Support NeoGAF

[Frozenprince]

He actually has said exactly how he intends to pass his plans. Whether it's realistic (it isn't) is another story.

"What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change."

Good luck with that. Still misses my point about "Pragmatically" passing it.

 

[norm9]

He actually has said exactly how he intends to pass his plans. Whether it's realistic (it isn't) is another story.

"What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change."

Sounds like Trump's I'm going to make Mexico pay for that wall.

 

[Alandrus Sun]

He actually has said exactly how he intends to pass his plans. Whether it's realistic (it isn't) is another story.

"What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change."

I still laugh at this today.

 

[Kak.efes]

What he's proposing is IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCOMPLISH.

No. It's necessary.

 

[Xe4]

He actually has said exactly how he intends to pass his plans. Whether it's realistic (it isn't) is another story.

"What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change."

His big error is not realizing that most people (and especially young people) barely get involved in politics during an actual election year, much less outside of one. His expectation of a million student March on Washington is rediculous. People will elect him, hope he takes care of all of their problems, then get mad that he doesnt, just like they always do, not realizing the part they played in the process.

You can really only mobilize your supporters for mass protests early in your term, and really it's a strategy that's not necessarily repeatable, especially if it fails. And if it fails it's more likely to dishearten and disillusion your supporters than fire them up--unless of course you have a Trump-like situation where your own personal rhetoric justifies violent escalation on the part of an increasingly rabid but miniaturizing base.

What incentive does an obstructionist Republican congressperson have to go along with what will easily be spun into a mass of crypto-communist, massively-entitled naifs who never had a job to tax in their life, begging the government to let them escape for four years into a drug and sex infused "safe space" while crippling the Common Man's pocketbook? Does Sanders feel Republicans think these kids would otherwise vote for them? Would Republicans feel that abandoning their current constituents in order to appease these kids would do more good than harm when they could just be primaried by a better-funded Tea Party or Trump Party figure to their right? This is like "underpants gnomes" political strategy.

Edit: also this. Any students that want college to be free obviously aren't going to vote republican anyhow, and they're in areas where their votes don't reflect the congressmen/women there. Why should a republican congressman in an area of Mississippi where there there are zero colleges care about free college? Why would a senator from the same state vote for the bill when the majority of his constituents are very against said bill? It's just a dumb, dumb plan.

The only good Bernie being in office would be towards those issues is starting a conversation on them, cause if he doesn't have a dem majority in Congress and supermajority (or close to one) in the senate, good luck getting a tenth of that passed.

 

[Frozenprince]

No. It's necessary.

No, it's not. Is the country going to collapse because we don't have single payer? Then it's certainly not necessary.

It's never going to happen in the US, we will eventually, one day, get a significantly watered down version of these things. But only after both parties come together and compromise.

 

[shem935]

No. It's necessary.

Don't quote interstellar to cover flaws in plans for policy implementation

 

[CrazyDude]

No. It's necessary.

Great, it's still impossible. Being necessary does not make it less impossible.

 

[Matt]

Yeah, I'm talking about each single SD. Not all superdelegates combined as a whole.

...why? It doesn't matter at all, and doesn't effect anything. Why are you talking about that?

 

[aspiegamer]

Bernies primary demo is 18-30 year old white men.

Not true! In some polls I've seen him lead in the "some college" bracket! But not in the "high school" or "college graduate" columns.

HMMMMMMM I can't imagine why! Having the core of your campaign being people only backing you because you have an impossible promise of free college is even more depressing than saying it's white guys.

No. It's necessary.

In this country, today (and indefinitely foreseeable future), it is absolutely, positively, certifiably 100% impossible to accomplish. I feel bad for anyone that's somehow been convinced otherwise.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I find it incredibly hilarious that Bernie people decry superdelegates as undemocratic, and at the same time are massively campaigning for them to go against the candidate who has had the most votes.

 

[Frozenprince]

Wrong topic.

 

[Aureon]

Obama's fundraising restrictions appear to have also backfired.

Unilateral disarmament is, generally, not a good idea.
Perhaps it helped in 2008, but 2008 was very atypical. 2010-2014... ugh.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

He actually has said exactly how he intends to pass his plans. Whether it's realistic (it isn't) is another story.

"What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change."

That's a populist message from a populist candidate. It sounds silly, but it's not an out of the ordinary appeal to the base he's built. It appears he's hopeful that what he's managed to do for the youth vote would carry over into his presidency (rather than the usual loss of interest among most voters in non-Presidential-election voting years).

That probably reads as an insult, but it's honestly not meant to be one.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

...why? It doesn't matter at all, and doesn't effect anything. Why are you talking about that?

It started with this. That's why I was talking about singular, individual superdelegates. I was annoyed by the use of the word "conspiracy" like it was some crazy thing to believe.

If you were all just saying that SDs as a whole group haven't flipped or changed an election then ok I "concede" that even though I wasn't arguing against that to begin with. There is still an argument that the pledged SDs so far, along with the media, bias the vote

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Sanders should just call it a day here. I can only hope that the US eventually will have a left wing candidate who has the same policy ideas that he does but a plan on how to make them achievable in the future. Sadly, I think the US will never accept social democracy in my lifetime, so no such candidate will ever exist. That would require an astronomical shift in its political culture.

 

[Cipherr]

I can only hope when/if she wins that she will take into account the feelings of Democratic voters while she is paying back her cronies and all the corporations she is beholden to

This level of "bargaining" consistently reminds me of the Republicans after they got curb stomped in 2012. They were all:

"Well I hope the President learns from these last 4 years that uhh, we feel this way about this stuff after he finishes celebrating his landslide victory tonight".

"Nigger" vs "Sit down in the back and maybe we get to you, maybe"

It all comes from the same place

This is a poor representation of reality IMO. There is DEFINITELY racism on the left. Lord knows there is. But you are straight up stretching to say its lock and step with the right. That's just crazy. Saying neither choice is perfect is more accurate, but there's a definite difference.

But WHY? Why is she GOING to be President? Why were people racing to embrace Hillary, I mean just look at how HillGAF behaves, when they had a better option?

Because I dont believe Bernie is a better option. Not even remotely. I'm too damned old to fall for someone promising the moon and stars only to pretend that I don't know that he needs massive party support and seats to make that stuff happen. Then he proceeds to ignore downticket dems completely.

This isn't my first rodeo and I know snake oil when I see it (after being disappointed a few times in the past). He is saying the right things, but showing me ZERO to indicate he actually cares to do what's necessary to get those things into place. He claims to be a revolutionary that dislikes the 'system' but jumped right on the 'system's' ticket as a Dem instead of independent when he knew it would benefit him, and has every plan to jump off ship back to Independent when he loses.

No thank you. Only way he gets my vote is if it's between him and the lunatics on the right.

This is just an excuse to not like him now though. Even if he reversed course and suddenly decided he would help with the downticket races, the Hillary supporters would just find a new reason to not like him.

No, this is you making an excuse for something you clearly know to be a failing by Bernie. You know his talk of revolution is just steam in the air without liberal support, and you know him not supporting down ticket is a mistake, but rather than admit that he has a flaw, you instead create a reality in your head that says "Even if he did, it wouldn't matter" to justify his inaction.

 

[Kangi]

I find it incredibly hilarious that Bernie people decry superdelegates as undemocratic, and at the same time are massively campaigning for them to go against the candidate who has had the most votes.

Look to this and things like the stuff in Nevada to see that for all their cries of corruption and deceit, they're perfectly fine with trying to win the election through whatever shady means they can think of. It's okay if Bernie does it, but if Hillary tries to so much as send absentee ballots... <incoherent screeching about voter fraud>

Suppose that's the nature of fringe supporters of a dying, desperate campaign. Win, whatever the cost. Just with a weird dash of "contradictory feelings of moral superiority" thrown into the mix this time.

 

[Matt]

It started with this. That's why I was talking about singular, individual superdelegates. I was annoyed by the use of the word "conspiracy" like it was some crazy thing.

That post you were responding to, just like basically every post made on this subject, is referring to the Superdelegates as a whole.

 

[Slayven]

I find it incredibly hilarious that Bernie people decry superdelegates as undemocratic, and at the same time are massively campaigning for them to go against the candidate who has had the most votes.

Too add a layer, Ted Devine, Bernie's number 2 is the one that came up with the system.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Look to this and things like the stuff in Nevada to see that for all their cries of corruption and deceit, they're perfectly fine with trying to win the election through whatever shady means they can think of. It's okay if Bernie does it, but if Hillary tries to so much as send absentee ballots... <incoherent screeching about voter fraud>

Suppose that's the nature of fringe supporters of a dying, desperate campaign. Win, whatever the cost. Just with a weird dash of "contradictory feelings of moral superiority" thrown into the mix this time.

This is basically what ideologues do regardless of what ideology follow. It only matters when applied to the opponent, when we do it it's okay because we are right and they are wrong. We are doing it for a good cause while they are doing it for evil.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Look to this and things like the stuff in Nevada to see that for all their cries of corruption and deceit, they're perfectly fine with trying to win the election through whatever shady means they can think of. It's okay if Bernie does it, but if Hillary tries to so much as send absentee ballots... <incoherent screeching about voter fraud>

Suppose that's the nature of fringe supporters of a dying, desperate campaign. Win, whatever the cost. Just with a weird dash of "contradictory feelings of moral superiority" thrown into the mix this time.

Nevada? What happened there?

(I'm sure I should/do know but it's been a long day)

 

[Xe4]

Nevada? What happened there?

(I'm sure I should/do know but it's been a long day)

Bernie gained a few delegates he didn't previously have because the caucus votes multiple times. He didn't flip the state as some are suggesting, but it was still pretty dumb.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

That post you were responding to, just like basically every post made on this subject, is referring to the Superdelegates as a whole.

If that's the case, then my mistake. I took it to mean that it never happened as in they always each vote in line with their constituents. The whole argument was a non argument then.

 

[Matt]

If that's the case, then my mistake. I took it to mean that it never happened as in they always each vote in line with their constituents. The whole argument was a non argument then.

Ok, glad we got that worked out.

 

[APF]

You can really only mobilize your supporters for mass protests early in your term, and really it's a strategy that's not necessarily repeatable, especially if it fails. And if it fails it's more likely to dishearten and disillusion your supporters than fire them up--unless of course you have a Trump-like situation where your own personal rhetoric justifies violent escalation on the part of an increasingly rabid but miniaturizing base.

What incentive does an obstructionist Republican congressperson have to go along with what will easily be spun into a mass of crypto-communist, massively-entitled naifs who never had a job to tax in their life, begging the government to let them escape for four years into a drug and sex infused "safe space" while crippling the Common Man's pocketbook? Does Sanders feel Republicans think these kids would otherwise vote for them? Would Republicans feel that abandoning their current constituents in order to appease these kids would do more good than harm when they could just be primaried by a better-funded Tea Party or Trump Party figure to their right? This is like "underpants gnomes" political strategy.

 

[eBay Huckster]

well, Sanders is right about one thing. those Republicans will have to make a decision.

do they:

1. laugh in the alleged protesters' faces, or
2. laugh at them from two stories up?

 

[Kak.efes]

Don't quote interstellar to cover flaws in plans for policy implementation

Bernie's the only one capable of docking us to the Endurance.

 

[Kangi]

well, Sanders is right about one thing. those Republicans will have to make a decision.

do they:

1. laugh in the alleged protesters' faces, or
2. laugh at them from two stories up?

How about laughing at them from a good ten stories up, once Bernie's finished replacing that establishment white house with a pristine ivory tower?

 

[Mecha]

Even if he turns the house his shit has no chance. I'm sorry, you're not gonna get a league of what are essentially moderates to vote for your socialist party policies. It's just not happening.

He isn't a socialist, if he would have called himself a social democrat (what he actually is) then he probably would have gotten more mainstream support.

 

[APF]

Headlines on the first day of protests

Slate: "Let's just admit it: not everyone should go to college."

Vox: "Is paying for college even a good investment in the first place?"

Salon: "Free tuition is just more subsidies for white people."

 

[Macam]

Maybe if you're a white straight male it won't make much a difference. But to the none white straight male population there's a stark difference between the Clinton and the Republican base.

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

Not really, Clinton still advocates raising the minimum wage while Republicans don't. Clinton still advocates for debt-free tuition policies, and Republicans will try and pass tax cuts for high earners any chance they get while Clinton would, at worst, keep them the same.

 

[Matt]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

None of this is true.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Not really, Clinton still advocates raising the minimum wage while Republicans don't. Clinton still advocates for debt-free tuition policies, and Republicans will try and pass tax cuts for high earners any chance they get while Clinton would, at worst, keep them the same.

Not to mention her SCOTUS picks aren't going to be chosen specifically for how willing they are to fuck over minorities, the LGBT community, the poor, women, etc.

 

[Alandrus Sun]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

 

[Trouble]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

This is some weapons grade bullshit right here. The democratic party platform isn't actively hostile against the poor.

 

[Ogrekiller]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

May I suggest to take some advice from Trump in regards to Clinton then?

Don’t Vote If You Don’t Plan On Voting For Me

 

[smurfx]

it truly is the blurst of times.

 

[Macam]

None of this is true.

None of this is true.

 

[Supermanisdead]

"How dare you vote against your own interests as an African-American woman. I expected you would be smarter than that."

jesus christ fuck off lmao

 

[Matt]

None of this is true.

That an...interesting defense. Certainly doesn't make you seem less informed or juvenile.

 

[Steel]

Exactly my point. I wasn't speaking broadly, but personally, and to the notion that all liberals are somehow magically better. That depends on a lot of things.

Don't worry, I have no intention of voting for a Republican for anything, dogcatcher included.

Spoiler

Of course, that also applies to Clinton.

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

Yeah, Cruz's and Trump's tax plans that will add trillions to the deficit couldn't possibly be bad for the average white guy.

 

[Macam]

That an...interesting defense. Certainly doesn't make you seem any more less informed or juvenile.

It's a mutual feeling.

In any case, I didn't actually intend to end up sidetracking this thread into the usual Simpson.gif / Hill-GAF nonsense. I probably should've been more specific in my original one-off post, but it doesn't really matter given the season. Continue on.

 

[Alandrus Sun]

It's a mutual feeling.

In any case, I didn't actually intend to end up sidetracking this thread into the usual Simpson.gif/Hill-GAF. I probably should've been more specific in my original one-off post, but it doesn't really matter given the season. Continue on.

You made a blatant "shit post," that is contrary to all facts and now refuse to defend yourself because posters are poking fun at your initial ridiculous post. How about give us these specifics you have?

 

[RustyNails]

Also, if you're a white, straight male lower on the socioeconomic ladder, that difference between Clinton and the Republican base quickly evaporates.

Where do people even get this kind of stuff from. Is this babby's first election?

 

[The Adder]

Where do people even get this kind of stuff from. Is this babby's first election?

"My guy's losing, I don't have to make sense, I just want to be right"

 

[wildfire]

Yet another thing to add to the qualities it mirrors w/ Trump's campaign.

Sadly this rings too true. We're just cuddlier because this isn't organizing to physically block Republican delegates like Trumpshirts were talking about.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Has Sanders given a clear reason yet why he isn't helping downticket Democrats? I've only heard him say it's so he can focus on his own campaign (which hasn't prevented his opponent from doing both). Surely this caused enough of an uproar that he's come back with a better response, right?

Someone on MSNBC yesterday or the day before (a Sanders campaign staffer--forgive me for not remembering who) said something about him writing a donor letter that, they claim, has raised more money than any donor letter written this election cycle (though they were careful to not say who it raised money for, and left it specifically at "more than any other letter" not "more than any other speech/rally/other method of helping raise money for downticket Democrats").

Anyone know the full story? Has he mapped out a plan for helping other Democrats? Because if he really wants to be President, it'd be a tremendous help to him to have a friendly Senate to back him up once he's in the White House.

 

[wildfire]

Has Sanders given a clear reason yet why he isn't helping downticket Democrats? I've only heard him say it's so he can focus on his own campaign (which hasn't prevented his opponent from doing both). Surely this caused enough of an uproar that he's come back with a better response, right?

Someone on MSNBC yesterday or the day before (a Sanders campaign staffer--forgive me for not remembering who) said something about him writing a donor letter that, they claim, has raised more money than any donor letter written this election cycle (though they were careful to not say who it raised money for, and left it specifically at "more than any other letter" not "more than any other speech/rally/other method of helping raise money for downticket Democrats").

Anyone know the full story? Has he mapped out a plan for helping other Democrats? Because if he really wants to be President, it'd be a tremendous help to him to have a friendly Senate to back him up once he's in the White House.

Sanders is bipartisan.

No, really.

He's the Amendment King.