Whether or not he gets all of his policies passed is definitely questionable. But there is one issue, that if he can accomplish in office, his presidency will be a success, and that's campaign finance reform. Hillary has paid a ton of lip service to Sanders' positions but don't be duped into thinking she has actually moved left. She'll pivot right for the general election and pivot wherever to win. Honestly, a shakeup in congress in addition to eliminating corporate/special interest donations is the only real and effective solution in order to stop this ridiculous obstructionism. More right-leaning "compromised" pieces of legislation are going to be inefficient and ineffective. And if you think the Republicans are going to be any less obstructionist against Clinton relative to Obama, then you're mistaken. If anything, Clinton is more willing to move right than Obama, not to mention her extremely Hawkish/interventionist foreign policy.
Obama broke the record with a whopping 13% of people under 25 IIRC. That's still atrocious, and I've posted about what I believe to be why this is happening. Just a really sucky situation for Americans. Disagree. Hillary didn't agree to move debates, she requested new ones cause Sanders was surging. A new schedule was put in place - which Bernie also agreed to - which gave more coverage to Bernie and Hillary, but proportionally she is still getting more coverage than him even on left leaning media outlets. Could be. I'd argue that calling Bernie a socialist/communist a few times has as much impact in America as spending millions of dollars attacking Hillary. This one's a bit of an unfair stretch rocketsjudoka. Big donors are a bogeyman because the Hillary Clinton types exist. They are not going to go away, especially if Hillary wins. Americans are living in the most unequal economy in the last 60-70 years. It's disingenuous to call big donors a bogeyman. It is a sign that more people believe more deeply in Bernie Sanders than they did anyone else in recent history, Obama included. Plus, they are getting less likely to improve their standard of living. Don't minimize that. Hillary has underperformed and Sanders has not broken through IMO. I'm not really bothered about the technicalities of how we define things but I think we're largely on the same page. I just get the sense from Clinton supporters that being at this point in the Bernie campaign is bad. IMO it's not. This was always going to happen. This is an amazing position for Bernie to be in. He can win most states and still lose, he can lose half the states and still win. The downer here is I get the sense super delegates will not shift for Bernie if it came to that point, as they did for Obama. Yeah, it's marketing. Having a lot of blacks in the administration does not balance out the damage criminal reform did. Bernie has a sterling record supporting the black community going back 30 years. Hillary has a huge red flag. Connected to my next point so I'll jump to that. Same reason why a Christian shouldn't necessarily be excited to have a Christian in office. They should be excited to have a person in office who will protect their freedom to practice their religion, not the person who happens to also go to a church. It's about policies and historical record. Hillary has a tremendous policy supporting women, perhaps most progressive ever. On policies, they are a tie and women perhaps don't realize just how much Bernie's other policies will impact women positively too. On record, while they have both been excellent, Bernie has been doing it longer. Add to that, Bernie was fighting for LGBT rights in the 70's and 80's. Was half joking there. But the excitement for Hillary is really weak IMO. There seems to be a lot more anti-Bernism than pro-Hillarism, but that could be chalked up to Hillary being a known entity. To be honest, if I truly believed he moved Hillary's positions to the left rather than just moving her talking points to the left, I would be ecstatic. That's a big enough victory on its own. The truth is I think she will rage back to centre right rhetoric if she's in the GE and she is always no matter what she says going to be a centre right president regardless of what she promised. She's a prototype, that's just how it works. Bernie is becoming less likely by the day of course, it's called having a deadline. Would have been nice to be further ahead at this point, but this is not just another race. The guys you compared bernie to at the beginning of this thread - the Naders and Deans of the past - wish they could be where Bernie is right now. Like I said, he was always going to be the underdog. I would take these odds, Bernie would have taken them months ago, and Hillary would have been horrified to be in this position a few months before that.
I'm just going to point out that the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative money can't be used for campaigning or go to Hillary Clinton herself. For that matter it isn't Hillary Clinton running those but her husband and daughter. True that is her family but there is no evidence of any quid pro quo from that.
But what if in your mind(and in the polls), you felt that you could easily beat this person in a General Election? You're telling me you would drive up the vote of someone who can match up better against you? I should have said that's what targeting is in this situation.
I'm reading quotes from bernie sanders where he said "if you're white you don't know what is like living in poverty" Did he really say that? WOW
Found the real quote. https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersFor...ou_please_give_me_a_justificationexplanation/
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5xiT6nkCp8o?rel=0&showinfo=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Going a little too hard for the black vote Bern. All of the guys who sold their comic books to give you 37 dollars might revolt.
Yeah, the guy who is white and grew up poor would definitely mean that. The guy who has family who were murdered by Nazis in - you guessed it - ghettos filled with poor people. He was paraphrasing and discussing what BLM activists told him. He structured his sentence stupidly. He meant: you don't know what it's like to be black AND poor. The good news is, he has 40 years of great character to back him up. This guy single handedly orchestrated the outing of housing segregation policies in a major college when he was a student. Marched in MLK rallies. Got arrested for protesting racism. Do you think it's likely he is racist? Why do you even bother man? None of this works at all. It's such a huge waste of time for you. Honestly, the stuff you post has zero chance of changing anyone's mind about anything. At the very least post some more analysis or provide your own, look for some more in-depth criticism if you genuinely find it important that people change their minds. Your analysis and opinion is important, these hysterical one liners aren't.
Ya, I think it's obvious he misspoke. But still, I'm a bit frustrated when this kind of crap happens. Watching these debates is so excruciating sometimes cuz it feels like he always has a few missteps or missed opportunities to really drive his points home. I thought he was great in the beginning and letup as the debate went on, hope Michigan voters really liked him, he definitely had some great moments.
This is what I think every single time you post something. I read a ATW post saying you get paid to post here and I really hope that is true.
He may have misspoke but this will cost him, and he cant afford to have stumbles like this at this point. But since we're playing along, how does a Jewish guy in the north east know what it's like to be black and poor?
I don't think anyone will even notice except fox. He didn't say he knows what it's like. He said people don't know what it's like. He intended to include himself. This is a total waste of time. He misspoke. He's going to outright apologize for misspeaking without tip toeing around it. His record and policy proposals speak for themselves.
It is poorly worded but most white people do not know what it is like to grow up in a minority ghetto.
That still makes no sense. How do you drive up the vote by continuously criticizing them and pointing out their shortcomings?
