Support NeoGAF

[Mercury Fred]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Great post. I couldn't agree more.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I think it's funny, the exact same arguments where tried against Obama's young "naive" supporters back then. He was unelectable, not as experienced as Hillary. Wouldn't be able to accomplish any of his promises. Too risky to nominate.

You would think such grizzled veterans of the political scene would not fall into the same trap twice but here we are.

Obama had the backing of many people in the Democratic establishment and was always viewed as a perfectly acceptable alternative to Clinton or Edwards.

This rhetoric is dumb. There are clear differences between Obama and Sanders.

 

[2AdEPT]

He made a empty post because I suppose he don't have words to argue.

I'm not an american so for me the result is basically irrelevant, I just like to follow USA politics and people are delusional to think that Bernie has a shot. There's nothing to support the idea that he has a chance.

It wasnt an empty post, it was a picture from the movie dumb and dumber, and a specific scene where the dumbest guy on earth (Carey) says to hot woman "Just lay it on me, even if its 1 in 100, what are my chances with you?" The woman replies, "more like one in a million" but dumb guy says....so you're sayin there's a chance!" [witha big dumb ass smile as seen n your post] the fact that all he had t do was post that dumb ass smile made me laugh for minutes.

one of the best scenes in a movie period. The poster might have been agreeing with you for all I know, but it was a great post...best in the thread.

I also am not from the US, but I would prefer the most powerful country on earth earns a little ability to be more benevolent in their dictatorship. If he gets into office and gets blocked by the senate, the people who voted for him will become even more vindicated in their knowledge that there are too many fucks spoiling the broth. It would be a great thing to see happen and increase the speed of human race development by at least a few decades out of the next hundred....so even if the chance is one in a million I will be cheering loud and clear from up here in Canada! Feel it!

 

[Xe4]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Fantastic post. I just take it that people who vote for Bernie but won't vote for Hillary if she wins aren't true liberals, and just want Bernie to win cause it makes them feel hip or something.

 

[Suikoguy]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Yes, exactly. Studies show that Candidates lobby for and vote for the things they campaign on.

This is why i'm disappointed and worried about how Sanders is pushing the Anti-"Establishment" message. It's dangerous because it's not about establishment versus non-establishment. It's about electing candidates at all level of government that support your views.

Edit: On second thought, I'm not sure if that study showed that candidates lobby for such things, but I know they vote for them.

 

[You Know Nothing]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Whew, preach it.

Leftists (which I definitely am) expecting some sort of panacea from one presidential election. It takes time and effort in the real world.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

 

[televator]

I think it's funny, the exact same arguments where tried against Obama's young "naive" supporters back then. He was unelectable, not as experienced as Hillary. Wouldn't be able to accomplish any of his promises. Too risky to nominate.

You would think such grizzled veterans of the political scene would not fall into the same trap twice but here we are.

Alienating supporters with this "Berniebro" bullshit is also not helping either. If Clinton wins the nomination, some people are not going to forget the smear job. It may widen the gap of voters that won't vote for Hillary. I mean you're trying to persuade people to vote, smearing people accomplishes the opposite.

 

[stupei]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

The lizard people will hide amongst us no longer!

 

[adamsappel]

I think it's funny, the exact same arguments where tried against Obama's young "naive" supporters back then. He was unelectable, not as experienced as Hillary. Wouldn't be able to accomplish any of his promises. Too risky to nominate.

You would think such grizzled veterans of the political scene would not fall into the same trap twice but here we are.

We didn't realize what a recalcitrant Congress he was going to deal with (even if you think they aren't doing it out of racism, but ideology). Of course, that could be an argument for Bernie as well, because they're probably going to be sexist, too.

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

She was a reliably liberal Senator.

 

[MisterAnderson]

Uh...so what's this six coin flip in a row business I'm reading about? Surely this isn't true? It would be obvious fraud...

 

[danm999]

Uh...so what's this six coin flip in a row business I'm reading about? Surely this isn't true? It would be obvious fraud...

They use them to assign county delegates when the caucus is deadlocked or people leave the caucus.

 

[SmokeMaxX]

Uh...so what's this six coin flip in a row business I'm reading about? Surely this isn't true? It would be obvious fraud...

Yeah Bernie won 6 out of 7 coin flips that determined delegates yesterday.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...bernie-sanders-coin-flips-iowa-caucus/459429/

But Sam Lau, a spokesman for the Iowa Democratic Party, said that Sanders fared better in the games of chance that were reported through the party’s official mobile app. He won six of those seven coin flips—a fact that underlines how incomplete the available data remains, and the likelihood that a full accounting of all the coin flips on Monday night would yield a more even result than initial reports suggested.

Proof of the fraud in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmkFYuUf6kY

This obviously isn't what you're talking about, but it might show why the "conspiracy theory" was dismissed already.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

False.

 

[Agnostic]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

When I pull the lever for her as the Democratic nom in November there is no doubt I will be voting for a conservative.

 

[lenovox1]

When I pull the lever for her as the Democratic nom in November there is no doubt I will be voting for a conservative.

Why do you think this even after being presented with her Senate record and I'm assuming you know of her prior, non-political occupations? She's never been a conservative in the American sense.

She doesn't even support the TPP like the majority of democrats do. What the frack makes her a conservative?

I'm trying to find something, legitimately.

(Every time anyone says this about her it automatically discredits them to me, especially when they don't show receipts to back their claims up. It's one thing to think she's not liberal enough, but she's not a DINO. Not that you were given the chance to source your claims Agnostic, just when people say this about he in general.)

 

[You Know Nothing]

Why do you think this even after being presented with her Senate record and I'm assuming you know of her prior, non-political occupations? She's never been a conservative in the American sense.

She doesn't even support the TPP like the majority of democrats do. What the frack makes her a conservative?

She's Hillary. And a Clinton! That's enough for some people. Actual voting records be damned.

 

[Azure Dream]

And therein lies the rump. How well do you think berniebros on reddit and elsewhere across the internet will reciprocate by voting for Hillary? Young people normally are the worst groups to turnout and vote. This just gives them the best excuse they wanted.

The significant majority probably will. And if she can't excite a younger base to get out there and vote, that's her failing, not "Berniebros".

 

[goomba]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

I dont know how she gets away with all her flip flops and contradictions.

Supporting the Iraq war and the reigime change attacks on Libya and Syria make it clear her foriegn policy is a continuation of neo conservative policy.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I dont know how she gets away with all her flip flops and contradictions.

Supporting the Iraq war and the reigime change attacks on Libya and Syria make it clear her foriegn policy is a continuation of neo conservative policy.

Sanders plan for Syria is an Iran and Saudi Arabia ground troop coalition. Let's not talk about foreign policy

 

[Suikoguy]

Sanders plan for Syria is an Iran and Saudi Arabia ground troop coalition. Let's not talk about foreign policy

Wait wait wait. Is this real?
I need a link, cause that can't be real....

right...?

Edit:
OMG it's real.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/17/bernie-s-isis-strategy-is-a-disaster.html

I'm not sure which is worse; either he thinks it will work, or he is unfamiliar with the situation.

 

[Damaniel]

Hillary cant be pushed or pulled to the left. She has no integrity. It is all lip service. How easily some of you are fooled.

I really hate hearing rehashed crap like this. The really strange part of it is that your average Bernie supporter wasn't even alive when Bill Clinton first took office, and many weren't alive at the start of his second term either.

There's only a few places where anybody under 25 has to have gotten their 'information' on Hillary - either it's Youtube videos tossed together by people actually alive back then who were part of the Clinton hate brigade, speculation about how her speaking fees must somehow mean she's beholden to people she spoke to (and that truly is speculation; her very liberal voting record shows no actual proof of that), or they've been listening to old 90s episodes of Rush Limbaugh. They've pretty much hit on all of the slurs he was tossing at the Clintons back then, and I'm disappointed to see supposedly left-leaning Democrats beating the same dead horse over and over again.

The only person being fooled here is someone who thinks that a politician who has been part of the Congressional establishment for years and years is somehow non-establishment. Bernie isn't any better than any other politician, just somewhat more left leaning, and far too one-dimensional to have a real shot at the nomination, let alone the Presidency.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Wait wait wait. Is this real?
I need a link, cause that can't be real....

right...?

