googleplex
Member
*face palm*
Why do Bernie supporters keep bringing up Europe like it's some paragon of a socialist Utopia? And even f it was it wouldn't matter because we're dealing with a American populous, politics and economic conditions.
Super Tuesday 4. I'm really feeling (The After Bern) March 22, 26 contests
- Thread starter NeoXChaos
- Start date
- Status
*face palm*
Why do Bernie supporters keep bringing up Europe like it's some paragon of a socialist Utopia? And even f it was it wouldn't matter because we're dealing with a American populous, politics and economic conditions.
He also could have spent his money a lot wiser. So far the bulk of his money has been spent on spamming the airwaves with expensive ads as opposed to establishing a ground game. Had he done that, he wouldn't have won the south (that ship sailed long ago), but he would have kept the margins closer.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Oh, I agree. It's not really a fair comparison to make.
Days like these...
Have a Blessed Day
You claim they are not low information voters but single issue voters. So what does that say about 'single issue voters' when guns, gays and ileagles are more important to them than economic opportunity and social safety nets?
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
So I guess all that's left now to is to see if that bird on the podium is Bernie's version of Bill Clinton playing sax on Arsenio
Ted Devine got to get paid
nitekrawlwer
Member
You're holding the messenger more accountable than the politician enacting policy. The votes matter so much more than the advertisement of said position. Of course there's no stains when we are willing to wipe Sander's hands clean of his actions. I suppose minimizing his actions might be a less provocative way of saying it. But the point remains the same.
If there are stains(no matter the degree to which you might argue) then it's hard to call them blindspots. In fact he was well aware of said issues while still voting for the bill anyways. That is by definition no blindspot. He saw it. He just didn't value it over whatever else was included.
When there are so few people in jail in Vermont in the first place, you get sample sizes that mean nothing. Factor in the drug trafficking from the Canadian border en route to NYC and you start to see why minorities, making up like 1% of the population, would even end up in jail there in the first place.
I have an app that tracks arrests in the zip codes surrounding Vermont and it's mostly low income white people or people from out of state or from downstate caught selling meth and cocaine.
Because it doesn't make it a pipe dream or something so out of the ordinary or unreleastic. Its very real benefit that is being enjoyed by many developed countries, despite the powers at be preferring to keep the veil on the american public.
I graduated with only 3-5k in undergrad loans an have dental school scholarship. Most of Bernie's policies wouldn't benefit me. But to say that everything he's saying is just snake oil, is foolish. Its obviously resonating with people.
Sub_Level
wants to fuck an Asian grill.
Well, they seem to refer to the Scandinavian countries specifically. And what you just said mirrors the attack a lot of republicans use when criticizing him too. The idea that America can't pull off having those social systems because we have a lot more people or because we're not homogeneous enough. Maybe thats true, I'm not an expert, but it seems like a defeatist "settle for less" attitude and its totally like what the republicans always say.
As far as political conditions go, its not like it will be smooth sailing for Hillary either. Her first couple years might be fairly accommodating but then when democrats fail to turn out in 2018 it will be the same old story as last time played out again. Its hard to quantify how much easier it is to pass a $12 federal minimum wage than a $15 federal minimum wage; people can only speculate.
No point in debates anymore.
Bernie will definitely want one. Hillary likely doesn't at this point. She doesn't need it. She has a commanding lead and the delegate math going forward is on her side. Why give Bernie a national platform to bullshit at her some more?
That said, I kinda hope she agrees to one...simply because I don't want Hillary getting TOO comfortable knowing the math is on her side. She's got this in the bag...lets keep it that way.
to the snake oil posts -- are ideals like free college education and health care not worth fighting for? their implementation, both politically and economically, would be very difficult, there is no doubt. but the disparagement of these ideals from liberals\progressives in this thread indicate a massive compromise. and if you want to talk about how replacing a hyper-conservative like Scalia with a moderate like Garland would still be pulling the Supreme Court to the left, don't you see how a compromise like this pulls the Democratic Party to the right?
i think it would be fantastic if Hillary became passionate about these ideas. i don't see the harm in fighting for them so i don't understand this negative tone towards them. i don't think people are really thinking about what they are saying, but they are having their thoughts warped by who is and isn't supporting them
i think it would be fantastic if Hillary became passionate about these ideas. i don't see the harm in fighting for them so i don't understand this negative tone towards them. i don't think people are really thinking about what they are saying, but they are having their thoughts warped by who is and isn't supporting them
From all looks, she is pivoting to go VS trump and just keep the margins with the remaining primary states.
The blitz after the nomination period ends might be the most improtant part of the campaign ala the ad blitz vs Romney.
Hillary also wants public colleges to be tuition free, but it's only snake oil when Bernie says it, as is per usual from the very insulated PoliGAF audience.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-proposes-debt-free-tuition-at-public-colleges-1439179200
I just replace snake oil with free stuff and get flashback of 2008 and 2012.
Some people has really devolved into Tea Party level rhetoric when tackling Sanders
He had a huge number of paid staff in SC but don't let facts get in the way of a good spin
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics...lina-hillary-clinton-looks-to-win-and-win-big
It is snake oil trying to fund it with the same transaction tax that has already failed elsewhere. Even in socialist paradise of Sweden.
A tax trying to punish bad behavior is not a tax you want to count on for revenue.
Funny, I don't remember Hillary supports here calling for a purity contest and calling her opponents supporters Republicans in disguise and not real progressives if they don't follow the right 'candidate'
You don't want the throw the 'tea party-like' stones, bernieGAF has too many broken glass houses.
Read up on Hillary Clinton: she's fighting for these things too. Debt free college and Universal Healthcare are a core part of her platform, and in the case of healthcare it's something she's been fighting for since the 90s.
People prefer her plans because they actually stand a bat's chance in hell of making it through congress. A lot of what Bernie wants to do SOUNDS nice, but they're DOA. He has no real plan, just ideas. Which is why when he's asked HOW, his response tends to be "When millions of Americans stand up bla bla bla Political Revolution" but anybody who's paying attention can see that that's NOT a plan. It's a platitude.
Yeah, Michigan was a big night for him, but as youbsaid, though it was a moral victory it didn't do much. He walked away with roughly the same amount of delegates (and increased his delagate deficit that night because of Mississippi, IIRC), and the result turned out to be a polling error rather than momentum.
I consider last night to be his best because it actually got him closer to the nomination. Sanders can have all the moral victories he wants, small wins in NY, Cali, DC, wherever, and it doesn't put him any closer to the nomination.
Actually, Clinton us projected to win Wisconsin, as of right now, because it has a larger AA population (twice that of Washington), is a primary, and Hillary had a polling lead (6% as the most recent poll taken about a week ago. It is an open primary, which favors Sanders, but hopefully polls have taken that into account after Michigan.
Also it's two weeks away, and while a lot can happen in two weeks, I wouldn't be surprised to see it as a wash.
What you just typed was precisely my point
The basis of his entire political platform is some arbitrary political revolution from the bottom up where the voting block at large vote out politicians serving special interests, and vote those in who will succumb to the will of the people. The politician who is losing a one sided primary season in down year for voter turnout has a platform that is entirely dependent on the opposite of his existing situation.
Woosh
That is a much less important part of his platform if you want to actually look at policy substance, and nothing more than the optics of how he plans to gain momentum. The crux of his campaign, the important aspect to actual voters, is actually attempting to bring more leftwing, progressive and socialist policies in to the US, with things like public healthcare, free education, less hawkish military and foreign policy, a more stringent approach to banking, finance and corporate political corruption and so on.
And thus we come back to what got us into this conversation: snake oil.
Where's his policy substance? Where are the substantial rebuttals to people pointing out that his numbers don't add up, for example?
The last time he was asked this on the debate stage, his response was "those economists who don't agree are in Hillary's camp." That ain't substantial. And Bernie knows it, which is WHY he leans so heavily on his political revolution rhetoric.
Yes, but his explanation for how he'd do all that is "political revolution" to remove the GOP Congress.
Oh, I forgot about this yesterday! Yup. Burlington is a stop along a drug trafficking route. A lot of the people in Vermont jails have to be out of staters
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Why does Sanders do better in caucuses?
Lack of enthusiasm and no early voting, doesn't help that she also didn't contest that many caucus states after winning Iowa and Nevada
Trump and Cruz aren't invited to the DemDebates
I don't think there is any need of doing debates at all anymore. We've all heard everything that can be said and I'm afraid anything further will just be unnecessarily mudslinging and attacks.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Bernie didn't need to steal the black vote like Obama, but he needed to be competitive since early March. Another issue for Bernie also is that in his pursuit to win and be "pragmatic" he ended up alongside Hillary on the wrong side of issues for blacks and it costs him today. Kevin Drum has an article that's iffy on a couple issues, but touches on your great point that he waited too long to create presence.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/03/matt-taibbi-case-against-hillary-weak
It's a good time to talk about foreign policy, considering the last few debates and town halls were almost 100% devoid of it.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
We had an entire debate devoted to foreign policy and it was mostly pointless.
Partly it's because the states that hold caucuses tend to favour Sanders to begin with, but caucuses also disproportionately advantage the activist types that are the bedrock of Sanders' campaign.
It's actually intresting to see the phrase political revolution brought up, because in 08 there was an actual honest to god political revolution happening that democrats hadn't seen since FDR, and in the end it did very little for Obama. Not saying he did nothing, but I have a hard time believing that Sanders could do any more than Obama considering the waves each candidate brought in. In fact I'd expect Sanders to do less.
DR2K
Banned
Because you're not actually voting, but being coerced into whatever side is rallying the hardest. Some of these sites are like those Berniebro Facebook postings come to life.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
As for the comparison to other countries, it is interesting to see how a sizable majority of Democrats Abroad voted for him. I would love to hear the reason for this from those people.
So all the talk about decriminalizing is just that? A Talking point?
Its convenient to blast the War against Drugs and its affects on minorites and then use it as a shield to defend minority incarceration rates.
And thus you've been misinformed in to thinking his policies are pie in the sky, likely by the very establishment that fears them largely due to financial and profit disincentive.
What exactly do you mean policy substance? That is policy substance, far more so than just peddling the status quo.
And the numbers only don't add up if certain tax avoidance loop holes and methods are allowed to remain in place, things which he also plans to take on. Add to that, whilst there have been two institutes that claim the maths is fuzzy, there have been others, along with countless economists and experts in the field that say the maths does add up. So its really a question of who you believe, but to me even attempting to get something like this through is the most important aspect. Things can be worked around it in due course, especially if the deficit isn't huge in the grand scheme of things given what you're getting in return, as has happened in every other nation these things were put forward (where often times opponents also argued maths didn't add up or it couldn't be afforded).
But what does that matter? Whether he got such a revolution or not, his stance would at least offer a much better chance at something more progressive than his opponents, who have either just settled with the current status quo or worse.
Think of it if you will as a negotiation. You want to go as far left as possible. You can either start that negotiation by putting in an offer that asks the opposition for exactly the same as what you already have, something largely centre right, or you can start by asking for something far left, till you at least end up with something more on the left of what you currently have. I'd much rather the latter. In fact the former seems akin to anti progression and playing it safe because of fearmomgering.
Ogrekiller
Member
It's like winning BC in a federal election. Quebec and Ontario are coming up.
I'd see a substantial tax increase, but it'd be entirely offset by what I pay in health care premiums. Your argument is an oversimplification for many of us.
Because Western Europe does a lot of things better than we do. They've got better outcomes for health care for lower costs, they offer maternity (and paternity!) leave, superior access to education, and so on.
B-b-but hey, our wealthy pay less in taxes! That counts for something, right?
Yeah Bernie has denounced institutionalized racism during his campaign (wouldn't know as a senator but have no reason to doubt that). From the brutal police aggression and proclivity to target black people, drug policies like crack and marihuana used to imprison more black folks, along with the data of the disproportionate amount of black people in jail and how that affects the community and their families. He expressed how not even poor white people have it as bad as black people due to all of the racist injustices that occurr in this country.
He's also being super upfront as to how the republican candidates like tramp and Cruz inspire hateful xenophobic rhetoric and denounces them. Wouldn't know if Hillary has gone on record like that other than in more diplomatic terms. I don't like making comparisons but it's a very clear contrast as to how Bernie handled the BLM activists at his rally and how Hillary handled Ashley Williams at her event, granted the venues were different and Ashley was more agressive as well, but still it's hard to deny how different they approach not only the subject, but people.
While Bernie obviously is being pushed by some classic principles of classism, he in no way a revolutionary wanting to abolish the high class and making the proletariat rise, instead he uses facts and figures expressing the growing trend of income inequality and how that affects 90% of all Americans negatively. And the social securities he proposes would also help comunities and families in very clear ways.
I understand the argument of Hillary's visibility in terms of winning the electorate over, but it's also a very content free argument that only relies on popularity. Of course she's going to be more notable, she's a Clinton for crying out loud, came from a wealthy background, has been in a lot more positions that allows her to work on some issues and communities as the First Lady and the other much higher and visible political positions she has had compared to Bernie's lower hierarchical positions In politics . She has done great work with the black and Hispanic communities in different places of the country and from what I gather has always been very personable and pushed for a very field oriented work to meet with the community. After all she is our Abuela.
But I get the impression - and please correct me if I'm wrong - that she has a very paternalistic and populist position in terms of what social help is. I get the impression from testimonies from Dolores Huerta and the like. And speaking of that, Rosario Dawson's open letter questioning Dolores' support for Hillary paints a very clear picture for me, in which she states that not only has Huerta fell for the misrepresentations of the media of Sanders but also spread misinformation like the "English only" controversy. Bernie's record has been stronger in terms of immigration and activist policies.
I see Bernie as a humanitarian first and foremost. Being against the war in Iraq and against the unnecessary occupation of the US in the Middle East. Speaking on behalf of the Palestinians wanting to reach more peaceful diplomacy and denouncing Israel and Saudi Arabia's crimes. Global warming is huge on his agenda as well.
So again, it's completely understandable Hillary has an advantage based on past policies which have been more visible, her being a much well known person and the media's push for her. But personally undermining Bernie's policies seems so petty to me.
Also on a tangential note l, was wondering if someone read Black Prophetic Fire from Dr. West and could tell me if it's a good introduction to his writing, as he has caught my attention a lot during this election.
Because many people don't particularly like somebody attempting to sell them stuff that has no chance of happening.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Thought this article was interesting in regards to the minority vote discussion:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rosar...r-to-dolores-huerta_b_9538994.html?1458825932
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rosar...r-to-dolores-huerta_b_9538994.html?1458825932
Decriminalizing possession, not trafficking.
There are people who traffick heroin and meth in Vermont as a stopping point between NY and Montreal. As a result, Vermont (and the rest of New England) has a huge opiate problem
Have we heard anything from Killer Mike or Cornell West with regards to the campaign since the SC primary?
I am sure we have evidence to show that the majority of minorties incarcerated in Vermont are traffickers?
Other then killer Mike putting his foot in his mouth, not that I am aware of.
You always put forward your policy ideals, as has been the case for every presidential campaign in history. The obstruction or problems you'll face along the way are a completely different kettle of fish that you deal with in due course, and also require the support of the public. It doesn't happen in a vacuum. The fact that you've already written his policies off on the basis of essentially nothing but false assumption and pessimism, is disappointing to say the least.
As I've said so many times, I do often feel like those who don't support Bernie often don't because of false assumption, pessimism and fearmomgering. It's not that they don't like his policies, it's that they've been convinced they're not realistic. Whereas a lot of people who don't support Hillary, hold the stance they do because they don't actually like her policies, and find them to be too status quo or not progressive enough. It's interesting to say the least.
- Status