Bernie Sanders Discussion Thread
POSTED BY: reaverfan
UPDATED: Monday, July 27, 2026 16:39
VIEWED: 44545
PAGE 5 of 30
Gotta love Bernie
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, but psychologists are all saying Trump is.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Those same things were said about Slick Willy, the First Black President - and also Obama, the Second Black President.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/a-neuroscientist-explains-trump-has-a-
mental-disorder-that-makes-him-a-dangerous-world-leader/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/stop-walking-eggshells/201511/the
rapists-confirm-trumps-narcissistic-personality-disorder
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/11/donald-trump-narcissism-therapi
sts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/03/30/donald-trump-narcissis
t-in-chief-not-commander-in-chief/#ea13b8c55959
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I thought I heard that Hilliary was behind in the polls for New York primary. And it was yesterday, not April Fool's day.
Have I misheard?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:Quote:Yes, but
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Those same things were said about Slick Willy, the First Black President - and also Obama, the Second Black President.
libtards
Quote:
are all saying Trump is.
And the real world seems to put him in 3rd place.
But isn't this the Bernie thread?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I figured it would either be Jill Stein or Bernie Sanders.
Ok, maybe Jill Stein's is slightly better. A curiosity, Signym: Of all the time you've been on this planet, who(m) is your favorite or least bad presidential candidate?
Still, it depends on who's running. I doubt Jill Stein will ever be voted in as President! So far, my thoughts are: Vote for Bernie in the primaries. But in the November election, if faced with ...vote for ...
Hillary v Trump > Trump
Hillary v any other Republican > Jill Stein
Sanders v any other Republican > Sanders
Sanders v Trump > ???
I thought this was fun!
http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz
But some people say tis biased for Bernie, which may be true. I took this poll and got unrealistic results, and I know other people who took this pool and got even stranger results. After all, we're counting on the honesty of the poll and its counting, and supposedly this poll was put up by a Sanders supporter.
Now, one of the problems with ISideWith is accurately judging the ACTUAL stances of the various politicians, since politicians work mightily of obfuscate their actual stances! Sanders, for example, votes the "right" way for hopeless cases, but when his vote might really make a difference - for example, on the Pentagon budget - he tends to fold. But he talks and good game, so what does this poll record as his real opinion? Well, it's a little hard to say. OTOH, Jill Stein (Green Party) is very consistent, but she doesn't have a voting record to look at so it's a little hard to decide how she would ACTUALLY perform.
Bernie Sanders' voting record
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/legislation/voting-record
http://mosquitocloud.net/like-it-or-not-bernie-sanders-congressional-v
oting-record
I stumbled across a voting record website that would allow you to parse votes by issue (eg defense) but can't find it now. IF I can find it again, I'll post it. A comparison to Hillary would be useful.
--------
One thing I heard was a very convincing argument that the ONLY arena where Presidents might make a difference is in foreign policy. For a number of reasons, their effectiveness is blunted in domestic issues. So if you're going to judge a candidate on their POV, look hardest at their foreign policy opinions/ record.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
REALLY?
Bernie Sanders Wins the Nevada Caucus After All
Quote:
After the Clark County Democratic Convention, Bernie Sanders has flipped his close Nevada caucus loss to a win at the convention stage. The Sanders campaign pulled out a victory in Nevada’s most populous county at this weekend’s convention at the Cashman Center in Las Vegas.
Las Vegas Sun reporter Megan Messerly confirmed the final delegate count, showing Sanders had flipped Clark County in his favor.
After realignment: 2,386 Clinton, 2,964 Sanders, & 7 uncommitted. 5,357 total.
— Megan Messerly (@meganmesserly) April 3, 2016
The other most populous county, Washoe County, ended with 1050 delegates for Sanders and 833 for Clinton. It is unclear at this time exactly how many more delegates Bernie Sanders has picked up, as the final results will not be decided until the state convention in May.
The Clark County Democratic Convention was full of controversy from the beginning. But to give the full context of the controversy, it’s important to understand how the convention process works.
Delegates come in three forms:
* Elected delegates, which were selected at precinct caucuses.
* Alternate delegates, which were also named at the precinct caucuses,
* And unelected alternate delegates, who can become official delegates in the event a precinct’s elected delegates or alternate delegates don’t show.
The Credentials Committee for the Clark County Democratic Convention determines who exactly qualifies as a bona fide delegate in the event an unelected alternate steps in to become an official delegate. The committee is made up of four members appointed by Clark County Democratic Party Chair Chris Miller, with two representatives for Hillary Clinton and two representatives for Bernie Sanders in the interest of fairness.
On Friday night, accusations of cheating came from both sides, which resulted in the attempted removal of credential committee chair Christine Kramar.
“We caught the Hillary campaign cheating, we caught the Nevada Democratic Party secretary cheating,” said Angie Sullivan, another member of the credentials committee for the Clark County Democratic Convention. “When it was apparent Bernie started winning, they really turned up the heat.”
Sullivan alleges that the Clark County Democratic Party (CCDP) was sharing information with the Hillary Clinton campaign that was not being shared with the Bernie Sanders campaign, and this is why Kramer copied a Sanders campaign contact on an email correspondence with CCDP officials and Clinton campaign officials.
However, Clinton campaign attorney Marc E. Elias told a different story in a threatening email sent to CCDP Chair Chris Miller. Elias ordered Miller to remove Kramar from the credentials committee due to her sharing allegedly proprietary information belonging to the Clinton campaign with the Sanders campaign.
But Kristal Glass, a Sanders delegate who was also a member of the credentials committee, told US Uncut that Kramar was simply acting as an independent arbiter in accordance with party bylaws by making sure all parties were included in conversations about the convention.
“It was her job to make sure everything was fair leading up to the Friday night early registration,” Glass said. “[Kramar] CC’d the Sanders campaign about a conversation happening that they weren’t included in, which was against the convention process.”
Then, Glass alleged that Michelle White, political director for Hillary Clinton’s Nevada campaign, was pressuring volunteers at the registration site to register alternates as delegates.
“We had a member of a campaign walking around with a computer showing volunteers, saying, ‘They’re approved, so go ahead and add them,'” Glass told US Uncut. “It has to be brought to the credentials committee to vet the entire thing, that’s what our responsibility is.”
“You don’t change the rules at the 11th hour to favor your candidate,” Sullivan said.
After Kramar reminded the Clinton campaign and CCDP officials of the parNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Maybe Bernie taking Nevada will make up a little bit for Hillary magically winning all six coin tosses in Iowa.
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"One point you never hear about in MSM: Sanders would fare BETTER than Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head against Trump"
That is a flat out fairy tale, in other words BULLSHIT!
Bernie is interviewed as much, if not more often than Hilary. I watch the news and they often mention how well he fares against Trump and that he
does so better than Hilary. He's often interviewed on MSNBC, most particularly by Rachel Maddow. Chuck Todd often refers to his "political
map" and he shows the poll numbers and how Sanders is doing. So don't give me that MSM media bias crap.
Besides how can the media be against all the candidates at the same time.
Trump complains all the time about media bias against him, as does
Bernie's camp. And, although the media covers Hilary's missteps with a
particular glee, her campaign rarely, if ever, complains about media bias.
So, is the media against all candidates - that's the way it should be.
Adversarial watchdogs.
Just last week they covered Bernie's victory speech, almost in it's entirety. Yeah the media is bias alright. Not that they are without fault.
They have been the major contributor to Trump's rise in the polls. But
he is his own worst enemy, so that won't last. Besides the media is mainly
made up of trends, Trump was trending for a while, but, since the Sykes
radio interview, that has changed. Now you find them following a new
blueprint. Now they are challenging Trump. There is media before Sykes
(never fact checking or challenging his statements) and there's media
after Sykes (now they question and challenge away).
Charlie Sykes is a conservative radio talk show host, based in Wisconsin, who showed the rest of the media how it's done.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/28/listen-to-what-happens-when-donald
-trump-gets-asked-real-questions-by-a-media-interviewer/
Here's the interview with Trump:
Why is it trending now? Because news outlets don't want to look bad and
seem bias (there goes that word again); they don't want to be out-scooped.
So now the latest is to pressure Trump and challenge, fact check and not let him control the interview (as they had previously allowed because it
brought in ratings; he was basically the Golden Goose). Yes, ratings
which equals money (this, above all, is the driving force as Les Moonves
admitted)
Clip from Talk Show host Thom Hartman:
I actually saw an morning interview, on the Today show, where both Matt
Lauer and Savanah Guthrie double teamed the Donald and employed the "new"
tactic. Something that they should have been doing all along. As long as the Donald was "making" news, and consequently bringing in the
cashy-money, all was good. Now with his latest fascist comments and
obvious stupidity, it doesn't bode well for the networks to be "allowing"
his Donaldness free access and unfettered exposure. Now he's popular, but for an entirely different reason - still, the networks make money.
Isn't it ironic? Bias no, money-making, yes!
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Last week Bernie was on Colbert. Bernie starts at 5:15 into the video.
First, the Sanders campaign needs to stop feeding the right-wing disinformation machine. Engaging in innuendo suggesting, without evidence, that Clinton is corrupt is, at this point, basically campaigning on behalf of the RNC. If Sanders really believes, as he says, that it’s all-important to keep the White House out of Republican hands, he should stop all that – and tell his staff to stop it too.
Second, it’s time for Sanders to engage in some citizenship. The presidency isn’t the only office on the line; down-ballot races for the Senate and even the House are going to be crucial. Clinton has been raising money for other races; Sanders hasn’t, and is still being evasive on whether he will ever do so. Not acceptable.
Oh, and the Sanders campaign is saying that it will try to flip superdelegates even if it loses the unpledged delegates and the popular vote. Remember when evil Hillary was going to use superdelegates to steal the nomination? Double standards aside, what makes the campaign think that he will get any backing from a party he refuses to lift a finger to help?
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/31/heres-why-a-b
ernie-sanders-victory-for-the-nomination-would-make-him-a-hypocrite/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Clinton IS corrupt. From her Wall Street speaking engagements to her list of top 20 donors to the hundreds of millions poured into the Clinton "foundation" from nations like Saudi Arabia, to her tenure as neocon head of the State Department, to her private email server...
Clinton is a bought, sold, butchered, graded, and packaged politician. You don't need a jury trial to figure that out.
I know exactly what she'll do when she gets into office: she'll represent the interests that have given her the most money: Banks, international law firms (like the Panamanian one that was just exposed), Saudi Arabia and the rest of the GCC, and the ultra-wealthy. She's for the TTP and TTIP. She's for Saudi Arabia, She's for the banks. Do you really think that Hillary will reform the WH in the way it so desperately needs?
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME