REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Bernie Sanders Discussion Thread

POSTED BY: REAVERFAN
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 09:07
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 33380
PAGE 6 of 6

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 12:41 AM

JO753

rezident owtsidr


There are 548 delegates up for grabz in California on June 7. I dont think Bernie or Hillary will get enuf there to clinch the nomination.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 12:58 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Oh, let me just run the arithmetic.

The numbers are in flux, but after Kentucky and Oregon Clinton has about 1,767 delegates while Sanders has about 1,488. It takes 2,383 for nomination. Polls for California have been all over the map (so to speak), but assuming Clinton has a 10% lead, California would net her 329, bringing her up to roughly 2100. So even with California in the bag with a 10% lead, according to HOW PEOPLE VOTED, Clinton couldn't get the nomination.

But then, there are SUPERdelegates! The 'democratic' party big fu to democratic voters.


With that in mind, I expect her to get the nomination, as ordained.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 8:01 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, let me just run the arithmetic.

The numbers are in flux, but after Kentucky and Oregon Clinton has about 1,767 delegates while Sanders has about 1,488. It takes 2,383 for nomination. Polls for California have been all over the map (so to speak), but assuming Clinton has a 10% lead, California would net her 329, bringing her up to roughly 2100. So even with California in the bag with a 10% lead, according to HOW PEOPLE VOTED, Clinton couldn't get the nomination.

But then, there are SUPERdelegates! The 'democratic' party big fu to democratic voters.


With that in mind, I expect her to get the nomination, as ordained.

Super delegates were intended to keep Republicans from flooding into the Democrats' open primaries and picking who runs as the Democrat for President. Bernie is not a Democrat; he just caucuses with them. If he gets 50% of the popular votes and he can give a convincing demonstration he is a Democrat, then the Super Delegates will vote for him. But he is not very convincing.

Yesterday's Democratic primaries basically ended in a tie.

The one thing I do keep wondering about is what happened to Bernie Sanders. Before this campaign, he was a gadfly, he was a critic of the system, and he was a man of strong principles. He still is, but he's also obviously very, very bitter. I wonder if all this was worth it for him? By all objective measures he did way better than anyone expected and had far more influence than anyone thought he would, and he should feel good about that. Instead, he seems more angry and resentful with every passing day.

I know this happens all the time in presidential primaries. Everyone starts out promising to run high-minded campaigns, but the attacks always come sooner or later—and the targets inevitably believe the attacks are unfair and slanderous. As a result, the losers develop a deep personal disdain for their opponents.

That's what's happened this time, and I suppose there's nothing unusual about it. I don't even blame anyone in particular. Maybe Hillary's team played too rough. Maybe Bernie's team is too thin-skinned. I just don't know. But it's sort of painful to see a good person like Bernie turned into such a sullen and resentful man. And doubly painful to see him take his followers down that path too.

Usually these things fade with a bit of time. Politics is politics, after all. But for Bernie, it's always been more than politics. I wonder if he's ever going to get over this?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:42 AM

REAVERFAN



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:54 AM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, let me just run the arithmetic.

The numbers are in flux, but after Kentucky and Oregon Clinton has about 1,767 delegates while Sanders has about 1,488. It takes 2,383 for nomination. Polls for California have been all over the map (so to speak), but assuming Clinton has a 10% lead, California would net her 329, bringing her up to roughly 2100. So even with California in the bag with a 10% lead, according to HOW PEOPLE VOTED, Clinton couldn't get the nomination.

But then, there are SUPERdelegates! The 'democratic' party big fu to democratic voters.


With that in mind, I expect her to get the nomination, as ordained.

Super delegates were intended to keep Republicans from flooding into the Democrats' open primaries and picking who runs as the Democrat for President. Bernie is not a Democrat; he just caucuses with them. If he gets 50% of the popular votes and he can give a convincing demonstration he is a Democrat, then the Super Delegates will vote for him. But he is not very convincing.

Yesterday's Democratic primaries basically ended in a tie.

The one thing I do keep wondering about is what happened to Bernie Sanders. Before this campaign, he was a gadfly, he was a critic of the system, and he was a man of strong principles. He still is, but he's also obviously very, very bitter. I wonder if all this was worth it for him? By all objective measures he did way better than anyone expected and had far more influence than anyone thought he would, and he should feel good about that. Instead, he seems more angry and resentful with every passing day.

I know this happens all the time in presidential primaries. Everyone starts out promising to run high-minded campaigns, but the attacks always come sooner or later—and the targets inevitably believe the attacks are unfair and slanderous. As a result, the losers develop a deep personal disdain for their opponents.

That's what's happened this time, and I suppose there's nothing unusual about it. I don't even blame anyone in particular. Maybe Hillary's team played too rough. Maybe Bernie's team is too thin-skinned. I just don't know. But it's sort of painful to see a good person like Bernie turned into such a sullen and resentful man. And doubly painful to see him take his followers down that path too.

Usually these things fade with a bit of time. Politics is politics, after all. But for Bernie, it's always been more than politics. I wonder if he's ever going to get over this?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly



Bernie Sanders is pushing the Democratic agenda that was in place before the Clintons and Bush's took control of the countries agenda. It is what the Demarcates stood for before, as I said, the Bush's and Clintons came to power.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:04 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Bernie Sanders is pushing the Democratic agenda that was in place before the Clintons and Bush's took control of the countries agenda. It is what the Demarcates stood for before, as I said, the Bush's and Clintons came to power.

At the 1972 Democratic National Convention, previously excluded political activists gained influence at the expense of elected officials and traditional core Democratic constituencies such as organized labor. It nominated Senator George McGovern of South Dakota for President.

And Nixon crushed McGovern like a bug. That is what the Democrats stood for, as you said, before the Bushs and Clintons came to power. Squashed bugs on the windshield of Nixon's Republican Party campaign bus. Trump is Nixon for the 21st century and Bernie is the next McGovern.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_197
2


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:20 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Bernie Sanders is pushing the Democratic agenda that was in place before the Clintons and Bush's took control of the countries agenda. It is what the Demarcates stood for before, as I said, the Bush's and Clintons came to power.

At the 1972 Democratic National Convention, previously excluded political activists gained influence at the expense of elected officials and traditional core Democratic constituencies such as organized labor. It nominated Senator George McGovern of South Dakota for President.

And Nixon crushed McGovern like a bug. That is what the Democrats stood for, as you said, before the Bushs and Clintons came to power. Squashed bugs on the windshield of Nixon's Republican Party campaign bus. Trump is Nixon for the 21st century and Bernie is the next McGovern.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_197
2




Excuse me, Vietnam America wanted out and Nixon was the one going to do it. I know, I was stationed in Hawaii at the time. Bernie beats Trump in all the poles. He trounces him.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:57 PM

RAHLMACLAREN

"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb


Not exact equivalences.

Trump isn't an incumbent, therefore no POTUS experience, or ultimate campaign high ground. I'd even bet Nixon's trustworthiness (at that point, before Watergate) was far higher than either Hillary's or Trump's.

I wonder how Carter ranks on the "Centrist" scale.



Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 4:02 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Excuse me, Vietnam America wanted out and Nixon was the one going to do it. I know, I was stationed in Hawaii at the time. Bernie beats Trump in all the poles. He trounces him.

Excuse you, but baby boomers don't remember the past the way it actually happened. Let's rewind to 4 years before McGovern. Nixon, as a candidate in 1968, sabotaged a ceasefire with N Vietnam. It is in the books:
www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/04/21/disaster-of-richard-nixon/
www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-viet
nam-treason


Nixon “was able to get a series of messages to the Thieu government [of South Vietnam] making it clear that a Nixon presidency would have different views on peace negotiations.”

Johnson was livid. He even called the Republican Senate Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen, to complain that “they oughtn’t be doing this. This is treason.”

“I know,” was Dirksen’s feeble reply.

Johnson blasted Nixon about this on November 3rd, just prior to the election. As Robert Parry of Consortiumnews.com has written: “when Johnson confronted Nixon with evidence of the peace-talk sabotage, Nixon insisted on his innocence but acknowledged that he knew what was at stake.”

Said Nixon: “My, I would never do anything to encourage….Saigon not to come to the table….Good God, we’ve got to get them to Paris or you can’t have peace.”

But South Vietnamese President General Theiu—a notorious drug and gun runner—did boycott Johnson’s Paris peace talks. With the war still raging, Nixon claimed a narrow victory over Humphrey. He then made Kissinger his own national security adviser.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:32 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by RahlMaclaren:
Not exact equivalences.

Trump isn't an incumbent, therefore no POTUS experience, or ultimate campaign high ground. I'd even bet Nixon's trustworthiness (at that point, before Watergate) was far higher than either Hillary's or Trump's.

I wonder how Carter ranks on the "Centrist" scale.

Nothing is ever exactly equivalent, but there are certain themes that play out over and over between Democrats and Republicans. Bernie is no McGovern, a B-24 bomber pilot, but Bernie was for McGovern in '72 because McGovern was the peace candidate. Even though it should have, that peace stance didn't sell well to voters in '72, but it would certainly sell better than Bernie's Danish-style Socialism in 2016. Republicans will make sure that everyone knows about Bernie's Socialism.

Our very own Jayne tweeted today about Bernie:

Adam Baldwin @AdamBaldwin 1 hour ago

Believing that capitalist Trump loves America as founded is reasonable.
Believing that socialists Obama/Hillary/Bernie do is unreasonable.
https://twitter.com/AdamBaldwin/status/733023197046530048

Check the tweet quickly before Jayne erases it like he has been doing to obscure his previous hatred toward Trump and exclusive love of Ted Cruz.

I do believe Jayne has fallen in love with Trump in a very manly way. If he had been old enough to vote in 1968, he would have loved Nixon as passionately. Nixon's brand of Peace With Honor™ (which is very different from McGovern's get out of Vietnam Now), family values, and patriotism were Nixon’s selling points in ‘68 and ‘72, same as Trump ‘16.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 7:16 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Comparing re-elections to non-incumbent elections is poor practice.

Past failed re-elections:
1. Bush41 in 1992, with Perot splitting the majority vote.
2. The disastrous Carter in 1980.
Bumbling LBJ did not even try in 1968.
Truman did not try in 1952.
3. Hoover in 1932. I doubt anybody here remembers voting in this election.

Ford was never elected to national office, so 1976 was not a re-election, nor were 1968 or 1952.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 18, 2016 9:42 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Excuse me, Vietnam America wanted out and Nixon was the one going to do it. I know, I was stationed in Hawaii at the time. Bernie beats Trump in all the poles. He trounces him.

Excuse you, but baby boomers don't remember the past the way it actually happened. Let's rewind to 4 years before McGovern. Nixon, as a candidate in 1968, sabotaged a ceasefire with N Vietnam. It is in the books:
www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/04/21/disaster-of-richard-nixon/
www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-viet
nam-treason


Nixon “was able to get a series of messages to the Thieu government [of South Vietnam] making it clear that a Nixon presidency would have different views on peace negotiations.”

Johnson was livid. He even called the Republican Senate Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen, to complain that “they oughtn’t be doing this. This is treason.”

“I know,” was Dirksen’s feeble reply.

Johnson blasted Nixon about this on November 3rd, just prior to the election. As Robert Parry of Consortiumnews.com has written: “when Johnson confronted Nixon with evidence of the peace-talk sabotage, Nixon insisted on his innocence but acknowledged that he knew what was at stake.”

Said Nixon: “My, I would never do anything to encourage….Saigon not to come to the table….Good God, we’ve got to get them to Paris or you can’t have peace.”

But South Vietnamese President General Theiu—a notorious drug and gun runner—did boycott Johnson’s Paris peace talks. With the war still raging, Nixon claimed a narrow victory over Humphrey. He then made Kissinger his own national security adviser.



Out of fifty states South Dakota ranks 47th in population and he didn't even win that. Nixon was a master politician.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:05 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


McGovern losing didn't seem to hurt congressional makeup. And, looking at governorships, it's possible he popularized the democratic 'brand', because he honorably stood for something honorable. And the rest of the democrats benefited from the reflected glow.

90th congress 1967-1969
67/ 100 democrats - senate
247/ 434 democrats - house

91st congress 1969-1971
57/ 100 democrats - senate
243/ 435 democrats - house

92nd congress 1971-1973
54/ 100 democrats - senate (there was also 1 independent and 1 conservative)
255/ 435 democrats - house

93rd congress 1973-1975
57/ 100 democrats - senate (there was also 1 independent and 1 conservative)
235/ 435 democrats - house

1969 - 25 democratic governorships
1971 - 33 democratic governorships
1973 - 35 democratic governorships




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 8:16 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Comparing re-elections to non-incumbent elections is poor practice.

2. The disastrous Carter in 1980.

Comparing any event to any other is poor practice, but despite that, I'll do it: the American hostages held by Iran were released at just the right time for Carter to lose an election, and Reagan’s first shipments of American weapons to Iran began the very next month. You may wonder if the Reaganites were capable of making such a vile deal. But you don't really wonder that, do you?
www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-01-21/iran-hostage-crisis-a-hot-pota
to-for-reagan

www.presidency.ucsb.edu/PS157/assignment%20files%20public/congressiona
l%20report%20key%20sections.htm

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 9:06 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
McGovern losing didn't seem to hurt congressional makeup.

Bernie running as 3rd party candidate. Start at 4:00.


The election is simple, it comes down to the town librarian versus the town drunk. The Republicans try to portray her as the Dragon Lady, but if you’ve ever heard her speak, you recognize her essential librarian nature. The big question is Bill. Can he be happy, even as he revitalizes the strip-mined ruins of Appalachia and burnt-out blocks of Detroit, and go off to the Kennedy Center looking good in a midnight blue Armani tuxedo with a honeydew shirt accented by diamond studs and cufflinks and a metallic silver bowtie with flecks of taupe?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 6:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Comparing re-elections to non-incumbent elections is poor practice.

2. The disastrous Carter in 1980.

Comparing any event to any other is poor practice, but despite that, I'll do it: the American hostages held by Iran blah blah blah...


Sure you're right.
Carter's destruction of the economy had nothing to do with it.
right

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 8:20 PM

JO753

rezident owtsidr


The amount uv propaganda you injest must be incredible, JSF. Do you hav your bedside radio playing a rite wing tok station wile you sleep to be sure your subconshus iz being indoctrinated? Hav you developed the abilty to lissen to more than 1 rite wing station at the same time you are watching Fox Newz and reading Lew Rockwell?

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 19, 2016 11:54 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Sure you're right.
Carter's destruction of the economy had nothing to do with it.
right

Blame Volcker.

Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker raised the federal funds rate from 11% in 1979 to 20% by 1981, Reagan's first year.

By wrecking the economy for President Carter, Volcker did such a great service for Ronald Reagan's election campaign that Reagan reappointed him to the Federal Reserve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1980s_recession

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 20, 2016 9:56 AM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Comparing re-elections to non-incumbent elections is poor practice.

2. The disastrous Carter in 1980.

Comparing any event to any other is poor practice, but despite that, I'll do it: the American hostages held by Iran blah blah blah...


Sure you're right.
Carter's destruction of the economy had nothing to do with it.
right



The destruction of the economy took place with the two previous presidents (Ford and Nixon). To say Carter destroyed the economy having served such a short period of time is absurd.

What Carter did was take the advice of "Paul Adolph Volcker, Jr. He is an economist who was Chairman of the Federal Reserve under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan from August 1979 to August 1987. He is widely credited with ending the high levels of inflation seen in the United States during the 1970s and early 1980s. He was the chairman of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 21, 2016 5:49 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Comparing re-elections to non-incumbent elections is poor practice.

2. The disastrous Carter in 1980.

Comparing any event to any other is poor practice, but despite that, I'll do it: the American hostages held by Iran blah blah blah...


Sure you're right.
Carter's destruction of the economy had nothing to do with it.
right



The destruction of the economy took place with the two previous presidents (Ford and Nixon). To say Carter destroyed the economy having served such a short period of time is absurd.

What Carter did was take the advice of "Paul Adolph Volcker, Jr. He is an economist who was Chairman of the Federal Reserve under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan from August 1979 to August 1987. He is widely credited with ending the high levels of inflation seen in the United States during the 1970s and early 1980s. He was the chairman of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker


Looks like you goofed up. I think you were supposed to blame it on Eisenhower, only 16 years prior to Jiminy.

I suppose you are going to try to credit the juggernaut economy of Reagan to LBJ or FDR, right?
Volcker served under the worst President - Carter - up til Clinton, and also the best President of modern times - Reagan. The horrific economics of Carter were obvious to anybody at the time, and the great enterprising economy of Reaganomics carried us (with assist from Newt) almost through the Clinton reign, so that Slick Willy could take credit for the work of conservatives yet again.

You must really, really be ticked off that Nixon had the most recent balanced budget before Reaganomics - actually surplus budget, paying down the Federal Debt. Prosperity under Nixon, destitution under Carter, mega prosperity launched by Reagan - quite contrasting.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 22, 2016 9:13 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I originally posted this under the Hillary thread, under an intense discussion about how undemocratic the Democratic party has become, but it belongs here too:

I heard an interesting live stream yesterday from the Left Forum. One of the speakers was Chris Hedges, who is always worth listening to even if I don't always agree with him.

This professor detailed the surveillances that he and other were under; and not only that he detailed the twists and turns that his lawsuit underwent as the Obama administration ("Democrat") forcefully imposed its will on the courts in favor of more surveillance and indefinite detention without trial.

Hedges had some unkind things to say about Sanders and Sanders' relationship to the Democratic Party. Hedges pointed out that Sanders had supported Bill Clinton (even after NAFTA), and after a list of other examples, described Bernie Sanders' relationship with the Democratic Party as follows (paraphrased):

Sanders is the watchdog of the Democratic Party. The arrangement that Sanders has with the Democratic Party is that they don't make a serious attempt to dislodge him from his seat, and he quashes every other independent candidate in VT.

According to Chris Hedges, who had advised Sanders to run as an Independent, Sanders thought he might really have a chance at winning running on the Democratic ticket. That the anger in Sanders' campaign is genuine, because of the undemocratic processes that are being used against him were unexpected, such as the exclusion of Independent and npp voters from the primaries.

According to Chris Hedges, if Sanders really wants to create a political movement, he has to get out from under the ass (my words) of the Democratic Party, repudiate his pledge to support the Democratic candidate (Hillary) and run under a different political party.

I agree.

The Democratic Party is there to co-opt any movement towards the left, and smother it in Party process. As long as people look to the Democratic Party to fulfill their yearnings for a better society, they'll be constantly thwarted.

I've been looking for a video of the forum, if I find one I'll post a link.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 22, 2016 9:47 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


https://www.rt.com/usa/343942-left-forum-day-two/
from about 42 minutes, but specifically about Sanders from 49:00

"I think Sanders made a disastrous mistake ... Sanders has built a very Faustian bargain with the Democratic Party, he campaigned for Bill Clinton in '92. He campaigned for Clinton in '96- after NAFTA .... after the Omnibus Crime bill .... the deregulation of the FCC which that turned over the airwaves to roughly a half-dozen corporations..."

And a lot more about Sanders.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 27, 2016 4:20 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


I agree with Chris Hedges, he should have run as an independent. At least he would have been more honest about running to his followers. But if you're going to run as a democrat, then maybe he should have read the rules (as I understood it, each state runs the primaries as they see fit. A truly democratic process). Instead, Bernie crows whenever he defeats Hilary and stomps off whenever he doesn't get his way.

So, which is it?

It's like rain, everyone gets wet. Hilary got whupped several times, mostly, if not all, caucuses and took it like a man. Bernie gets his clock cleaned and suddenly everything is rigged against him. The rules of engagement are the same for both.
The complaint by Bernie supporters was that they were not allowed to register as democrats. Really!? When he decided to run as a democrat, why didn't he have his devoted followers immediately venture out and find out when they could register
as democrats? In each state, he does have followers in each state does he not?

When I moved, I immediately found out where I needed to go to vote. My right as an American. Why couldn't Bernie's people alert his followers, go out and multiply, but above all else register as democrats. No, they complain - the system is rigged.
F*ck u............know the rules if you want to play the game. It's as simple as that.

Apparently Bernie felt that he would win as a democrat. I have no words.


SGG




Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I originally posted this under the Hillary thread, under an intense discussion about how undemocratic the Democratic party has become, but it belongs here too:

I heard an interesting live stream yesterday from the Left Forum. One of the speakers was Chris Hedges, who is always worth listening to even if I don't always agree with him.

This professor detailed the surveillances that he and other were under; and not only that he detailed the twists and turns that his lawsuit underwent as the Obama administration ("Democrat") forcefully imposed its will on the courts in favor of more surveillance and indefinite detention without trial.

Hedges had some unkind things to say about Sanders and Sanders' relationship to the Democratic Party. Hedges pointed out that Sanders had supported Bill Clinton (even after NAFTA), and after a list of other examples, described Bernie Sanders' relationship with the Democratic Party as follows (paraphrased):

Sanders is the watchdog of the Democratic Party. The arrangement that Sanders has with the Democratic Party is that they don't make a serious attempt to dislodge him from his seat, and he quashes every other independent candidate in VT.

According to Chris Hedges, who had advised Sanders to run as an Independent, Sanders thought he might really have a chance at winning running on the Democratic ticket. That the anger in Sanders' campaign is genuine, because of the undemocratic processes that are being used against him were unexpected, such as the exclusion of Independent and npp voters from the primaries.

According to Chris Hedges, if Sanders really wants to create a political movement, he has to get out from under the ass (my words) of the Democratic Party, repudiate his pledge to support the Democratic candidate (Hillary) and run under a different political party.

I agree.

The Democratic Party is there to co-opt any movement towards the left, and smother it in Party process. As long as people look to the Democratic Party to fulfill their yearnings for a better society, they'll be constantly thwarted.

I've been looking for a video of the forum, if I find one I'll post a link.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 27, 2016 5:04 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Bernie Sanders Is Switching Teams

Bernie Sanders says he'd be delighted to debate Donald Trump:

Game on. I look forward to debating Donald Trump in California before the June 7 primary.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) May 26, 2016


I am delighted that @realDonaldTrump has agreed to debate. Let’s do it in the biggest stadium possible. — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) May 26, 2016

A debate like this would (a) help Trump and (b) hurt Hillary. That's it. That's all it would do. And Bernie is all in.

Is Bernie really so aggrieved that he's now willing to explicitly campaign on Trump's behalf? Because that's all this is. What happened to the old Bernie Sanders?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 28, 2016 4:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, let me just run the arithmetic.

The numbers are in flux, but after Kentucky and Oregon Clinton has about 1,767 delegates while Sanders has about 1,488. It takes 2,383 for nomination. Polls for California have been all over the map (so to speak), but assuming Clinton has a 10% lead, California would net her 329, bringing her up to roughly 2100. So even with California in the bag with a 10% lead, according to HOW PEOPLE VOTED, Clinton couldn't get the nomination.


With Bernie at 1499 and Hilliary at 1771 and the majority needed at 2384, even if Hilliary gets all of CA, she would not have enough elected delegates for majority. And almost nobody thinks she will get even half of CA delegates.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 2, 2016 6:19 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I have been wondering about the unclear direction the Dems were taking with Hilliary, Bernie, her indictment. What were they planning to do, and when.

Now I have heard a credible scenario. This is not a prediction, merely a projection of how things might play out.

Obama is horrified of Hilliary dismantling his legacy. he will allow the indictment to come out, but he is controlling the pace and timing.
If Hilliary is indicted before the convention, Bernie will need to be the candidate or the riots will be 5 times worse than 1968.
So Hilliary must take care of Bernie at the Convention. Then Hilliary's indictment will come down, and they can slip in Plugs Biden as the candidate to replace candidate Hilliary.

I suppose that sounds like an actual plan to deal with things. It sort of puts things into order.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:38 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


How many more states will Bernie win today? All 6?
I have heard reports that he'll win all 6, or else only 5.
But all polls show him behind Hilliary in CA - and we all know they are never biased, trying to convince non-Hilliary voters to stay home, give up.