Edit:
OMG it's real.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/17/bernie-s-isis-strategy-is-a-disaster.html

I'm not sure which is worse; either he thinks it will work, or he is unfamiliar with the situation.

Sanders has a lot of great ideas...but his entire foreign policy is frankly the most pie in the skiest and frankly dangerous.

 

[goomba]

Sanders plan for Syria is an Iran and Saudi Arabia ground troop coalition. Let's not talk about foreign policy

He was right about Iraq when everyone said he was wrong at the time.

 

[Suikoguy]

Sanders has a lot of great ideas...but his entire foreign policy is frankly the most pie in the skiest and frankly dangerous.

He is exceedingly lucky the number one issue for many voters is the Economy.

He was right about Iraq when everyone said he was wrong at the time.

I was for the Iraq war based on the information provided. (I was also way younger and not out of High School yet).

 

[ugaboga232]

The truth is, its a dumb plan in so far as iran and saudi arabia hate each other but its a good/smart plan in that nothing will happen when you have the Saudi's essentially funding ISIS or at least contributing to their hate speech, Iran funding Assad, and a whole bunch of other players funding some combination of the rebels, assad, and isis to get what they want. You have to bring iran and saudi arabia and turkey and russia to the table and get them to agree on one plan of action. Otherwise nothings gonna get accomplished. If somehow bernie can get them to the table its a good plan if not then it sucks. I like the idea behind it though.

Compared to unilateral action or carpet bombing I'd say its better if a bit idealistic.

 

[excelsiorlef]

He was right about Iraq when everyone said he was wrong at the time.

I protested that damn thing, still doesn't make his current plan any good.

 

[ugaboga232]

I protested that damn thing, still doesn't make his current plan any good.

Who has the best plan in your opinion? Purely curious.

 

[goomba]

I protested that damn thing, still doesn't make his current plan any good.

Because the Obama policy is working so well.. which Clinton will continue.

 

[danm999]

Because the Obama policy is working so well.. which Clinton will continue.

I don't think the problem with Sanders plan is that it won't work, it's that it won't happen.

 

[dabig2]

Speaking of foreign policy, I'd like to hear candidates on the ongoing Yemen situation:
UN Food Agency: Yemen Enduring 'Humanitarian Catastrophe'

Yemen is facing chronic mass starvation, a United Nations report warns, calling it a "forgotten crisis."

The poorest country in the Middle East may be on the brink of famine while it faces bombing and a blockade from a Saudi-led coalition.

More than half of the total population of Yemen — some 14.4 million people — are food insecure, the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization said in a report.

The number of food insecure people has grown by 12 percent since June, according to the U.N. agency.

Fuel shortages and restrictions on imports have reduced the availability of essential food commodities and caused food and fuel prices to soar since conflict escalated in March 2015.

Humanitarian organizations have repeatedly warned that 80 percent of the Yemeni population desperately needs food, water, medical supplies and fuel. The U.N. has called what the Yemenis are enduring a "humanitarian catastrophe."

Our partner and ally Saudi Arabia fighting the good fight with our money and support.

 

[SamVimes]

I don't think the problem with Sanders plan is that it won't work, it's that it won't happen.

I don't know if just doing something is better than doing nothing. Doing something is what brought us to this situation in the first place.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Who has the best plan in your opinion? Purely curious.

No one has a great plan. But talking normalization with Iran and your big foreign plan being just get two countries who just broke off diplomatic relations oh and you know come from two different and sects of Islam (Sunni vs Shiite) to team up and put boots on the ground in Syria is the worst of the bunch

 

[KingV]

canada is sort of like america jr. whereas kenya has no white people

Spoiler

mother is american. so he's a citizen

Never mind that Obamas mom is also an American citizen, so it shouldn't have mattered if he had actually been born in Kenya.

 

[danm999]

I don't know if just doing something is better than doing nothing. Doing something is what brought us to this situation in the first place.

There mightn't be an optimal outcome or course of action true, but expecting the Sunnis and Shias to unite is something I'm going to attribute to a slip of the tongue and not a serious policy.

 

[ugaboga232]

No one has a great plan. But talking normalization with Iran and your big foreign plan being just get two countries who just broke off diplomatic relations oh and you know come from two different and sects of Islam (Sunni vs Shiite) to team up and put boots on the ground in Syria is the worst of the bunch

I mean realistically they need to stop playing mini cold war in syria and fix the mess they contribute to. But i agree the silly differences make it hard (as an iranian myself the government gives us all a bad name).

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

I don't know if Sanders actually believes in his foreign policy proposals as realistic or if he just doesn't care and tells his supporters what he thinks will please them most.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I mean realistically they need to stop playing mini cold war in syria and fix the mess they contribute to. But i agree the silly differences make it hard (as an iranian myself the government gives us all a bad name).

The thing is Sanders just doesn't have the experience or the orator skills or the focus and grasp of scope to be a kind of uniter that you would need to pull the sort of thing he suggested off.

Fun fact this happened once:

Not long after President Barack Obama ordered U.S. airstrikes in Libya in 2011, his national security adviser, Tom Donilon, trekked to Capitol Hill to brief Democratic senators. After a few minutes of discussion about the military operation, Bernie Sanders took the floor.

To talk about the economy.


“Sanders delivered a meandering manifesto about Democratic messaging on the economy,” says a former Senate chief of staff. “It wasn't that his insights were wrong. It just wasn't the time or place. Everyone was thinking, ‘Here goes Bernie!’ ”

Current and former Senate aides call the episode typical of Sanders, who on any given day would rather talk about Wall Street profits than about Middle East conflict.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-foreign-policy-deficit-218431

 

[Staccat0]

I will admit, Sanders supporters (of which I am one) are pretty annoying online and his foreign policy is pretty far fetched, but the "he knows nothing about foreign policy" stuff is silly.

Lets be real for a second: There is no deep well of geo-political knowledge on NeoGaf that 90% of these politicians don't have. Bernie Sanders fucking KNOWS that Saudi Arabia and Iran are assholes. You think that no one has mentioned that to him, but you somehow are hip to it?
Bernie has "big ideas". No shit.

He's the idealist "big/new idea" candidate. People who think Bernie Sanders is above selling a lemon to get elected are being goofy, but so are people who think that's anything more than an empty appeal to war weary young liberals.

If you are gonna dog it. Dog it for what it is. That's all. It's not a stupid miscalculation. It's a bullshit promise.

 

[Abinash117]

I don't think the problem with Sanders plan is that it won't work, it's that it won't happen.

It also won't work. I believe he is like a one note candidate unless forced to confront an issue that isn't strictly about wallstreet and making the economy more like a democratic socialist one.

Here is the current plan to defeat ISIL and the war against ISIL is actually going well.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Wait wait wait. Is this real?
I need a link, cause that can't be real....

right...?

Edit:
OMG it's real.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/17/bernie-s-isis-strategy-is-a-disaster.html

I'm not sure which is worse; either he thinks it will work, or he is unfamiliar with the situation.

That might be Bush level. Jesus.

 

[Polari]

Man Trump is pissed. Watching his rally today, he seems really bitter. It seems to have sharpened his performance though.

 

[damnbandit]

I'm just curious, how many people here actually understand how delegates work and how Iowa awards delegates? I'm not a pro-Trump supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but every conversation I've had with people up to this point was based on the presumption that they understood how the Iowa caucus works, or the primaries in general for both parties.

Cruz got 8 delegates, Trump got 7, Rubio got 7. Technically, Cruz came in first and the other two tied for second. However, since the gap is literally one delegate, it's pretty asinine to make this the focal point.

1,237 delegates are needed for the Republican nomination.

Everyone is saying that Trump "lost". But surely you've all seen the chart of how much Trump spent proportional to the votes he got, which is significantly lower than the other candidates. If we were to base the results on a dollar cost to benefit for his campaign then Trump had an outstanding victory and actually far out performed the other candidates. This is something that I would expect of a "competent" businessman, not that I'm inferring that I believe Trump is competent, but take that as you will.

It really just seems to be like the only reason this is a "big" deal at all is because of

1. A complete lack of understanding of how the system works.

2. Willful ignorance.

3. Media poop-slinging.

For the note, on a purely mental level I understand how Trump coming in "second" and emphasizing that is an effective way to disparage the man. Coming from any sense of understanding of what actually happened in scope of the primary system it doesn't make any sense though.

Welp, there's my post of the year folks. Time to go back into lurking.

 

[teruterubozu]

^ It's because Iowa is the first hint of anything tangible. Nothing else to talk about until NH.

 

[danm999]

Honestly none of the primaries matter mathematically until Super Tuesday. The damage to Trump is not in delegates, it's in optics.

He's running a campaign that always wins, that boasts about its fantastic poll numbers, that calls other people losers, that says Rand Paul shouldn't be on the stage because his numbers suck, that is reinventing the way a modern campaign works.

And then at the first hurdle it unperformed compared to its polls (and try as he might now Trump was absolutely hyping his position in the Iowa polls as evidence he would win).

Now there's this unattractive question mark hanging over the rest of his campaign. So far he's still poll leader in New Hampshire, but we haven't had any polls yet post-Iowa, where he may well be hurting. And even his pre-Iowa poll numbers can be scrutinized because apparently Trump supporters don't show up.

 

[Malyse]

Has anyone visited loser.com lately?

 

[Slayven]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Great post

 

[Nipo]

I'm just curious, how many people here actually understand how delegates work and how Iowa awards delegates? I'm not a pro-Trump supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but every conversation I've had with people up to this point was based on the presumption that they understood how the Iowa caucus works, or the primaries in general for both parties.

Cruz got 8 delegates, Trump got 7, Rubio got 7. Technically, Cruz came in first and the other two tied for second. However, since the gap is literally one delegate, it's pretty asinine to make this the focal point.

1,237 delegates are needed for the Republican nomination.

Everyone is saying that Trump "lost". But surely you've all seen the chart of how much Trump spent proportional to the votes he got, which is significantly lower than the other candidates. If we were to base the results on a dollar cost to benefit for his campaign then Trump had an outstanding victory and actually far out performed the other candidates. This is something that I would expect of a "competent" businessman, not that I'm inferring that I believe Trump is competent, but take that as you will.

It really just seems to be like the only reason this is a "big" deal at all is because of

1. A complete lack of understanding of how the system works.

2. Willful ignorance.

3. Media poop-slinging.

For the note, on a purely mental level I understand how Trump coming in "second" and emphasizing that is an effective way to disparage the man. Coming from any sense of understanding of what actually happened in scope of the primary system it doesn't make any sense though.

Welp, there's my post of the year folks. Time to go back into lurking.

Iowa's delegates have never been really important. What is important is the narrative and media publicity that come from it. The current media story is that cruz destroyed trump with evangelicals and Rubio is the official establishment candidate.

NH is really the same way. If NH reaffirms that narrative (trump loses again and Rubio wins) Trump's campaign will be effectively over, christie and kasich will be foreced to drop out, and the question will be whether Cruz can defeat rubio in the south.

 

[Clefargle]

Here's my thought on a "political revolution." It doesn't end if/when your candidate doesn't get nominated. That's not a political revolution. That's a cult. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, the cause doesn't end. You vote for the best (or least bad) practical option (if you're a liberal, that'd be Hillary) and you push her ass to the left. In two years, you show up in droves at mid-terms. You push the people in office that don't represent you out. In four to eight years, you vote for an even more progressive candidate for President. You don't make progress by going backwards. For all the shit that the Tea Partiers get (much of which is deserved), they are actually represented in Congress because they got so fed up with the system that they forced themselves in. I don't see why the passionate left can't do the same thing.

Nice thoughts, I'm of the same mind. Ive been over and over this with a Bernie supporter on FB. I am committed to voting for either Democrat, which apparently labels me a "yellow dog democrat" in his mind. I keep harping on how the "political revolution" he is seeking has to exist with or without Sanders and how anyone currently registered as a dem MUST show up and vote in nov if he ever wants to see the revolution take place. He keeps making excuses about his principles against corporate interest and trying to justify not showing up in nov. I can't beleive that someone who considers this race of such importance could stay home just because they only got a candidate they agree with on 85% of the issues instead of the whole pie.

 

[jmdajr]

I don't know what it will take for people to care about Mid-Term elections.