Support NeoGAF

[Mael]

Wow. Are you actually making a case for super delegates? Super delegates are the most undemocratic thing in American elections.

You've got a strange way of spelling Caucuses.
I didn't know that most of the US had such a huge density of population to make paper voting inefficient to begin with but this BS Caucuses are even more hillariously undemocratic than elected officials deciding on who's going to be the nominee.
heh top of the page!

 

[Box of Kittens]

It will not.

This is true. First past the post Congressional elections plus the Electoral College (in particular the requirement that the winner have a majority of electoral votes) create strong pressures towards a two party system. Neither of those are changing any time soon.

 

[shinra-bansho]

So does the purity straw man. Saying someone has faults is not a purity contest.

And so it begins.

Purity tests don't seem to be about faults. They're not even normally about policy or record or actual activities so far as I can tell.

They're about associations for the most part.

Ever collaborated with or worked in an industry. Stay out of public office.

Unless you're talking about ideological purity. In which case it's also not really about faults. It seems more about being first and/or being unwavering. And typically devoid of nuance.

 

[Macam]

Purity tests don't seem to be about faults. They're not even normally about policy or record or actual activities so far as I can tell.

They're about associations for the most part.

Ever collaborated with or worked in an industry. Stay out of public office.

Unless you're talking about ideological purity. In which case it's also not really about faults. It seems more about being first and/or being unwavering. And typically devoid of nuance.

None of which pertains to the original poster that was being cited for engaging in "purity" tests.

The claims about purity tests here tend to be used as a shorthand to attempt to shut down even basic critiques about someone else's critiques (i.e., don't shoot the messenger, regardless of how clumsy or faulty the support for that message may be). They're more than welcome to make the claim, but it's as silly as the behavior they seem to despise.

 

[DOWN]

Op could you try labeling who is saying what?

 

[eBay Huckster]

so how many democratic voters needed to vote to win in the gerrymandered territories in 2010 and 2014?

not sure about democrats alone

in 2010 they arguably would've just needed a national popular vote tie (so 48-48). they got -7.

in 2014, i'm pretty sure they needed a margin of +6 (and instead got -6)

 

[Azzanadra]

Heh, establishment hack. Just another member of the elite who wants Americans to submit themselves to the rule of the wealthy. People like him and Hillary need to be stopped, they are the villains in the American story.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Heh, establishment hack. Just another member of the elite who wants Americans to submit themselves to the rule of the wealthy. People like him and Hillary need to be stopped, they are the villains in the American story.

Do you write bad Detective Noir fiction as a hobby?

 

[Azzanadra]

Do you write bad Detective Noir fiction as a hobby?

Nah, I'm not Nic Pizzolatto.

I do, however see the the truth in American Politics from up north. How these establishment guys deny you basic human rights like free Health care so that guy with 40 million dollars in his bank can have 50 million dollars. And even more bizarre is that one of the candidates who supports this way of life is winning the primary of the supposed "progressive" party? The truth is that America has tow right wings party, one juts happens to be borderline insane compared to the other, thus making the Democratic party seem progressive only due to relativity.

And so arrive people like Sanders, people that care about the common man rather than be subservient to the 1%. Alas, the establishment has the common people of America convinced that the needs of the elite are more important than their own and America, as a result, is stuck in a perpetual cycle where you are always voting for the "lesser evil".

 

[excelsiorlef]

Nah, I'm not Nic Pizzolatto.

I do, however see the the truth in American Politics from up north. How these establishment guys deny you basic human rights like free Health care so that guy with 40 million dollars in his bank can have 50 million dollars. And even more bizarre is that one of the candidates who supports this way of life is winning the primary of the supposed "progressive" party? The truth is that America has tow right wings party, one juts happens to be borderline insane compared to the other, thus making the Democratic party seem progressive only due to relativity.

And so arrive people like Sanders, people that care about the common man rather than be subservient to the 1%. Alas, the establishment has the common people of America convinced that the needs of the elite are more important than their own and America, as a result, is stuck in a perpetual cycle where you are always voting for the "lesser evil".