When was the last time a Democrat candidate who won the CA primary was not the nominee?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 9, 2016 6:25 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
How many more states will Bernie win today? All 6?
I have heard reports that he'll win all 6, or else only 5.
But all polls show him behind Hilliary in CA - and we all know they are never biased, trying to convince non-Hilliary voters to stay home, give up.

When was the last time a Democrat candidate who won the CA primary was not the nominee?


Sounds like Bernie won 2 of the six states on Tuesday, and barely lost South Dakota but evenly splitting the delegates with 10 to each Hilliary and Bernie.

So Bernie won a total of 22 States and Hilliary has won 28.

With 2382 delegates needed to win, Hilliary has won 2203 and Bernie 1828. The only primaries remaining are the District of Columbia next week, and then Hilliary's Email Primary, date TDB.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 13, 2016 8:51 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Poor Bernie- he caved.

How can you helm a "political revolution" when you're a creampuff? Isn't the idea of a "revolution" to overturn the current power structure?

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 13, 2016 8:34 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Yesterday Bernie abandoned any principles and capitulated to the Co-Perpetrator-in-Chief.

A shame. For many, his principles were what set him apart.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 13, 2016 10:00 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Were you expecting Bernie to endorse Trump? Or Bernie to assassinate Hillary? Or Bernie to protest Hillary’s candidacy? Or Bernie to abstain from voting for any Presidential candidate? How would that change the USA more to Bernie’s liking? What should Bernie have done to please you?

And where did you get the childish idea that a President can overturn the power structure? Congress can and always has been able, but not the President, except for a President going to war, then losing to foreign invaders, then the invaders burn Washington DC down and execute Congress for war crimes. Kind of like what Gen MacArthur did in Tokyo. Kind of like what Jefferson Davis had planned for Lincoln and Washington DC. That’s overturning the power structure.

I think Bernie should work to get a majority in Congress voting for Bernie's ideas. With new laws Bernie could overturn the current power structure running the USA. Having a Congressional majority is far better for Bernie's dreams than being President with a Congress that opposes his ideas.
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Poor Bernie- he caved.

How can you helm a "political revolution" when you're a creampuff? Isn't the idea of a "revolution" to overturn the current power structure?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 16, 2016 1:29 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Libertarian or Green? What chances do third parties have in 2016?
http://theconversation.com/libertarian-or-green-what-chances-do-third-
parties-have-in-2016-66276


Clinton's third-party headache
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/clintons-third-party-headache-22
6700



Most Sanders Democratic Convention Delegates Are Not Ready to Vote for Clinton, New Poll Finds
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/most-sanders-democratic-conventi
on-delegates-are-not-ready-vote-clinton-new-poll-finds

As Sanders campaigns for Clinton, diehards are not moved.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 22, 2019 6:40 AM

JAYNEZTOWN

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 7, 2019 2:39 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


So the bloggers still say it was rigged by Hillary?

Here's the Alien/UFO thing? https://twitter.com/MW_Unrest/status/1158895855333761024

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 25, 2020 12:14 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/
8/9/1439099209471/87ad98ef-9426-4599-9134-aedbe9ad1433-2060x1236.jpeg




Progressive or Regressive? Bernie Sanders slams Tesla CEO Elon Musk

Sanders' tax returns revealed millionaire status?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 25, 2020 12:36 PM

THG


Old news, he lost and it's time to move on. Trying to revive this thread is trolling.

T


Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and they certainly don't realize how obvious it is to others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 25, 2020 1:52 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/
8/9/1439099209471/87ad98ef-9426-4599-9134-aedbe9ad1433-2060x1236.jpeg




Progressive or Regressive? Bernie Sanders slams Tesla CEO Elon Musk

Sanders' tax returns revealed millionaire status?

And?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 25, 2020 2:42 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Looks to me like Bernie the Cuck wasn't saying anything and he let the BLM terrorist take the podium from him.

Strong leadership right there.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2021 9:07 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Sanders was considering something like 6 Trillion? considering multi trillion Covid relief, print more debt relief, build stimulus, covid bailout spending bill

Bernie Sanders blasts Joe Manchin over Build Back Better opposition
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rumors-swirl-manchin-could-defect-130857682.
html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL