Tough to argue with his logic. I really hope he rocks the political world in a way that's been needed for a very long time.
https://youtu.be/rtBVuye4fZQ
To good to be true I say. It sounds nice, but he'd corrupt under power like all the others.
All the stuff he says he wants to happen, sadly, won't happen without changing the way people live in a dramatic way, where would he get the extra money from to pay people, how would he go about keeping people happy in a free world?
Quote from: Munch on June 13, 2015, 12:55:03 PM
To good to be true I say. It sounds nice, but he'dl the others.
All the stuff he says he wants to happen, sadly, won't happen without changing the way people live in a dramatic way, where would he get the extra money from to pay people, how would he go about keeping people happy in a free world?
You don't know much about Bernie Sanders do you?
Well, it is an open question as to how exactly he plans on paying for subsidized healthcare and college education. No such thing as a free lunch and all that. It's no secret how a lot of other industrialized countries pay for their setups - higher taxes. Don't get me wrong, I think that'd be worth it. But there are tradeoffs involved.
This is something I don't understand, why is it that other countries can take care of all their people and not just the rich, and we can't. If the money from taxes went toward the people instead of the military industrial complex that makes the rich richer there would be more than enough money. We are over $3,000,000,000+ in debt because of the war machine and that's not counting Home Land security that has taken our rights away. Why should private money decide who runs for president? Isn't that where the problem lies? This is how the Mafia operates, give protection money to them, so the other crooks can't threaten you.
Superb video APA!
As I've said before, I'll vote for Sanders in the primaries, and for the Democrat in the general.
I wish I didn't have to work and had seen him speak in Austin last year :/. Maybe he will be back while on the campaign trail.
I just took this quiz and I am apparently aligned with him 92%.
I don't think he'll win the primary, but I will likely vote for him. I will vote for Clinton if he loses.
http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz
Quote from: Mermaid on June 13, 2015, 04:05:02 PMI just took this quiz and I am apparently aligned with him 92%.
Me too. Center-left represent.
I'll likely vote for him in the primaries, but I'll be shocked if he gets the nomination.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2015, 02:06:49 PM
You don't know much about Bernie Sanders do you?
I just have a distrust for all politicians tbh.
You are not alone!
Quote from: Mermaid on June 13, 2015, 04:05:02 PM
I just took this quiz and I am apparently aligned with him 92%.
I don't think he'll win the primary, but I will likely vote for him. I will vote for Clinton if he loses.
http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz
I guess I side with him 95% of the time. I will probably vote the same as you.
Quote from: Munch on June 13, 2015, 04:40:10 PM
I just have a distrust for all politicians tbh.
So a general distrust of politicians by default makes them all corrupt all the time, huh? Heck, I distrust the monarchy so perhaps I should distrust and assume all Brits are criminals? Maybe all gay people are criminals. Maybe all atheists are criminals. Perhaps I'm a criminal.
Bernie might actually snatch victory because HRC has just to much baggage while the only baggage Bernie has is being a self styled socialist democrat. If he can clear that hurdle he has a good shot at dispatching HRC to yet another failed candidacy..
No way. Clinton's brand is just too well established.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 13, 2015, 08:03:43 PM
No way. Clinton's brand is just too well established.
Just like 2008?
Quote from: Shiranu on June 13, 2015, 08:03:43 PM
No way. Clinton's brand is just too well established.
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2015, 08:33:15 PM
Just like 2008?
I am a fan of Obama, but the only reason he edged ahead is because of his skin colour and a bit more progressive message. Sanders doesn't have any great marketable factor like Obama/Clinton have, and I don't believe the majority of Americans are politically literate enough to be swayed by his message.
Edit: Got 95% agreement with Sanders on that test... next closest was Hillary at 65%. Got Jeb Bush at 37% and that one idiot at 27%... for foreign policy... what the fuck? And I got pretty strongly left wing, which is what I have been getting for years now.
It's really going to come down to how well the progressive wing of the Democratic party is able to turn out the vote. The democratic party without the progressive wing doesn't seem to be able to get out the vote for squat.
Even though dKos has officially put its weight behind HRC if you read the comments almost nobody supports her, but Bernie is the clear front runner by a large margin of posters. . A lot is going to depend on if Bernie can get his message out to the masses. If he gets enough exposure folks might just realize he's the ONLY serious one in any of the races. I'd like to think people are tired of gimmicks and sound byte candidates.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 13, 2015, 08:42:56 PM
I am a fan of Obama, but the only reason he edged ahead is because of his skin colour and a bit more progressive message. Sanders doesn't have any great marketable factor like Obama/Clinton have, and I don't believe the majority of Americans are politically literate enough to be swayed by his message.
Edit: Got 95% agreement with Sanders on that test... next closest was Hillary at 65%. Got Jeb Bush at 37% and that one idiot at 27%... for foreign policy... what the fuck? And I got pretty strongly left wing, which is what I have been getting for years now.
Yeah, I got 95% too. But I got 80% for Hillary. Fine minds think alike---yes?! :)
I was voting for Bernie before I joined this site. 😃
If only the primary took place at AF instead of Iowa. This guy would be a shoo-in.
Wow, this guy should be President ... 40 years ago, why isn't he now? Serious question, not rhetorical.
I have been a fan of Bernie for 25 years now, and there have been times I've had to adopt him as my representative because my local one didn't represent me. I'm looking forward to voting for him in the Ohio primary.
To be honest, I'm still expecting to end up voting for Hillary in the general (and I don't mean 'end up' as in as the lesser of two evils, I think she'll make a terrific president), but Bernie's talking like Democrats used to talk, and I miss that, and I want that back in my party. If Dems are going to just bitch and moan and then shrug and go along with Boehner and McConnell and behave like "Republican lite", that's why they're losing elections -- if both sides are going to behave like Republicans, the voter's just going to vote for the one that actually carries the label.
Bernie is perfectly happy to take the fight to them -- and with any luck will move Hillary a little to the left.
Oh, jeez. I just imagined a ticket of Bernie Sanders and former San Antonio mayor/current HUD secretary Julián Castro. That sends a shiver up the spine.
QuoteOh, jeez. I just imagined a ticket of Bernie Sanders and former San Antonio mayor/current HUD secretary Julián Castro. That sends a shiver up the spine.
I quite like Castro, growing up right outside his representation. I am just afraid the Democratic party will make him step in line with them too much, and he will have to because it's what the party wants.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 14, 2015, 03:38:38 AM
I quite like Castro, growing up right outside his representation. I am just afraid the Democratic party will make him step in line with them too much, and he will have to because it's what the party wants.
Yeah, but even a lockstep Dem Castro is vastly preferable to... well, everyone running on the other side.
You godless socialists! You'll destory America, voting for people like this! What's next? Taxing the church?! :p
Well hot damned, a sense of humor after all. :super: :pai: :flowers:
While it is unlikely he will win, with him and Warren pushing back, they are going to force both parties to address those subjects. Our political system has been way overdue with voices like his.
I am tired of some painting both parties as the same. One is the issue of the system, and the other is the issue of the voters and human empathy. Democratic voters are on the right side of history as far as pay, equal pay for women, women's reproductive rights, health care and eduecation and equal rights for LGBT community.
Where our voters have failed though for far too long is midterms. The more our voters speak out and show up in all local state and national elections, the better things will get for the long term.
The cause of our 30 year decline has been the top and the right using blackmail and money to bully the entire congress, and democratic politicians have for far too long allowed their sense of cooperation to allow them to be pulled to the right. But as far as ideas, democrats are the party of the worker and the party of equality.
Hasn't Bernie done this before? Or am I thinking of someone else?
I gotta say. .I'd love to see a Sanders/Warren ticket and perhaps I'm to pie in the sky, but I'd love to see the two of them turn the establishment on its head and even being a lot of rubes with them in not only the presidential election, but the congressional and the mid terms. .
Then again I'd also like my gf to become 40 years younger looking like she did 40 years ago. .
Quote from: Brian37 on June 14, 2015, 11:01:10 AM
The cause of our 30 year decline has been the top and the right using blackmail and money to bully the entire congress, and democratic politicians have for far too long allowed their sense of cooperation to allow them to be pulled to the right. But as far as ideas, democrats are the party of the worker and the party of equality.
Moreso than the Republicans, certainly -- although I'm more likely to say that they're less anti-labor than the Repubs, than that they're pro-labor. I would love for Sanders and Warren and other progressives to get out there and drag the national debate back where it belongs, in the center. Unfortunately, Will Rogers' statement -- "I don't belong to any organized political party, I'm a Democrat" -- still holds, and getting us all pointed in the same direction is like herding hyperactive kittens.
The main structural thing in favor of the Democrat this coming election is the dictum that a candidate runs to the party's extreme for the nomination, then runs to the center for the general election. Considering a) the candidates already declared on the Other Party's side, and b) where their extreme end currently is, Hillary can casually stand in the center and claim it months ahead of either convention and cede the left-wing vote to Sanders or move enough in his direction to dilute it. By the fall, whoever's carrying the banner for the GOP has the unenviable task of trying to either push a toxic set of policies that attracts no one but the hardest of hard core Republicans, or of trying to encroach on territory that will have by then been well claimed by the Democrats -- and the participation of Sanders will only make the Repubs look even more extreme, and move the center even further away from where they are now.
Yeah, I know, I'm kind of mentally ceding the nomination to Hillary already -- I could be surprised (again), though. Realistically, or at least based on current polling, she represents the best chance to keep the White House out of Republican hands, and that's my priority #1. I'm willing to take half a loaf over no loaf at all. But if Bernie's still in by the time the circus reaches Ohio, I will be pulling the lever for him. I want my party to know that it belongs on the left.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 14, 2015, 01:33:52 PM
I gotta say. .I'd love to see a Sanders/Warren ticket and perhaps I'm to pie in the sky, but I'd love to see the two of them turn the establishment on its head and even being a lot of rubes with them in not only the presidential election, but the congressional and the mid terms. .
Then again I'd also like my gf to become 40 years younger looking like she did 40 years ago. .
That would definitely be a dream team to me.
Quote from: trdsf on June 14, 2015, 08:13:35 PM
Yeah, I know, I'm kind of mentally ceding the nomination to Hillary already -- I could be surprised (again), though. Realistically, or at least based on current polling, she represents the best chance to keep the White House out of Republican hands,
That's where she was eight years ago until an unknown Junior Senator stepped in and captured everyone's attention. That was an unusual situation that doesn't happen often. I don't know if that's likely to happen again or not. I supported Hillary back then too, but it was a lukewarm support. Obama is a dynamic campaigner that won my trust easily. And I thought he would be a much hoped for liberal, not just another Democrat, but I was making assumptions based mostly on not really knowing him. In fact, what happened was that he captured my imagination, and that was all. There was nothing else to judge him by. My question would be why did people walk away from Hillary so quickly? Is it something about Hillary, or was it that Obama was just that good?
Whether this makes a difference, I don't know. While Hillary is polling well, she's not really competing with anyone at the moment. But I question whether her support is that strong (as in people's hearts and minds)? Does that even matter? Maybe it's just the numbers that count.
Quote from: SGOS on June 15, 2015, 08:00:55 AM
That's where she was eight years ago until an unknown Junior Senator stepped in and captured everyone's attention. That was an unusual situation that doesn't happen often. I don't know if that's likely to happen again or not. I supported Hillary back then too, but it was a lukewarm support. Obama is a dynamic campaigner that won my trust easily. And I thought he would be a much hoped for liberal, not just another Democrat, but I was making assumptions based mostly on not really knowing him. In fact, what happened was that he captured my imagination, and that was all. There was nothing else to judge him by. My question would be why did people walk away from Hillary so quickly? Is it something about Hillary, or was it that Obama was just that good?
Whether this makes a difference, I don't know. While Hillary is polling well, she's not really competing with anyone at the moment. But I question whether her support is that strong (as in people's hearts and minds)? Does that even matter? Maybe it's just the numbers that count.
Well, not entirely unknown. I remember Obama's keynote at the 2004 Democratic convention -- I forget which commentator it was (I think it was David Brinkley) who remarked something like, "I think we've just seen our first black President." and many of us, myself included, were wondering why
he wasn't our candidate that year. He was a superb campaigner, there's no question about that. And given the extraordinary level of opposition the Other Party has thrown at him where they oppose what he says even before he says it, I think it's remarkable he's accomplished what he has.
But Obama had to win me over; I was intrigued, but I was still in the Hillary camp because she had the experience that he didn't, and if she had won the nomination, I would have voted for her without hesitation -- and will do so next year, if everything plays out the way I expect it to.
But the Sanders run is important -- I think it marks the beginning of the swing back of the political pendulum. He's a tough, intelligent liberal who doesn't come off like a crank, like Kucinich did (and who I will never forgive for his comments about my old congresswoman Marcy Kaptur after she beat him in the primary for the new 9th District). The national debate is too far to the right at present for him to win, but he's in a prime position to pull it back to some semblance of sanity. Because let's be honest, in any other country at least in the Developed West, Obama would be a centrist, not on the left. We don't
have a liberal party in this country, at the national level. We have a centrist one, and a collection of raving reactionary lunatics that make the John Birch Society look reasonable. It's past time that the pendulum swing back again.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/19/bernie-sanders-profile-democrat-presidential-candidate
Some more interesting things about the Senator from Vermont
BUMP! Sanders or Bust. Those of you that think Clinton has a leg at all, and that I should back her "just in case" my guy loses? Let's see if my guy loses first, all right? All right.
Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on August 01, 2015, 12:54:59 AM
BUMP! Sanders or Bust. Those of you that think Clinton has a leg at all, and that I should back her "just in case" my guy loses? Let's see if my guy loses first, all right? All right.
OK!
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2015, 06:37:45 PM
So a general distrust of politicians by default makes them all corrupt all the time, huh? Heck, I distrust the monarchy so perhaps I should distrust and assume all Brits are criminals? Maybe all gay people are criminals. Maybe all atheists are criminals. Perhaps I'm a criminal.
I think that's a bit harsh.
I would never hold it against anyone for being reluctant to trust people in politics, their advertisements either paint an idyllic picture or serve to demonize the opposition; if you were to ask me the very nature of these ads makes it almost impossible for me to take them at face value as at least one side, (and there is a good chance both) are being deceptive to some degree. For example they exaggerate, selectively criticize, or fail to mention something pertinent like potential drawbacks.
However, since you guys endorse him, and on this board we are generally like-minded, I do find that in itself to be a good case for Sanders.
Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on August 01, 2015, 12:54:59 AM
BUMP! Sanders or Bust. Those of you that think Clinton has a leg at all, and that I should back her "just in case" my guy loses? Let's see if my guy loses first, all right? All right.
I'll certainly vote for Hillary in the fall before
any of the idiots on the Other Side; there's no question in my mind that she has the intelligence and background to do the job, and do it well -- and as much as I like Obama, I think she's got more spine and would stand up to the teabaggers more firmly.
But until and unless she's the nominee, Sanders is my candidate, as he better represents my thinking; it's my hope that his presence in the campaign will bring not only Hillary, but the entire national debate, back towards at least the center. It's lurched so far to the right, we're still debating things that every other industrialized democracy dealt with decades ago and that even
their conservatives take for granted.
And who knows, he might surprise us all like another candidate did eight years ago. But if not, I am secure in the knowledge that any of our candidates is a better bet than any of theirs, and the eventual nominee doesn't have to be my first pick in order to get my vote. I don't have any truck with this PUMA bullshit.
Bernie Sanders fancies himself a Socialist. He would (politically) fare much better in a country which favors Socialism. Like in Europe or somewhere. Anywhere but the US.
Quote from: SkyChief on August 03, 2015, 12:27:48 PMBernie Sanders fancies himself a Socialist. He would (politically) fare much better in a country which favors Socialism. Like in Europe or somewhere. Anywhere but the US.
True, but the US is where this political stance is needed the most. In the US, the right-wing stance is pervasive and even among Democrats, the best one can realistically hope for is a capable centrist Democrat prez. And this alternatively centrist and right-wing governance hasn't addressed, much less dealt with, lots of longstanding problems around here. Getting an actual progressive into the presidency would be a major upset.
Sanders' Donors (career totals):
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528&type=I (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528&type=I)
Clinton Donors (Election Cycle Donors):
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019&type=f (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019&type=f)
Unions vs Corporation. Hmmmm. :eek:
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/08/03/bernie-sanders-shreds-gop-science-deniers-applauding-obama-climate-change-initiative.html (http://www.politicususa.com/2015/08/03/bernie-sanders-shreds-gop-science-deniers-applauding-obama-climate-change-initiative.html)
I like Sanders a lot, but fear he has no shot at winning. Socialism is still considered a dirty word in America. People will vote against their own interests in hopes of one day being rich, or because they think anyone who needs help is just lazy.
Quote from: SkyChief on August 03, 2015, 12:27:48 PM
Bernie Sanders fancies himself a Socialist. He would (politically) fare much better in a country which favors Socialism. Like in Europe or somewhere. Anywhere but the US.
It's not about winning, it's about fighting for what you believe in. Sanders' history is full of this stance, and it's one of the things that makes him so admirable. So what if he could win where he is the norm? That isn't how change is made.
Quote from: Shiranu on August 04, 2015, 01:43:51 AMIt's not about winning, it's about fighting for what you believe in.
...in the primary. The general election is definitely all about winning.
Quote from: Hydra009 on August 04, 2015, 02:11:15 AM
...in the primary. The general election is definitely all about winning.
(In regards to it would be much easier for him to just go somewhere else)
I've come to the conclusion that the vast majority of the political stuff anymore revolves around click through, Facebook politics designed to make money for whoever is in charge of putting the shit online for us to click on. One example is the notion that we'll have a constitutional amendment to overturned CU which is a pure pipe dream It would require both houses of congress and 3/4th of the states to ratify it which simply isn't going to happen. I'm a bit disappointed Sanders uses it on the stump because he knows it's a lost cause so the ONLY way CU gets overturned is through SCOTUS which is going to require that democrats, progressive democrats in particular hold the white house until the right wingers either die of old age or retire and even then the congress would have to approve of whoever the president nominated.
I don't see anything wrong with talking about it. That's how the idea gets into the system, so support can be built for the 3/4 states necessary for an amendment. If no one's talking about it, how is the idea supposed to get out there? He's not promising he's going to sign it out of existence his first day in office.
But yes, the easiest way will be to get sane Justices on the Supreme Court and get it just overturned. And that definitely means Representatives, Senators, and a President who are not teabaggers, beholden to them, or just barking mad.
QuoteBut yes, the easiest way will be to get sane Justices on the Supreme Court and get it just overturned.
And that note; look at the ages of the court... upper 70s, 80, 80, and like... 82 or 83.
The time to change Justices is really close... the saner the president we have at that time, the better.
Quote from: trdsf on August 04, 2015, 10:56:10 PM
I don't see anything wrong with talking about it. That's how the idea gets into the system, so support can be built for the 3/4 states necessary for an amendment. If no one's talking about it, how is the idea supposed to get out there? He's not promising he's going to sign it out of existence his first day in office.
But yes, the easiest way will be to get sane Justices on the Supreme Court and get it just overturned. And that definitely means Representatives, Senators, and a President who are not teabaggers, beholden to them, or just barking mad.
Of course talking about it is good, but something I read the other day talked about the people who circulate the petitions for click throughs and then solicit huge sums of money for things that are almost impossible to accomplish are disingenuous .. Fine, talk about an amendment but these are people who know how the system works. They know damm good and well a constitutional amendment is one of the toughest things to ever get done in Washington and yet lead people on giving them the impression that a $3 or $50 "donation and clicking on a petition is all but a done deal and that the states would ever go for it. CU just opened the flood gates to allow people with shitloads of money to buy elections, but what is not told is that every politician is a direct beneficiary of the corruption and it's the politicians who have to cut their own throats to pass such an amendment. That's like addressing a convention of bank robbers about the ethics of taking money that doesn't belong to them.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on August 05, 2015, 02:14:29 AM
Of course talking about it is good, but something I read the other day talked about the people who circulate the petitions for click throughs and then solicit huge sums of money for things that are almost impossible to accomplish are disingenuous .. Fine, talk about an amendment but these are people who know how the system works. They know damm good and well a constitutional amendment is one of the toughest things to ever get done in Washington and yet lead people on giving them the impression that a $3 or $50 "donation and clicking on a petition is all but a done deal and that the states would ever go for it. CU just opened the flood gates to allow people with shitloads of money to buy elections, but what is not told is that every politician is a direct beneficiary of the corruption and it's the politicians who have to cut their own throats to pass such an amendment. That's like addressing a convention of bank robbers about the ethics of taking money that doesn't belong to them.
I sent Obama a check for $200 eight years ago, when I thought he was a liberal. Now I get that kind of "click on" solicitation from the Democratic Party several times a week. Every hot button issue from guns, to abortion rights to global warming, or whatever highly emotional item has hit the news in the last week. Hell, you'd think the Democratic Party was working for the people. But the country keeps moving to the right (read "corporate control") regardless that half our leadership declares themselves Democrats. It's all a scam to get money to get elected. The real goal of our leaders is to get their hands on those really fat corporate donations, and in spite of all the good rhetoric, the country is falling further and further into corruption. We point at the behavior of leaders in other 3rd world countries and identify the bribe taking and special favors as corruption. We solved the corruption problem here by making it legal.
I'll never send a dime to another politician.
Quote from: Mermaid on June 13, 2015, 04:05:02 PM
I just took this quiz and I am apparently aligned with him 92%.
I don't think he'll win the primary, but I will likely vote for him. I will vote for Clinton if he loses.
http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz
I agreed with Bernie 96%.
I recall a similar quiz way back, where I agreed 100% with Kucinich.
Yeah, I hit the same 96% with Bernie, then I think it was 85% Hilary and 71% with O'Malley. Cruz and Trump were my worst matches.
If the choice comes down to Bernie vs. Hillary, less is known of the former than the latter. However, we know enough about Hillary not to want her in the Oral Office. We know her position on working Americans, how she stabbed us in the back with her injurious foreign policies. We know that Bernie is no racist by his history, despite the complaints of some for not making them his priority campaign issue (although their concerns are somewhat legitimized by current events). It's plain to see that Bernie's positions are voiced with more passion than any candidate ever to make it as far as he has in the polls since at least the time of FDR, and while Hillary plays the ultimate poker game, Bernie simply hasn't the face for that. Whether or not this is more a liability with Congress as it is a sign that we can trust him to give 98% of America the best that he can matters less to me than knowing that he can be trusted not to fuck with us, and that's why Bernie will be getting my vote at the primary polls.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on August 18, 2015, 08:01:48 PM
If the choice comes down to Bernie vs. Hillary, less is known of the former than the latter. However, we know enough about Hillary not to want her in the Oral Office. We know her position on working Americans, how she stabbed us in the back with her injurious foreign policies. We know that Bernie is no racist by his history, despite the complaints of some for not making them his priority campaign issue (although their concerns are somewhat legitimized by current events). It's plain to see that Bernie's positions are voiced with more passion than any candidate ever to make it as far as he has in the polls since at least the time of FDR, and while Hillary plays the ultimate poker game, Bernie simply hasn't the face for that. Whether or not this is more a liability with Congress as it is a sign that we can trust him to give 98% of America the best that he can matters less to me than knowing that he can be trusted not to fuck with us, and that's why Bernie will be getting my vote at the primary polls.
Given the alternatives, Hillary is infinitely preferable to the clot of religious bigots and economic "Darwinists" on the Republican side of the aisle.
But yes, if Bernie is still in the mix when the primaries come to my state, I will vote for him cheerily. And if he does not eclipse her for the nomination, I will vote for Hillary in the fall without hesitation or regret.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on August 18, 2015, 08:01:48 PM
If the choice comes down to Bernie vs. Hillary, less is known of the former than the latter. However, we know enough about Hillary not to want her in the Oral Office.
Freudian slip?
Quote from: trdsf on August 18, 2015, 08:23:04 PM
Given the alternatives, Hillary is infinitely preferable to the clot of religious bigots and economic "Darwinists" on the Republican side of the aisle.
But yes, if Bernie is still in the mix when the primaries come to my state, I will vote for him cheerily. And if he does not eclipse her for the nomination, I will vote for Hillary in the fall without hesitation or regret.
Now see, I almost feel that way. If Clinton would shrug off all of her campaign donors, the same people as your highest Republican/Libertarian front runner? Then, maybe. But if Sanders doesn't make it through primary (and, I live in VT, open primary vote here), then my vote is for nobody else, because they are all the same. And I am VERY tired of people telling me Hillary Clinton is better than my worst pick of Republicans. Because she's not.
Quote from: Mermaid on August 18, 2015, 08:47:13 PM
Freudian slip?
No, that's just how I've viewed the White House ever since Ronald Reagan polluted it with his inexorable stench.
Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on August 18, 2015, 08:52:39 PM
Now see, I almost feel that way. If Clinton would shrug off all of her campaign donors, the same people as your highest Republican/Libertarian front runner? Then, maybe. But if Sanders doesn't make it through primary (and, I live in VT, open primary vote here), then my vote is for nobody else, because they are all the same. And I am VERY tired of people telling me Hillary Clinton is better than my worst pick of Republicans. Because she's not.
Uh, Hillary doesn't want to revoke my right to marry the man of my dreams, should I ever meet him. Hillary doesn't want to repeal the first medical coverage I've had in 15 years. There
IS a difference.
Quote from: trdsf on August 18, 2015, 10:42:21 PM
Uh, Hillary doesn't want to revoke my right to marry the man of my dreams, should I ever meet him. Hillary doesn't want to repeal the first medical coverage I've had in 15 years. There IS a difference.
If equal rights behooves you, I find it odd that you view anyone but Sanders as a choice. Clinton is more of the same, and that's all she is.
Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on August 18, 2015, 11:07:09 PM
If equal rights behooves you, I find it odd that you view anyone but Sanders as a choice. Clinton is more of the same, and that's all she is.
If you can show me where Hillary says she wants to block equal marriage rights, or repeal the Affordable Care Act, I would like to see your links.
This isn't a zero-sum thing. I really do support and prefer Sanders, and think he would be an excellent president. But it's not Sanders or nothing. I'm sorry, but if you really believe that a President H. Clinton would be absolutely no different from a President J. Bush, or a President Walker, or a President Tr(no, I can't even type that as a theoretical), than you are just flat wrong -- I'm willing to entertain the idea that she won't be great, but she also won't be the fiscal and social disaster area that
any of the Republicans would be.
She's not my first choice, but
if if comes down to it, I'll vote for her before I'll vote for anyone on the Republican side. This isn't about having my absolute first choice. This is about making the best choice from the available options. I really want Sanders to be one of those options, but the GOP idiots represent far too much potential damage for me to take my vote and go home if I don't get everything I want.
Quote from: trdsf on August 18, 2015, 11:34:54 PMPresident Tr(no, I can't even type that as a theoretical)
(http://media.giphy.com/media/DBa308wq8XTMs/giphy.gif)
Sanders in the primaries. The Dem nominee (whether Sanders or Clinton) in the general.
Though I would LOVE a Sanders presidency, if it comes down to Hillary vs. ANY Republican, Hillary is the best choice by far. I would much rather have Hillary picking Supreme Court justices than Jeb, Trump, Perry, Santorum, or any of those other clowns.
Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on August 18, 2015, 11:07:09 PM
If equal rights behooves you, I find it odd that you view anyone but Sanders as a choice. Clinton is more of the same, and that's all she is.
If she's more of the same, then it doesn't matter if I vote for her rather than a republican, does it?