be able to fight a republican party with their socialism tar bucket in hand, and how a lot of his proposals sound like pie in the sky best case scenario promises that will never pass a congress opposed to him while hillary is hardened and muttering about exectuive actions and going it alone...
Sometimes i wake up sweatily at night and wonder if neoxchaos is right

I'm of the opinion that their proposals are going to be blocked and fought against regardless, so it doesn't really make a difference who wins on the "how would you get this through congress" front.

 

[kirblar]

I think it's hard and also presumptuous for them to do that until they get the nomination, don't you? Bernie can stump for progressives as the party nominee, but I don't even think Clinton is currently stumping for Democrats in downballot elections yet.

IIRC. She's been doing some fundraising for them alongside hers.

 

[Armaros]

IIRC. She's been doing some fundraising for them alongside hers.

Yes she has, its been constantly in the news when she releases new fundraising numbers.

 

[SmokeMaxX]

Fair enough at establishment attacks. I think the speaker fees are important and annoying to the clintons but wouldnt be an issue if they didnt take the speeches. It seems more like frustration. In the end they will almost certainly win so I don't know why they are getting so flustered.

There's a difference between disagreeing on policy and demonizing the other primary candidate. Even if Bernie isn't directly smearing Clinton (don't get me started on the indirect 'not a true progressive' bull), his campaign isn't doing very much to settle his supporters down. See: r/politics.
Primaries are supposed to be about picking a candidate and coming together. Democrats (even if it wasn't Hillary) were supposed to have a lock on this election with the rise of Trumpmageddon. Instead we have a lot of people who hate the front-runner so much that they're willing to sit out or even vote for the other party.

I'm of the opinion that their proposals are going to be blocked and fought against regardless, so it doesn't really make a difference who wins on the "how would you get this through congress" front.

There's a big difference between needing 1-2 Republicans to vote with you and your coalition, and having to actually convince the party that you're representing to vote with you.

 

[ugaboga232]

TBH hillary's healthcare proposal is at best = to bernies (not that his is that good in the details, not as bad as Vox says it is but def has some problems) and at worst super generic platitudes about just incremental improvements. No talk on the public option (on her website) or a variety of important changes that bernie at least mentions.

I guess it means medicine will still be relatively lucrative so I guess I can't complain.

 

[ugaboga232]

There's a difference between disagreeing on policy and demonizing the other primary candidate. Even if Bernie isn't directly smearing Clinton (don't get me started on the indirect 'not a true progressive' bull), his campaign isn't doing very much to settle his supporters down. See: r/politics.
Primaries are supposed to be about picking a candidate and coming together. Democrats (even if it wasn't Hillary) were supposed to have a lock on this election with the rise of Trumpmageddon. Instead we have a lot of people who hate the front-runner so much that they're willing to sit out or even vote for the other party.

Do you have any data that "berniebros" are a significant faction? Bernie is treating clinton with kid gloves (the progressive thing was dumb on both parts and he should have backed down but it was just from a direct quote of hillary that started it). It sounds like you/clintons are pissed that there is a contender who is creating a somewhat contentious primary when hillary should have strolled to the nomination in order to fight the real enemy the republicans. Some people think both are bad (republicans comically so, current democrats not bad enough to outright hate but definitely need improvement) why is it bad that democracy is working?

 

[disastermouse]

Yes she has, its been constantly in the news when she releases new fundraising numbers.

But it will definitely ramp up a lot more when she's the nominee, right? And it'll be easier when they have a Republican nominee to rally against.

Clinton has a large network of political operatives and allies and so, stumping for downballot candidates is just a lot more accessible to her right now. I can't think of anyone who is going to want Sanders stumping for them until he's the head of the party. Maybe Kshama?

 

[kirblar]

Do you have any data that "berniebros" are a significant faction? Bernie is treating clinton with kid gloves (the progressive thing was dumb on both parts and he should have backed down but it was just from a direct quote of hillary that started it). It sounds like you/clintons are pissed that there is a contender who is creating a somewhat contentious primary when hillary should have strolled to the nomination in order to fight the real enemy the republicans. Some people think both are bad (republicans comically so, current democrats not bad enough to outright hate but definitely need improvement) why is it bad that democracy is working?

How is repeatedly attacking her directly and impugning her trustworthiness "kid gloves"? His campaign (and Bernie himself) are going straight after her personally, and they're taking it personally.

 

[ugaboga232]

How is repeatedly attacking her directly and impugning her trustworthiness "kid gloves"? His campaign (and Bernie himself) are going straight after her personally, and they're taking it personally.

Compared to clinton bringing up very misleading votes that her husband strong armed bernie into doing, bringing up clintons conflicts of interest with regards to her governance is important. Other than the true progressive thing which he should have backed off on (and was just quoting hillary herself saying shes a moderate), he hasn't really engaged in ad hominems (wont attack emails or bill clinton).

 

[sc0la]

So, Bubba apparently let off some steam.

Oh man I thought he had really taken to the snap chat thing or something.

Edit: what if Monica's blue dress was actually gold all along?

 

[kirblar]

Compared to clinton bringing up very misleading votes that her husband strong armed bernie into doing, bringing up clintons conflicts of interest with regards to her governance is important. Other than the true progressive thing which he should have backed off on (and was just quoting hillary herself saying shes a moderate), he hasn't really engaged in ad hominems (wont attack emails or bill clinton).

So repeatedly bringing up the speaking engagements with the pretty clear implication that her vote's for sale doesn't strike you as an issue?

She wasn't the one who brought the knives out.

 

[ugaboga232]

So repeatedly bringing up the speaking engagements with the pretty clear implication that her vote's for sale doesn't strike you as an issue?

She wasn't the one who brought the knives out.

Are you implying that a few million dollars to you personally and more to your PACs, campaign, and charity mean nothing? Benghazi is a red herring, even her emails arent really a problem. Clear conflicts of interest are important. Should they be ignored?

 

[The Technomancer]

I think that it's taken everyone by surprise just how much Sanders has surged. Add that to the fact that he's not dealing with the political 'A-Team' because Hillary vacuumed then all up ahead of time, and I think that maybe we need more than a handful of debates and 'not-even-the-first-Primary' to start coming down too hard on Bernie.

And then consider that a presidential campaign veteran like Hillary, who does have the 'A-Team' (and a helluva lot of high dollar donors), is tripping all over herself over responses to obvious lines of attack. How does she still not have a response to the Wall Street stuff besides 'it's sexist to attack me for it'?

And she's losing women and then Boomersplaining to them why they're naive or stupid to not vote for her. Awesome politics!

All of that is minor compared to things like the fact that I'm not sure how much Sanders actually understands the Supreme Court or, more worryingly, the Presidency. There is no excuse for a man who is running for the position of commander in chief to be as clueless as he is about foreign policy at this point. The fact that he isn't even trying is worrying. And I don't know how he expects to get anything done legislatively either with the way he's alienating the people he has to work with. It feels like he's bought into the idea that just being elected on his platform would be "symbolic enough" to make a difference. No, it fucking won't. The government has to actually operate

 

[kirblar]

Are you implying that a few million dollars to you personally and more to your PACs, campaign, and charity mean nothing? Benghazi is a red herring, even her emails arent really a problem. Clear conflicts of interest are important. Should they be ignored?

Yes. Those appearances are a drop in the bucket.

 

[ugaboga232]

All of that is minor compared to things like the fact that I'm not sure how much Sanders actually understands the Supreme Court or, more worryingly, the Presidency. There is no excuse for a man who is running for the position of commander in chief to be as clueless as he is about foreign policy at this point. The fact that he isn't even trying is worrying

I think he understands the supreme court and knows you cant just get rid of citizens united but uses it as a litmus test (unless he directly makes it seem otherwise).

As far as iran and SA, they def super hate each other but they are also the two major factors playing out their proxy war in syria. If you want to fix the problem you have to get them to stop feuding (obviously so much easier said than done as I know of the bad blood between shias and sunnis being the child of two iranians). So bad policy probably but in a sense an ok understanding of how to fix it. Still really craptastic showing on the debate by bernie so I hope he steps it up next week.

Yes. Those appearances are a drop in the bucket.

So you are handwaving sums of the money that definitely change peoples opinions even if not consciously?

 

[The Technomancer]

Compared to clinton bringing up very misleading votes that her husband strong armed bernie into doing, bringing up clintons conflicts of interest with regards to her governance is important. Other than the true progressive thing which he should have backed off on (and was just quoting hillary herself saying shes a moderate), he hasn't really engaged in ad hominems (wont attack emails or bill clinton).

Is this what we're saying now? Bernie's "bad votes" are ones Clinton forced him to make? He sure didn't have a problem not voting for the Iraq war when all the pressure was on congress to approve it

 

[shinra-bansho]

Let us dispel once and for all with this fiction that these aren't personal and negative attacks.
Let us dispel once and for all with this fiction that these aren't personal and negative attacks.
Let us dispel once and for all with this fiction that these aren't personal and negative attacks.

 

[disastermouse]

So repeatedly bringing up the speaking engagements with the pretty clear implication that her vote's for sale doesn't strike you as an issue?

She wasn't the one who brought the knives out.

That's not bringing the knives out, that's making a distinction between the principles of his campaign and the traditional politics of her campaign. It speaks to 'who is your milleau?' Hillary is obviously much more comfortable with the monied powerful. That doesn't mean she's immoral, but it makes it hard to believe that she'll repudiate or act against the interests of people she hobnobs with. That's not because she's immoral, it's because she's inclined via proximity to think more highly of them than an outsider would, to be a little less judgmental, a smidge more inclined to disregard the consequences of their behavior. After all, she can see that the Goldman execs are a lot like herself! And they love their families!

Most of us have kind feelings toward benefactors or people with whom we have close social similarity.

It's natural to do this, and not immoral so much as problematic regarding reconciling her perspective with the perspectives of poor and working class people.

 

[ugaboga232]

Is this what we're saying now? Bernie's "bad votes" are ones Clinton forced him to make? He sure didn't have a problem not voting for the Iraq war when all the pressure was on congress to approve it, as we've heard many times

Well one in specific that was a must vote to pass. I guess I should get some citations before I go trying to remember fragments of articles ive read.

 

[kirblar]

That's not bringing the knives out, that's making a distinction between the principles of his campaign and the traditional politics of her campaign. It speaks to 'who is your milleau?' Hillary is obviously much more comfortable with the monied powerful. That doesn't mean she's immoral, but it makes it hard to believe that she'll repudiate or act against the interests of people she hobnobs with. That's not because she's immoral, it's because she's inclined via proximity to think more highly of them than an outsider would, to be a little less judgmental, a smidge more inclined to disregard the consequences of their behavior. After all, she can see that the Goldman execs are a lot like herself! And they love their families!

Most of us have kind feelings toward benefactors or people with whom we have close social similarity.

It's natural to do this, and not immoral so much as problematic regarding reconciling her perspective with the perspectives of poor and working class people.

And Bill O'Reilly is "just asking questions", too?

He's very much implying she's for sale.

 

[The Technomancer]

And Bill O'Reilly is "just asking questions", too?

He's very much implying she's for sale.

Which is exactly the narrative everyone discussing it has jumped on as well

 

[ugaboga232]

And Bill O'Reilly is "just asking questions", too?

He's very much implying she's for sale.

Are you really comparing bill o reilly and bernie sanders? Sanders gave her a chance to respond in the last debate and her answer was pretty crappy.

And everyone is for sale, its just a matter of price and what you want them to do.

 

[East Lake]

And Bill O'Reilly is "just asking questions", too?

He's very much implying she's for sale.

That's like one of the least offensive things to be attacked about. Everybody needs cash.

 

[The Technomancer]

I like Bernie, and I support basically every thing he stands for, and I would support a candidate who I thought was actually serious about politics and the presidency who focused on those issues. But all I can say right now is that he is pissing me off. Its becoming too late for him to make that change, to impress me, to convince me that "he gets it". He's very rapidly just becoming an obstacle in front of the candidate who seems to actually make progress a priority over symbolic grandstanding. As the kids say, put up or shut up

 

[disastermouse]

All of that is minor compared to things like the fact that I'm not sure how much Sanders actually understands the Supreme Court or, more worryingly, the Presidency. There is no excuse for a man who is running for the position of commander in chief to be as clueless as he is about foreign policy at this point. The fact that he isn't even trying is worrying. And I don't know how he expects to get anything done legislatively either with the way he's alienating the people he has to work with. It feels like he's bought into the idea that just being elected on his platform would be "symbolic enough" to make a difference. No, it fucking won't. The government has to actually operate

The government hasn't 'been actually operating' for the last six years. Foreign policy has been a fantastic mess - a foreign policy with which Hillary Clinton has been hugely influential! She fucking name-dropped Henry Goddamned Kissinger to back up her bona fides!

Besides the fact that Henry Kissinger is not a man one should bring up as a supporter, ever, I have serious doubts about the political savvy of a Democrat who doesn't already know that - especially in a non-establishment cycle.

 

[kirblar]

Are you really comparing bill o reilly and bernie sanders? Sanders gave her a chance to respond in the last debate and her answer was pretty crappy.

And everyone is for sale, its just a matter of price and what you want them to do.

No, I'm specifically comparing that "explanation" to the "just asking questions" excuse when you're using the questioning to cause a deliberate association in the viewer.

You should get a Ted DiBiase avatar w/ that quote.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Sanders vote for the CFMA was for an originally much milder bill. It was "sloppy voting" as one article put it. It's a dumb attack.
No one forced him to vote for the omnibus crime bill though.
I don't know what other votes are being referred to.

Are you really comparing bill o reilly and bernie sanders? Sanders gave her a chance to respond in the last debate and her answer was pretty crappy.

And everyone is for sale, its just a matter of price and what you want them to do.

It's a dumb question. And there is no palatable answer to people outraged by the very existence of banks. It's what Presidents and First Ladies and Secretaries out of office do. I'd do it too if I could.

 

[ugaboga232]

Sanders vote for the CFMA was for an originally much milder bill. It was "sloppy voting" as one article put it. It's a dumb attack.
No one forced him to vote for the omnibus crime bill though.
I don't know what other votes are being referred to.

I think it was the CFMA. Agree on crime bill, would like to check up and see what reasons he gave at the time for it.

 

[The Technomancer]

The government hasn't 'been actually operating' for the last six years. Foreign policy has been a fantastic mess - a foreign policy with which Hillary Clinton has been hugely influential! She fucking name-dropped Henry Goddamned Kissinger to back up her bona fides!

Besides the fact that Henry Kissinger is not a man one should bring up as a supporter, ever, I have serious doubts about the political savvy of a Democrat who doesn't already know that - especially in a non-establishment cycle.

There's two things:
I trust Hillary's ability to actually craft effective executive actions more than Bernie's quite frankly, and the stuff she's made the focus of her platform can actually be worked on on an executive level. Bernie's stuff all requires some level of congressional support, which brings us to point 2

Forget working with Republicans because that's never going to happen, the last month has raised doubts about how well Bernie will be able to work with congressional democrats

 

[kirblar]

It's a dumb question. And there is no palatable answer to people outraged by the very existence of banks. It's what Presidents and First Ladies and Secretaries out of office do. I'd do it too if I could.

It's like how stars get paid to be on talk shows. Just w/ way better paychecks.

 

[Armaros]

There's two things:
I trust Hillary's ability to actually craft effective executive actions more than Bernie's quite frankly.

Forget working with Republicans because that's never going to happen, the last month has raised doubts about how well Bernie will be able to work with congressional democrats

Sander's campaign leadership choices and their actions make me question how well the Bernie White house would run the various Executive branch departments.

He cant put together a foreign policy team so he can brush up on foreign policy, what is he going to do about a State Department?

 

[ugaboga232]

No, I'm specifically comparing that "explanation" to the "just asking questions" excuse when you're using the questioning to cause a deliberate association in the viewer.

You should get a Ted DiBiase avatar w/ that quote.

Are you really questioning the fact that the humans and their brain is just running on a very sophisticated system of incentives? People are not pure machines of free will (pls no more philosophy discussion on this quite yet lol) and respond to incentives and disincentives. See what the lottery does to people (extreme example). The millions and millions both clintons have received most certainly has an effect on them, the question is what type and what magnitude. It doesn't even have to be an insidious, screw the 99% effect. It can be much more subtle and aligned on tribalistic notions (which feeds into the establishment thing as essentially a networking clique within the democratic party).

 

[The Technomancer]

Sander's campaign leadership choices and their actions make me question how well the Bernie White house would run the various Executive branch departments.

He cant put together a foreign policy team so he can brush up on foreign policy, what is he going to do about a State Department?

Basically

 

[disastermouse]

And Bill O'Reilly is "just asking questions", too?

He's very much implying she's for sale.

No, she's implying that he's saying that - because that sort of attack is much easier to deflect with indignation.

I'm a Bernie fan and I don't think Hillary is for sale. You can't purchase people who are already securely rich. I don't think Hillary Clinton (or Bill for that matter) is particularly greedy. I think that, via close physical proximity, she has assumed the values of the wealthy, values of excellence, surely. But in assuming those values, and their downsides as well, she is completely out of touch with the struggles of working class and poor people - and obviously out of sync with their values.

Wealth values are also out of sync with this entire election cycle.

 

[ugaboga232]

There's two things:
I trust Hillary's ability to actually craft effective executive actions more than Bernie's quite frankly, and the stuff she's made the focus of her platform can actually be worked on on an executive level. Bernie's stuff all requires some level of congressional support, which brings us to point 2

Forget working with Republicans because that's never going to happen, the last month has raised doubts about how well Bernie will be able to work with congressional democrats

What does hillary want to do with executive action as opposed to congress? Neither her nor bernie will get much done thru congress which is a good point as well as the fact his political staff suck (though some part could be due to no one wanting to piss off hillary and all the good people already being with hillary) and he lacks foreign policy people which he hopefully fixes or he pretty much is too incompetent.

 

[kirblar]

What does hillary want to do with executive action as opposed to congress? Neither her nor bernie will get much done thru congress which is a good point as well as the fact his political staff suck (though some part could be due to no one wanting to piss off hillary and all the good people already being with hillary) and he lacks foreign policy people which he hopefully fixes or he pretty much is too incompetent.

She's saying she wants to continue what DGAF Obama has done for the last 1/4 of his presidency- he's been going wild with the exec orders.

 

[ugaboga232]

Sanders vote for the CFMA was for an originally much milder bill. It was "sloppy voting" as one article put it. It's a dumb attack.
No one forced him to vote for the omnibus crime bill though.
I don't know what other votes are being referred to.
It's a dumb question. And there is no palatable answer to people outraged by the very existence of banks. It's what Presidents and First Ladies and Secretaries out of office do. I'd do it too if I could.

The problem is that shes going back into the presidency. Cashing out is one thing, cashing in on your pre-presidential tour (i dont buy that she didnt know she was gonna run for president 2 years ago).

 

[East Lake]

Sander's campaign leadership choices and their actions make me question how well the Bernie White house would run the various Executive branch departments.

He cant put together a foreign policy team so he can brush up on foreign policy, what is he going to do about a State Department?

What do you think would happen with the state department?

 

[ugaboga232]

She's saying she wants to continue what DGAF Obama has done for the last 1/4 of his presidency- he's been going wild with the exec orders.

Fair enough but what new things does she want to do? I would be ok with more DGAF obama but I don't think hillary is quite that (more progressive in some ways, more conservative in others and definitely a bit more hawkish).

 

[SmokeMaxX]

Do you have any data that "berniebros" are a significant faction? Bernie is treating clinton with kid gloves (the progressive thing was dumb on both parts and he should have backed down but it was just from a direct quote of hillary that started it). It sounds like you/clintons are pissed that there is a contender who is creating a somewhat contentious primary when hillary should have strolled to the nomination in order to fight the real enemy the republicans. Some people think both are bad (republicans comically so, current democrats not bad enough to outright hate but definitely need improvement) why is it bad that democracy is working?

Lol. First off, I'm not even talking about the berniebro nonsense so stop trying to use that to hand-wave my argument away. I'm talking about the significant reality that a large portion of Sanders voters are saying right now that they don't want to vote for Clinton because she's a liar, she's not trustworthy, she's part of the problem, she's not even progressive, she's a hypocrite, she'll do anything to be President, etc. (I could go on, but you get the point). This isn't limited to reddit, but it's obviously most pronounced there. You almost can't ask ANY group of Bernie supporters if they'd support Hillary if she won the primary without hearing some form of 'no.' You see this any time the media does a live interview at a rally. Obviously it's hard to prove empirically since noone asks the question, but it's telling that you don't hear the same of Hillary Clinton supporters.

Second, stop with the persecution complex. I don't care if Sanders wins. I already stated several times in the past that I'll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination. I like Sanders and I agree with him about 95% of the time. I care that he's hurting the chances of the progressive movement to get the Presidency for no reason. If his policies are so great, then why are we even discussing how establishment Clinton is? That attack has no place in a primary. How is he going to call her establishment (which indirectly states that she's "part of the problem") and then later endorse her? Clinton might not have liked Obama beating her in 2008, but she and Bill worked their asses off for him because that's what the party needed. Bernie attacks Clinton on her Super PACs and the fact that she's establishment and then hopes we forget about that when he bows out of the race?

 

[The Technomancer]

What does hillary want to do with executive action as opposed to congress? Neither her nor bernie will get much done thru congress which is a good point as well as the fact his political staff suck (though some part could be due to no one wanting to piss off hillary and all the good people already being with hillary) and he lacks foreign policy people which he hopefully fixes or he pretty much is too incompetent.

There's a lot you can do, if you get clever, with regards to education reform, climate change and energy development, immigration, LGBTQ protections, substance abuse problems, etc with executive actions. Legislation is usually better at baking in real change, but the operational control the President has is still very valuable.
That's not to say Bernie doesn't care about those things, I believe that he does, but I don't have confidence that he's organized enough or understands administrative politics enough to be nearly as effective. And the stuff that is the core of his campaign, like sweeping tax reform, single payer healthcare, etc, that stuff all requires actual congressional action

 

[ugaboga232]

Lol. First off, I'm not even talking about the berniebro nonsense so stop trying to use that to hand-wave my argument away. I'm talking about the significant reality that a large portion of Sanders voters are saying right now that they don't want to vote for Clinton because she's a liar, she's not trustworthy, she's part of the problem, she's not even progressive, she's a hypocrite, she'll do anything to be President, etc. (I could go on, but you get the point). This isn't limited to reddit, but it's obviously most pronounced there. You almost can't ask ANY group of Bernie supporters if they'd support Hillary if she won the primary without hearing some form of 'no.' You see this any time the media does a live interview at a rally. Obviously it's hard to prove empirically since noone asks the question, but it's telling that you don't hear the same of Hillary Clinton supporters.

Second, stop with the persecution complex. I don't care if Sanders wins. I already stated several times in the past that I'll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination. I like Sanders and I agree with him about 95% of the time. I care that he's hurting the chances of the progressive movement to get the Presidency for no reason. If his policies are so great, then why are we even discussing how establishment Clinton is? That attack has no place in a primary. How is going to call her establishment (which indirectly states that she's "part of the problem") and then later endorse her? Clinton might not have liked Obama beating her in 2008, but she and Bill worked their asses off for him because that's what the party needed. Bernie attacks Clinton on her Super PACs and the fact that she's establishment and then hopes we forget that when he bows out of the race?

Pretty sure at least 80% of bernie supporters would vote for hillary and I'm sure the number will go up. You are confusing anecdotes with data (people ask that question a lot). You are asking bernie to play the primary with both of his hands tied against his backs. If clinton can't take bernie's relatively weak attacks how will she survive the GE?

There's a lot you can do, if you get clever, with regards to education reform, climate change and energy development, immigration, LGBTQ protections, substance abuse problems, etc with executive actions. Legislation is usually better at baking in real change, but the operational control the President has is still very valuable.
That's not to say Bernie doesn't care about those things, I believe that he does, but I don't have confidence that he's organized enough or understands administrative politics enough to be nearly as effective. And the stuff that is the core of his campaign, like sweeping tax reform, single payer healthcare, etc, that stuff all requires actual congressional action

Fair enough, all good points. Drugs are hard with the weird interactions between congress and DEA but the rest seem feasible.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It just occurred to me that were Sanders to win the nomination and not succumb to the GOP attack machine, you'd get Jeff Weaver and Tad Devine in the White House.

 

[disastermouse]

Lol. First off, I'm not even talking about the berniebro nonsense so stop trying to use that to hand-wave my argument away. I'm talking about the significant reality that a large portion of Sanders voters are saying right now that they don't want to vote for Clinton because she's a liar, she's not trustworthy, she's part of the problem, she's not even progressive, she's a hypocrite, she'll do anything to be President, etc. (I could go on, but you get the point). This isn't limited to reddit, but it's obviously most pronounced there. You almost can't ask ANY group of Bernie supporters if they'd support Hillary if she won the primary without hearing some form of 'no.' You see this any time the media does a live interview at a rally. Obviously it's hard to prove empirically since noone asks the question, but it's telling that you don't hear the same of Hillary Clinton supporters.

Second, stop with the persecution complex. I don't care if Sanders wins. I already stated several times in the past that I'll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination. I like Sanders and I agree with him about 95% of the time. I care that he's hurting the chances of the progressive movement to get the Presidency for no reason. If his policies are so great, then why are we even discussing how establishment Clinton is? That attack has no place in a primary. How is he going to call her establishment (which indirectly states that she's "part of the problem") and then later endorse her? Clinton might not have liked Obama beating her in 2008, but she and Bill worked their asses off for him because that's what the party needed. Bernie attacks Clinton on her Super PACs and the fact that she's establishment and then hopes we forget about that when he bows out of the race?

My answer is definitely 'no' on voting for Clinton, but not because I think she's a bad person - rather because, via wealth and proximity to wealth, she has assumed the values of the wealthy class with whom she associates and is obviously most comfortable. She has little insight or proximity to the values of the working class or the poor.

 

[ugaboga232]

It just occurred to me that were Sanders to win the nomination and not succumb to the GOP attack machine, you'd get Jeff Weaver and Tad Devine in the White House.

If that happens i will do something generically stupid (like eat a lot of spicy foods and lactose containing products to set off my IBS). Clinton almost assuredly has this nomination short of divine (cough FBI cough) intervention.

 

[RastaMentality]

Trump has 70+% (in PP and PO) chance of winning NH on 538 now.

 

[User 463088]

The VA Scandal on Bernie Sander's Watch

And here's another ad that writes itself to attack Bernie's health care plan. All you gotta do is remind people how shit the VA was, and tie Bernie's love for all things government controlled to him wanting to take over health care.

"Broken hospitals, long waits, uncaring staff...this was the VA under socialist Bernie Sanders. And what did he learn? Nothing. He wants to turn YOUR healthcare over to the same bureaucratic nightmare that caused hundreds of our brave men and women to languish without medical care. Ask yourself, is this the type of care your family deserves?"

Baby Got PAC is responsible for the content of this ad.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

I just have to hope Dems come to their senses with SC/NV on the horizon.

 

[Coriolanus]

The VA Scandal on Bernie Sander's Watch

And here's another ad that writes itself to attack Bernie's health care plan. All you gotta do is remind people how shit the VA was, and tie Bernie's love for all things government controlled to him wanting to take over health care.

"Broken hospitals, long waits, uncaring staff...this was the VA under socialist Bernie Sanders. And what did he learn? Nothing. He wants to turn YOUR healthcare over to the same bureaucratic nightmare that caused hundreds of our brave men and women to languish without medical care. Ask yourself, is this the type of care your family deserves?"

Baby Got PAC is responsible for the content of this ad.

Shitting on VA's is something that anyone that held political office does so wouldnt be particularly worried. Especially when it seems somewhat incredulous that anyone would support the alternative to government providing healthcare for them.

Either way, if VA track record is your concern, sadly you wont be voting, yes? After all...

Hillary told Rachel Maddow on the latter's Friday program that the VA scandal was "overstated," that "overall, veterans who do get treated are satisfied with their treatment," and that "nobody would believe that from the coverage that you see, and the constant berating of the VA that comes from the Republicans, in -- in part in pursuit of this ideological agenda that they have.

While sorta true, horrendously incompetent in regards to optics, and as such, walked back.
Can democrats afford nominating someone with suh a clear capacity to shove her foot in her mouth? Join me next time as i Concern Troll some more!