A) I'm Canadian
B) Look up Hillary Care before you start acting like Clinton wants to deny people human rights
C)You still sound like a bad Pulp Writer.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Frank spitting fire. I like it. I'm tired of people just making random statements online (based on their online experience) and generalizing that without retort. Voters (on the left) aren't mad at the system. They're not mad at Obama's presidency. They're not raging at everything Sanders rages at. You know what my proof of that is?

We've been holding votes for a status quo, Obama 3.0 candidate and an anti-establishment candidate for months now, and the results are pretty damn clear.

But what do I know, I live in a red state.

And direct democracy is one of the worst things to ever happen in American politics.

SuperDelegates are there as a firewall in case of Emergency. Trump would certainly qualify as one, and the GOP is wishing they had them right now.

These complaints aren't actually about democracy, they're complaints about Sanders losing.

Bolded for truth. I'm glad someone said it. The dude is literally campaigning right now that the superdelegates should all ignore Hillary's massive pledged delegate and actual vote lead and pick him because "reasons." Sanders is a hypocrite. Nothing more.

 

[Jonm1010]

'Don't make perfect be the enemy of good.'

This purity shit needs to stop.

GTFO with that reaching nonsense. Nowhere did I advocate that. My response was in the middle of people piling on another poster for criticizing Frank.

Just saying that on the other side of that coin, there is a tendency for people to get irrationally reflexive toward criticism - no matter how warranted - when it is directed at politicians or public figures they are fond of.

Which is kinda being born out by your overreacting response.

 

[Armaros]

You've got a strange way of spelling Caucuses.
I didn't know that most of the US had such a huge density of population to make paper voting inefficient to begin with but this BS Caucuses are even more hillariously undemocratic than elected officials deciding on who's going to be the nominee.
heh top of the page!

The Irony is that Bernie Sander supporters were complaining about Caucuses before primary went into full swing as undemocratic.

Now they embrace them wholeheartedly and relish when any of them come up.

 

[excelsiorlef]

The Irony is that Bernie Sander supporters were complaining about Caucuses before primary went into full swing as undemocratic.

Now they embrace them wholeheartedly and relish when any of them come up.

It'll be fun to watch how the narrative changes on Super Delegates if Sanders follows through on his try to convince the Supes to give him the nomination even if he has less pledged delegates and loses the popular vote plan.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Nah, I'm not Nic Pizzolatto.

I do, however see the the truth in American Politics from up north. How these establishment guys deny you basic human rights like free Health care so that guy with 40 million dollars in his bank can have 50 million dollars. And even more bizarre is that one of the candidates who supports this way of life is winning the primary of the supposed "progressive" party? The truth is that America has tow right wings party, one juts happens to be borderline insane compared to the other, thus making the Democratic party seem progressive only due to relativity.

And so arrive people like Sanders, people that care about the common man rather than be subservient to the 1%. Alas, the establishment has the common people of America convinced that the needs of the elite are more important than their own and America, as a result, is stuck in a perpetual cycle where you are always voting for the "lesser evil".

If any of this were true, Sanders would be raising money for progressive down ticket Democrats. He'd have dropped out now that it was clear he can't win to allow the party to focus on the General. He wouldn't be actively telling his largely young supporters that anyone who doesn't agree with him is part of some vague establishment and can't be trusted.

Here's the real truth; Sanders only cares about one person, and that's himself.

 

[Azzanadra]

A) I'm Canadian
B) Look up Hillary Care before you start acting like Clinton wants to deny people human rights
C)You still sound like a bad Pulp Writer.

I'm Canadian too, hence why in my first post I said from "up north". And there seem to be a discrepancy with what Clinton says and actually does. We all know she's corrupt, she kind of reminds me of Tommy Carcetti from the Wire in how focused she is in advancing herself as opposed to the country despite her progressive values.

If any of this were true, Sanders would be raising money for progressive down ticket Democrats. He'd have dropped out now that it was clear he can't win to allow the party to focus on the General. He wouldn't be actively telling his largely young supporters that anyone who doesn't agree with him is part of some vague establishment and can't be trusted.

Here's the real truth; Sanders only cares about one person, and that's himself.

Why would he want to allow the party to focus on the general, though? Why would he compromise his values for an establishment puppet? That's like Jesus dropping out of an election against Trujillo in order to support Trujillo against Hitler. He has hope, and he clearly gives many Americans hope that things can be different. That the non-1%ers don't need to be treated like inhumane inconveniences and rather as people, I mean that's a message that should resonate with a lot of (rational) people.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I'm Canadian too, hence why in my first post I said from "up north". And there seem to be a discrepancy with what Clinton says and actually does. We all know she's corrupt, she kind of reminds me of Tommy Carcetti from the Wire in how focused she is in advancing herself as opposed to the country despite her progressive values.

LOL oook there buddy. No we don't all know that, Christ almighty. This is my point you have absolutely nothing to say but you claim everyone knows she's corrupt.

Her voting record generally backs her talk.

I know you're Canadian but you said deny me health care so I was just letting you know that I too am Canadian.

 

[q_q]

If any of this were true, Sanders would be raising money for progressive down ticket Democrats. He'd have dropped out now that it was clear he can't win to allow the party to focus on the General. He wouldn't be actively telling his largely young supporters that anyone who doesn't agree with him is part of some vague establishment and can't be trusted.

Here's the real truth; Sanders only cares about one person, and that's himself.

Ahaha how deluded are you? Would you hire a lawyer to defend you if they were taking money on the side from the prosecution? Of course not, but Bernie is wrong for applying this logic to politics.

 

[royalan]

Nah, I'm not Nic Pizzolatto.

I do, however see the the truth in American Politics from up north. How these establishment guys deny you basic human rights like free Health care so that guy with 40 million dollars in his bank can have 50 million dollars. And even more bizarre is that one of the candidates who supports this way of life is winning the primary of the supposed "progressive" party? The truth is that America has tow right wings party, one juts happens to be borderline insane compared to the other, thus making the Democratic party seem progressive only due to relativity.

And so arrive people like Sanders, people that care about the common man rather than be subservient to the 1%. Alas, the establishment has the common people of America convinced that the needs of the elite are more important than their own and America, as a result, is stuck in a perpetual cycle where you are always voting for the "lesser evil".

Can you point to any legislation that Hillary Clinton has backed that would point to her being corrupt and/or lend any credibility to your post?

 

[Azzanadra]

Can you point to any legislation that Hillary Clinton has back that would point to her being corrupt and/or lend any credibility to your post?

Well I mean there is the debacle with the Wall Street speeches, like what is she telling those guys that the common people of America are apparently not worthy of knowing? And there is the issue of the Super PACs, who all candidates except Sanders and Trump are guilty off. Now isn't that funny, Trump is actually less of a corporate tool than Clinton. The irony. Granted, people like Clinton are responsible for people like Trump existing with their unwavering support for the system.

Though I don't think its a question of whether or not she will be pro- big corporation in her time in office, its clear she will be. But I think we are getting off topic here, no?

Barney Frank agrees with me about the speeches at least, but he's wrong about Bernie. He thinks all Bernie supporters are just angry, and why shouldn't they be? America isn't the "shining city on the hill", people should be angry and overthrow the oligarchies that Barney and people like him peddle in order to control the masses.

 

[q_q]

Can you point to any legislation that Hillary Clinton has back that would point to her being corrupt and/or lend any credibility to your post?

If you think thats the only way corruption manifests itself, much more needs to be explained to you before we even get to Clinton. Youre just parroting a talking point. So depressing...

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Why would he want to allow the party to focus on the general, though? Why would he compromise his values for an establishment puppet? That's like Jesus dropping out of an election against Trujillo in order to support Trujillo against Hitler. He has hope, and he clearly gives many Americans hope that things can be different. That the non-1%ers don't need to be treated like inhumane inconveniences and rather as people, I mean that's a message that should resonate with a lot of (rational) people.

Because when Clinton can raise 18m in the same time frame, Bernie's 1k is fucking pathetic and shows how much of a liar and hypocrite he is.

And what the fuck is an establishment puppet? What the fuck is The Establishment? Is it rich people? I've worked for and with tons of rich people. Put a bunch of them in a room together and none of them will be able to reach an agreement on anything, and yet they are somehow some illuminati style world order that controls everything?

And the fact that you're comparing Sanders to fucking Jesus shows that how much of his campaign is nothing but a cult of personality.

And yes, I agree that message resonates with rational people. Which is why we reject Sanders. He will do nothing but damage the progressive cause, because he has shown neither ability not willingness to fight the actual battles needed. All he cares about is propping himself up as an inviolate saviour. In that sense, he is no different than Trump; neither have a workable plan, they're just in this for their own ego.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Well I mean there is the debacle withe the Wall Street speeches, like what is she telling those guys that the common people of America are apparently not worthy of knowing? And there is the issue of the Super PACs, who all candidates except Sanders and Trump are guilty off. Now isn't that funny, Trump is actually less of a corporate tool than Clinton. The irony. Granted, people like Clinton are responsible for people like Trump existing with their unwavering support for the system.

Can you point to any legislation that Hillary Clinton has back that would point to her being corrupt and/or lend any credibility to your post?

His answer is clearly no. LOL

 

[Armaros]

Well I mean there is the debacle withe the Wall Street speeches, like what is she telling those guys that the common people of America are apparently not worthy of knowing? And there is the issue of the Super PACs, who all candidates except Sanders and Trump are guilty off. Now isn't that funny, Trump is actually less of a corporate tool than Clinton. The irony. Granted, people like Clinton are responsible for people like Trump existing with their unwavering support for the system.

Legislation. Like you know? Proof that she voted on laws that directly benefited them in exchanged for their donations?

If you think thats the only way corruption manifests itself, much more needs to be explained to you before we even get to Clinton. Youre just parroting a talking point. So depressing...

So how else does an elected official (senator or secretary of state) engage in corruption if you ignore legislation? Any proof of that as well?

Funny how you talk parroting a talking point, when you literally just parrot her being corrupt without any evidence.

 

[royalan]

Well I mean there is the debacle withe the Wall Street speeches, like what is she telling those guys that the common people of America are apparently not worthy of knowing? And there is the issue of the Super PACs, who all candidates except Sanders and Trump are guilty off. Now isn't that funny, Trump is actually less of a corporate tool than Clinton. The irony. Granted, people like Clinton are responsible for people like Trump existing with their unwavering support for the system.

So, you cannot point to any specific legislation that Hillary Clinton has backed that would lend credit to your post and the idea that she is undeniably corrupt?

If not, maybe you should reevaluate that sentence in your last post that I highlighted.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Ahaha how deluded are you? Would you hire a lawyer to defend you if they were taking money on the side from the prosecution? Of course not, but Bernie is wrong for applying this logic to politics.

If you wanted to call me deluded by way of analogy, it might have been a good idea to pick one that was actually realistically possible. But then again, I presume the nuances of professional ethics is less exciting than moral outrage.

 

[BanGy.nz]

Well I mean there is the debacle withe the Wall Street speeches, like what is she telling those guys that the common people of America are apparently not worthy of knowing? And there is the issue of the Super PACs, who all candidates except Sanders and Trump are guilty off. Now isn't that funny, Trump is actually less of a corporate tool than Clinton. The irony. Granted, people like Clinton are responsible for people like Trump existing with their unwavering support for the system.

Both Trump and Sanders have 4 small tiny super PACS. Well there are more but only four have raised any money.

 

[q_q]

If you wanted to call me deluded by way of analogy, it might have been a good idea to pick one that was actually realistically possible. But then again, I presume the nuances of professional ethics is less exciting than moral outrage.

Its not possible because there are laws against it. Thats the point. Hard to have a discussion when i have to dumb everything down just to get through your emotional reactions to inconvenient truths. When you graduate high school hopefully things will change.

 

[q_q]

L.U.L.Z.


Neither "Wall Street speeches" nor "SUPERPACSSSSS" have anything to do with legislation.

I understand you're Canadian, so you may not be familiar with our political system, but can you at least try? Or admit you don't know and ask for someone to give you some answers ?

And my paycheck has nothing to do with why i listen to my boss. LOL indeed. Youre living in a dream world friend.

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

If you think thats the only way corruption manifests itself, much more needs to be explained to you before we even get to Clinton. Youre just parroting a talking point. So depressing...

Well if you are going to accuse someone of being corrupt it helps if you have evidence of it.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

If you think thats the only way corruption manifests itself, much more needs to be explained to you before we even get to Clinton. Youre just parroting a talking point. So depressing...

His answer is clearly no. LOL

Nailed that one.

I have one question that keeps getting ignored, so I'll just repeat it.

Why does Sanders' revolution only include himself? Why is he not helping literally any progressive candidate at all right now? I mean, if he's so serious about taking on the establishment, and he keeps raising all this money, shouldn't he be able to support, say, DWS's primary challenger?

I'll wait (probably forever) for the answer.

 

[Barzul]

Bernie = Jesus. Heard it all folks. That man is so pure and incorruptible and without sin. He's perfect. Yet is still losing in every metric to someone that's so impure and corrupt. Ain't that some shit. Will truly be something special when he loses on the popular vote and delegate count and tries to hone in super delegates. I wonder how his supporters will be able to make sense of and reconcile that. Won't have to wait too long I imagine.

 

[q_q]

So how else does an elected official (senator or secretary of state) engage in corruption if you ignore legislation? Any proof of that as well?

Funny how you talk parroting a talking point, when you literally just parrot her being corrupt without any evidence.

By not backing or pursuing legislation, by "reaching across the aisle" by supporting crime bills beneficial to for profit prisons, by supporting the military industrial complex with her vote for iraq, etc. These are things that are difficult to come up with concrete proof of her reasoning. You will hide conveniently behind that, but all youre doing is tantamount to denying climate change because it happens to be cold outside.

 

[Azzanadra]

Nailed that one.

I have one question that keeps getting ignored, so I'll just repeat it.

Why does Sanders' revolution only include himself? Why is he not helping literally any progressive candidate at all right now? I mean, if he's so serious about taking on the establishment, and he keeps raising all this money, shouldn't he be able to support, say, DWS's primary challenger?

I'll wait (probably forever) for the answer.

He believes that he can do more as President, that's what he's raising all the money for. Do you expect him to raise all the cash and be like "oh by the way, it wasn''t for my campaign but for this other guy." And his revolution doesn't include only himself, rather his focus is on common Americans and not the fat cats. What's this double standard for Bernie, anyways? He doesn't donate all this money he raised for his own campaign to other causes he made no promise of, and yet Hillary votes for the biggest foreign policy blunder in ages and its a "whoopsies?"

That's like saying Frank Darabont should have spent the budget for The Shawshank Redemption to actually reform prisons instead of just criticizing them, but guess what? The studio gave him the money to make a movie, not to spend it on campaigning for prison reform.

 

[q_q]

Well if you are going to accuse someone of being corrupt it helps if you have evidence of it.

Sure. And we cant call bill cosby a rapist because we dont have any proof. I mean come on guys, he would be in jail if he had done thst stuff... So much rationalization from so called progressives in this thread.

Why would these large corporations give so much money to her then if it have no influence. What is their incentive? Or are they as delusional as i am?

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Its not possible because there are laws against it. Thats the point. Hard to have a discussion when i have to dumb everything down just to get through your emotional reactions to inconvenient truths. When you graduate high school hopefully things will change.

And in what way is Clinton's relationship with literally any person or body analogous to the relationship between a lawyer, her client and the other party's legal representative? Your analogy isn't dumbed down. Your analogy is just dumb.

And really? Personal insults? I have a bachelor of laws, bachelor of commerce and am a Mensa member, but sure, apparently I have the intellect of a high schooler because I think your favourite politician is full of shit

 

[excelsiorlef]

He believes that he can do more as President, that's what he's raising all the money for. Do you expect him to raise all the cash and be like "oh by the way, it wasn''t for my campaign but for this other guy." And his revolution doesn't include only himself, rather his focus is on common Americans and not the fat cats. What's this double standard for Bernie, anyways? He doesn't donate all this money he raised for his own campaign to other causes he made no promise of, and yet Hillary votes for the biggest foreign policy blunder in ages and its a "whoopsies?"

He's raised fuck and all for down ticket Democrats. Literally fuck and all. His revolution starts there but he doesn't seem to want to lend a hand.

 

[Armaros]

He believes that he can do more as President, that's what he's raising all the money for. Do you expect him to raise all the cash and be like "oh by the way, it wasn''t for my campaign but for this other guy." And his revolution doesn't include only himself, rather his focus is on common Americans and not the fat cats. What's this double standard for Bernie, anyways? He doesn't donate all this money he raised for his own campaign to other causes he made no promise of, and yet Hillary votes for the biggest foreign policy blunder in ages and its a "whoopsies?"

Uh double standard?

Hillary has raised millions for down ballot Democrats. We don't even know if there are progressive politicians running for office that Bernie supports, much less him GIVING them support.

So you calling for a double standard is funny considering that he has literally raised around a thousand dollars for democrats, and Hilary is in the neighborhood of 18 million.

 

[royalan]

By not backing or pursuing legislation, by "reaching across the aisle" by supporting crime bills beneficial to for profit prisons, by supporting the military industrial complex with her vote for iraq, etc. These are things that are difficult to come up with concrete proof of her reasoning. You will hide conveniently behind that, but all youre doing is tantamount to denying climate change because it happens to be cold outside.

Several questions:

1) Why is "reaching across the aisle" an inherently corrupt act?
2) Why is Hillary guilty for supporting those crime bills, but Bernie not guilty for actually voting for them?
3) What does her yes vote for the Iraq War have to do with campaign finance corruption?

None of this is proof that Hillary Clinton is corrupt. You're basing your opinion on feelings, feelings that you can't back up with any concrete evidence. What is so wrong with admitting this?

 

[q_q]

Oh the irony.

Nothing to say. Thought as much.

 

[Barzul]

By not backing or pursuing legislation, by "reaching across the aisle" by supporting crime bills beneficial to for profit prisons, by supporting the military industrial complex with her vote for iraq, etc. These are things that are difficult to come up with concrete proof of her reasoning. You will hide conveniently behind that, but all youre doing is tantamount to denying climate change because it happens to be cold outside.

So a vote for the Iraq war = corruption? So pretty much of all Washington that voted for that war is corrupt. How is Bernie supposed to accomplish anything in this sea of corruption? One of the few pure, unadulterated souls. What does it say about Americans, we the people who voted in these corrupt politicians? Give me break.

 

[Azzanadra]

Uh double standard?

Hillary has raised millions for down ballot Democrats. We don't even know if there are progressive politicians running for office that Bernie supports, much less him GIVING them support.

So you calling for a double standard is funny considering that he has literally raised around a thousand dollars for democrats, and Hilary is in the neighborhood of 18 million.

Of course, supporting Bernie is this climate in dangerous. Its like freely calling yourself a follower of Christ during the Crucifixion. Revolution right now seems scary and radical, but its necessary. Besides, I highly suspect that a lot of these guys running for office are establishment hacks anyways, hopefully Bernie's win (or just his campaign, really) allows real humanitarians to arise.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

He believes that he can do more as President, that's what he's raising all the money for. Do you expect him to raise all the cash and be like "oh by the way, it wasn''t for my campaign but for this other guy." And his revolution doesn't include only himself, rather his focus is on common Americans and not the fat cats. What's this double standard for Bernie, anyways? He doesn't donate all this money he raised for his own campaign to other causes he made no promise of, and yet Hillary votes for the biggest foreign policy blunder in ages and its a "whoopsies?"

That's like saying Frank Darabont should have spent the budget for The Shawshank Redemption to actually reform prisons instead of just criticizing them, but guess what? The studio gave him the money to make a movie, not to spend it on campaigning for prison reform.

But he literally can not. Without the support of a democratic senate, Sanders sweeping reform is dead in the water. Focusing only on the presidency does nothing but stroke his ego

 

[Armaros]

Of course, supporting Bernie is this climate is dangerous. Its like freely calling yourself a follower of Christ during the Crucifixion. Revolution right now seems scary and radical, but its necessary.

Okay, comparing Bernie to Jesus, you are obviously either too far gone to be taken seriously or just a troll.

 

[q_q]

Several questions:

1) Why is "reaching across the aisle" an inherently corrupt act?
2) Why is Hillary guilty for supporting those crime bills, but Bernie not guilty for actually voting for them?
3) What does her yes vote for the Iraq War have to do with campaign finance corruption?

None of this is proof that Hillary Clinton is corrupt. You're basing your opinion on feelings, feelings that you can't back up with any concrete evidence. What is so wrong with admitting this?

1. Because republicans are inherently corrupt. Name one who isnt.
2. Bernie voted for the bill because it was held ransom by republicans. Hillary on the other hand led the charge with the super predator line and all the rest.
3.Look up the military industrial complex.

Im not coming at this with feelings. You are emotionally attached to a candidate because she says what you want to hear and has been next in line for so long. Many of your comments reveal you have but a cursory understanding of the current political system, which makes your condescension all the more disheartening.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

He believes that he can do more as President, that's what he's raising all the money for. Do you expect him to raise all the cash and be like "oh by the way, it wasn''t for my campaign but for this other guy." And his revolution doesn't include only himself, rather his focus is on common Americans and not the fat cats. What's this double standard for Bernie, anyways? He doesn't donate all this money he raised for his own campaign to other causes he made no promise of, and yet Hillary votes for the biggest foreign policy blunder in ages and its a "whoopsies?"

Point by point here.

1) Yes, I do expect that since literally every candidate on the planet throughout history does this. Hillary has already raised $18 million for other Democrats in contested states. Bernie's raised $1000, which is the required minimum the DNC asks. He could give more, but that would imply he cares about anyone else.

2) His revolution is bunk. He hasn't driven up turnout at all, he's losing badly (almost 3 times worse than Hillary ever lost to Obama), and it's only going to get worse now that we're down to just 2 caucuses.

3.1) He absolutely "promised" this when he kept saying this was a revolution. It's apparently not actually a revolution, but a run for the White House. If everyone else on the Dem ticket loses, Bernie's basically saying "Fuck you, got mine" with his support. You know how revolutions happen? Wide sweeping changes in Congressional seats. There's only one candidate on the left trying to do that, and it ain't the FYGM guy.

3.2) It's not a double standard when you flip a nonsense metaphor. "Hey, how come I get in trouble for practice A when so-and-so did thing B?" is bunk. It's only a double standard if both candidates are doing something wrong and I ignore one of them doing it. That isn't happening with my question at all. Hillary is funding a revolution down-ticket. Bernie isn't.

 

[Azzanadra]

Okay, comparing Bernie to Jesus, you are obviously either too far gone to be taken seriously or just a troll.

I'm not comparing him to Jesus, just saying that like in that situation, supporting an "outsider", someone who fights against the common belief is political suicide.

 

[PK Gaming]

20 years ago, Bernie seems to have been just like his own supporters are now

"He is completely ineffective as a lobbyist because he offends just about everyone... His holier-than-thou attitude - saying in a very loud voice he is smarter than everyone else and purer than everyone else - really undercuts his effectiveness"

"To him, anybody who disagrees with him is a crook; there are no honest disagreements with people. Bernie's view of the world is that the great majority of the people agree with him on all the issues and the only reason he does not win is that the Congress is crooked."

source

This is also to refute the implication that Barney is somehow a Hillary shill. He knows Sanders better than virtually all of his supporters, and he's felt this way about him for 20+.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

Don't need to, everyone else is saying it for me <3.


& much better too.

Spoiler

if you ever want to have a discussion about tax please hit me up though. i only have a masters in it but i think i'll be able to muster up one or two semi intelligent thoughts on how i view the current tax proposals and how i feel they reflect the candidates' positions / stances. corruption is a buzzword, we can talk policies though.

I'd love to hear the tax analysis

 

[Armaros]

1. Because republicans are inherently corrupt. Name one who isnt.
2. Bernie voted for the bill because it was held ransom by republicans. Hillary on the other hand led the charge with the super predator line and all the rest.
3.Look up the military industrial complex.

Im not coming at this with feelings. You are emotionally attached to a candidate because she says what you want to hear and has been next in line for so long. Many of your comments reveal you have but a cursory understanding of the current political system, which makes your condescension all the more disheartening.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Those two bolded statements in the same post.

I cant even

If Bernie Sanders, Mr. Never comprise for anything , could vote against the Amber Alert Bill because he found something he didn't like in it, he could have voted against the Crime Bill if he thought it was bad, no matter the 'hostage' situations.