US Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders rallies |OT|

Status
Not open for further replies.
We just came back from a jog at the park and someone tagged up the park trail with pro Bernie logos like "Feel the Bern" and "Bernie Sanders is not for sale" ....wtf, not cool.

Think that's bad? I saw Trump 2016 on a couple of stop signs today.
 
They keep getting BIGGER!

CMGHisLW8AAyn8H.jpg:large


CMF-1dpUkAERx0x.jpg:large


But... He's not a contender, right? /s
 
and, y'know, everyone whose professional reputation relies on their accurate forecasting of elections

(you're really doing your best to dispel the ron paul comparisons, though. good job.)

Because Based God just called it LOL

And for srs, this momentum is pretty significant.
 
yeah, next i'll get told sports curses are real and that ghosts exist in the long, wet fart of CNN pretending Lil B's endorsement matters at all in the Democratic primary
 
You be wrong. You'd be really wrong if the basic media(mainstream ABC, CBS, NBC) covered him at all. He gets brief mentions on those Nightly News when he just turned out 70,000(15, 28, 27k) people in 3 stops this week.

i'd be wrong if you actually pointed out anyone mentioned in the same breath as a wang, sabato, linzer, or silver rather than linking to a video full of media pundits

and i'd be even wronger if ron paul's campaigns hadn't unfolded almost exactly like this in the last two cycles.

money bombs! huge rallies! blindly idealistic supporters!

...still down upwards of 2:1 to someone who literally isn't even campaigning yet
 
i'd be wrong if you actually pointed out anyone mentioned in the same breath as a wang, sabato, linzer, or silver rather than linking to a video full of media pundits

and i'd be even wronger if ron paul's campaigns hadn't unfolded exactly like this in the last two cycles

Yeah, it's totally the same considering that event was about two-thirds less than what Bernie turned out tonight in LA, that event was 8 months later in the election cycle(April 2012) and Paul was in his second go around(name recognition...or third attempt at Pres if you want to count that one back in the day) for President vs. Bernie's first and only needed attempt.

You failed on all accounts.
 
salty much?

salty that everyone seems to have developed another messiah complex eight years after the last one, and in spite of the fact that he turned out to have a totally realistic two terms as president rather than smiting partisanship, a complete joke of a health care system, and an economic recession from his floating fortress? probably

Yeah, it's totally the same considering that event was about two-thirds less than what Bernie turned out tonight in LA, that event was 8 months later in the election cycle(April 2012) and Paul was in his second go around(name recognition) for President vs. Bernie's first and only needed attempt.

You failed on all accounts.

yeah it's totally not the same that an ideological minority within one of the major parties is working itself up into a tizzy, trying to convince themselves that a guy with approximately zero support from the biggest components of the party base has the Big Mo' because he's delivering speeches to overwhelming-majority-white audiences in large cities 6 months before any primaries. you got me.
 
Good. I was worried about his potential stances on Palestine as well.

Bernie has been in favor of equal rights for both Palestine and Israel since the 80s, and has frequently protested the Israeli government's continued settlements in spite of the direct roadblock to talks. He basically criticized the Israeli PM every time he got a question on Israel throughout the Obama presidency as far as i can remember.

I find it really sad that a lot of people have already packed it up for Bernie and declared Hillary the winner. Its a shame that's what people who claim to want change come down to in the end, name recognition.

All i know is, if Bernie's name is on the ballot come voting time, i'll vote for him. If not, i'll abstain. I just can't vote for Hillary. Maybe i'll just vote green party instead
 
yeah it's totally not the same that an ideological minority within one of the major parties is working itself up into a tizzy, trying to convince themselves that a guy with approximately zero support from the biggest components of the party base has the Big Mo' because he's delivering speeches to overwhelming-majority-white audiences in large cities 6 months before any primaries. you got me.

My argument was to counter your argument of Bernie being Ron Paul but since you wanted to change the goalposts when proven wrong...that's fine.
 
My argument was to counter your argument of Bernie being Ron Paul but since you wanted to change the goalposts when proven wrong...that's fine.

you may want to point out where this actually happens in that quote

like congratulations, you've proven he has numerically bigger white audiences. too bad you've failed to indicate what part of the core analogy - a minority of the party getting overexcited about Big Crowds such that they ignore what actual political scientists looking at the race are saying - actually does not apply to hardcore sanders supporters.
 
salty that everyone seems to have developed another messiah complex eight years after the last one, and in spite of the fact that he turned out to have a totally realistic two terms as president rather than smiting partisanship, a complete joke of a health care system, and an economic recession from his floating fortress? probably

as if hillary would've done much different
 
You may want to change your initial statement that Bernie Sanders is Ron Paul. And Bernie Sanders' support is equivalent to Ron Paul's support. Post #420.

then you may want to reread that post, given that it was given a clarification edit before you even responded to it.

speaking of support levels, here's another fast fact: clinton's lead looks smaller than it actually is because pollsters are still including joe biden (whose support mainly goes to clinton when excluded) for no apparent reason

as if hillary would've done much different

i'm not saying she wouldn't have done much different - it probably would've taken every republican candidate in 2010 simultaneously being caught with a dead girl and live boy for that to be the case - i'm saying i'm salty that seemingly the same type of people who disengaged after obama didn't immediately wave his magic wand and fix the economy are back at it again.

enthusiasm is good. blind enthusiasm (some of 2008, and apparently now some of 2016) is bad. and enthusiasm that seems to be 50% "tearing down everyone else in the primary process because they aren't as pure and perfect", like what happens literally any time hillary clinton is brought up in the general vicinity of one of these threads, is obnoxious.
 
then you may want to reread that post, given that it was given a clarification edit before you even responded to it.

speaking of support levels, here's another fast fact: clinton's lead looks smaller than it actually is because pollsters are still including joe biden for no apparent reason

Nationally? Perhaps. But most state wide polls where Sanders is gaining momentum do not include Biden anymore.

For instance, PPP last Iowa poll does not include Biden and yet the difference between Sanders (25%) and Clinton (52%) has gone down 22 points since April.

The trend is pretty obvious, and coming the debate the results may improve. So the enthusiasm is not grounded in delusions, I would say.
 
Nationally? Perhaps. But most state wide polls where Sanders is gaining momentum do not include Biden anymore.

For instance, PPP last Iowa poll does not include Biden and yet the difference between Sanders (25%) and Clinton (52%) has gone down 22 points since April.

The trend is pretty obvious, and coming the debate the results may improve. So the enthusiasm is not grounded in delusions, I would say.

now that's a fair point and i appreciate that you're actually coming at me with real data

but at the same time, i'm not sure there's an obvious trend toward an actual shot at him winning beyond Iowa/NH to begin with (partly because practically no other state's getting polled even semi-regularly, and largely because both of those states aren't particularly demographically representative of the Dem base).

not to mention this is coming with clinton refusing to actually campaign beyond sporadic policy platform releases, which i'd expect to change nearabouts the debate. she's invisible on and around the stump thus far, which can't be helping her numbers with Bernie actually traveling around and stumping, but at the same time that's not going to last forever - and we're talking about someone who came damn close to beating Candidate Obama.

i appreciate that Bernie's trending into a very strong second because practically all of this country's overton windows need a sharp shift to the left sooner rather than later, but that's basically all the trend's really showing so far.

(e: last post for the night, so i'll get to any responses later)
 
I feel like the trend doesn't really mean much because it was inevitable. The only reason Clinton and especially Biden poll as well as they do at this point is the name recognition. As Sanders gains recognition, of course he is going to poll better.

Once debates start, polls will probably start to reflect more than just "I know of that person and might vote for them."
 
now that's a fair point and i appreciate that you're actually coming at me with real data

but at the same time, i'm not sure there's an obvious trend toward an actual shot at him winning beyond Iowa/NH to begin with (partly because practically no other state's getting polled even semi-regularly, and largely because both of those states aren't particularly demographically representative of the Dem base).

not to mention this is coming with clinton refusing to actually campaign beyond sporadic policy platform releases, which i'd expect to change nearabouts the debate.

i appreciate that Bernie's trending into a very strong second because practically all of this country's overton windows need a sharp shift to the left sooner rather than later, but that's basically all the trend's really showing so far.

There´s Oregon too (39% vs 44%) and Minnesota (50% vs 32%). Granted, these are single polls, made in super white states. So yeah, the tide is not turning against Hillary but if I was in her camp I wouldnt underestimate Sanders´ rallied up bases.
 
I know this is a Sanders thread but people brought Hillary into it so fuck it.

Is Hillary generally considered to be a good speaker? I was just thinking about how I couldn't remember what she sounded like when spitting from a podium so I looked up a video. I don't get it.
 
I know this is a Sanders thread but people brought Hillary into it so fuck it.

Is Hillary generally considered to be a good speaker? I was just thinking about how I couldn't remember what she sounded like when spitting from a podium so I looked up a video. I don't get it.

i haven't sat down and watched any of her speeches but the few snippets i've heard just sound kind of disinterested and not emotional at all whereas what i've heard of bernie is always more spirited and in the moment.
 
i haven't sat down and watched any of her speeches but the few snippets i've heard just sound kind of disinterested and not emotional at all whereas what i've heard of bernie is always more spirited and in the moment.

My thought :30 into watching her economy speech: "oh, THIS is why I don't remember anything about Hillary from 2008."
 
popping back in just for a minute

There´s Oregon too (39% vs 44%) and Minnesota (50% vs 32%). Granted, these are single polls, made in super white states. So yeah, the tide is not turning against Hillary but if I was in her camp I wouldnt underestimate Sanders´ rallied up bases.

now that's the kind of analysis i was looking for! yeah, not saying the Bern has no chance whatsoever, just that Clinton's probably safer than certain suspects (:P) are letting on.

and yeah, hopefully she doesn't underestimate this part of the base even in a runaway win, just because any extra leftward pivot's good from the dumpster fire of acceptable policy this country's been stuck in

I know this is a Sanders thread but people brought Hillary into it so fuck it.

Is Hillary generally considered to be a good speaker? I was just thinking about how I couldn't remember what she sounded like when spitting from a podium so I looked up a video. I don't get it.

i always thought she was considered fairly mediocre, actually - think i've seen "bland" leveled most often (and most accurately) against her speaking style

luckily, she's going to have the two best living public speakers in american politics (and elizabeth warren) as surrogates, as would Bernie if he did wind up beating the odds.
 
There´s Oregon too (39% vs 44%) and Minnesota (50% vs 32%). Granted, these are single polls, made in super white states. So yeah, the tide is not turning against Hillary but if I was in her camp I wouldnt underestimate Sanders´ rallied up bases.

I know this is a Sanders thread but people brought Hillary into it so fuck it.

Is Hillary generally considered to be a good speaker? I was just thinking about how I couldn't remember what she sounded like when spitting from a podium so I looked up a video. I don't get it.

She's not and would be wise for her to have Bill help her since he has a lot of charm and charisma, which she greatly lacks.
 
Hillary Clinton is getting a lot of traction due to two things: her sex and her name.

She doesn't have the warmth of Bill. But she's always been visible. Can't discount anyone at this point.
 
Great job updating the OP, OP!

So exciting to see Bernie gaining all this traction! I was hoping he'd announce a run for some time before he actually announced. I'm so pleased to see this happening!
 
i feel like sanders is the president america needs (and deserves), but not the one it will get. just pulling hillary left would be good though, especially if it helps frame the overall election in 2016 over values the left cares about like race, equality, and opportunity. even if he wins the nomination, i have a really hard time seeing him not getting blown the fuck out by a republican with billions of dollars backing them. and the optics of 74 year-old (75 year-old next year) bernie sanders up against a mid-40s slimeball like scott walker or marco rubio probably wouldn't be that positive. plus, if age was an issue regarding john mccain, i can't see how it wouldn't be with sanders.
 
i feel like sanders is the president america needs (and deserves), but not the one it will get. just pulling hillary left would be good though, especially if it helps frame the overall election in 2016 over values the left cares about like race, equality, and opportunity. even if he wins the nomination, i have a really hard time seeing him not getting blown the fuck out by a republican with billions of dollars backing them. and the optics of 74 year-old (75 year-old next year) bernie sanders up against a mid-40s slimeball like scott walker or marco rubio probably wouldn't be that positive. plus, if age was an issue regarding john mccain, i can't see how it wouldn't be with sanders.

Age wasn't really a issue with McCain, it was more the factors of that election made people pause because of his age.

McCain the old, white, frumpy republican vs young (relative), charismatic African American in a year where the republicans were coming off of the worst or second worst (second only to arguably nixon) presidency since the maybe the civil war. People wanted change, and McCain's look and age vs Obama just reflected the status quo.

Also, after Palin showed up the DNC started spinning hard the "well, what if he dies?" line and a lot of people just were probably scared fucking shitless of that person being one heartbeat away from having the finger on the red button.

I doubt Berny's age becomes a problem because the "old, frumpy white dude" line doesn't really carry any (or enough) weight to swing left voters to a party that has come to define the old white dude's party, regardless of who they put up there.
 
Yeah, I think Bernie could alleviate most age concerns with a solid VP pick. I don't know who that would be though. Ideally you'd want someone ideologically similar, but most prominent young democrats seem to be considerably to the right of Bernie.
 
Are you serious? I'm not from the USA, but I'm a libertarian and I don't know any libertarian who would vote for a statist like this guy.

No he's not going to win over the hardcore libertarians who use words that are supposed to be insults but aren't such as statist.

But that's not your average libertarian. The average libertarian wants to cut down on the military, be able to legally smoke weed, and not have a candidate blatently working for the interests of a big political party.

Bernie absolutely has cross support. Because he has earned their respect due to his record.

But if you're one of those dweebs on the internet who uses the word statist as an insult, then yeah, you're already balls deep in Praxeological bullshit.
 
I'm hoping he comes to St. Louis.

I think given this weekend, a trip to Ferguson would be risky but necessary. To win, Bernie's going to have to take a bunch of risks and have them all pay out. He's still a longshot, but Hillary has to be sunk before she can lose in the general

Yeah, I think Bernie could alleviate most age concerns with a solid VP pick. I don't know who that would be though. Ideally you'd want someone ideologically similar, but most prominent young democrats seem to be considerably to the right of Bernie.

for VP Jim Webb or Claire McCaskill I think would be solid choices for Bernie. If Kay Hagan had won I'd say she would be a solid pick (VA/NC would be a must for Bernie in a general)

I know folks are worried about the minority vote- but what swing states would a lower black turnout hurt Bernie in the most, and would he be helped by a larger percentage of the white vote (Bernie WILL do better among whites than Obama, and probably Hillary)
 
Yeah, I think Bernie could alleviate most age concerns with a solid VP pick. I don't know who that would be though. Ideally you'd want someone ideologically similar, but most prominent young democrats seem to be considerably to the right of Bernie.

Elizabeth Warren? Or could we not handle that unified ticket?

I think given this weekend, a trip to Ferguson would be risky but necessary. To win, Bernie's going to have to take a bunch of risks and have them all pay out. He's still a longshot, but Hillary has to be sunk before she can lose in the general



for VP Jim Webb or Claire McCaskill I think would be solid choices for Bernie. If Kay Hagan had won I'd say she would be a solid pick (VA/NC would be a must for Bernie in a general)

I know folks are worried about the minority vote- but what swing states would a lower black turnout hurt Bernie in the most, and would he be helped by a larger percentage of the white vote (Bernie WILL do better among whites than Obama, and probably Hillary)

Pardon my language, but fuck her. She tried to bury him a few weeks ago by calling him "extreme" in his positions. She's totally on the Hillary camp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom