Sanders trails Clinton by only 225 pledged delegates, but because of the proportional way in which delegates are awarded, he must win California and likely NY by huge margins to overtake her. If I was him, I would not delay campaigning in those states.
Thanks. I was really starting to think I was the only one who isn't naive enough to think that businesses will just eat up all these extra taxes on their labor without passing them onto employees in the form of lower wages. I realize that out in socialist utopia workers are supposedly king, but out here in capitalist reality a corporation's obligations are to shareholders. As you rightly say, there is no reason for a company to willingly sacrifice profits for an employee whose real value has not increased. At the end of the day, one way or another, wages are going to crash with Bernie's plan and it will have pretty devastating effects on the consumer economy. It's easy to live in la-la land now because nobody really considers Bernie a serious enough threat to scrutinize his platform with any measure of incision. And lest you think I'm some evil right wing capitalist, I strongly agree with Bernie's basic premise that the economy is rigged and we have a runaway income inequality issue. The problem I have with him is illogic and extremism. You don't fight right wing extremism with left wing extremism or arsonism. And as far as I'm concerned, his platform is left wing extremism. Btw, it really amuses me how short people's attention span is. Wasn't it just a few days ago that Hillary was in serious trouble after losing Michigan and all momentum to Bernie's unstoppable freight train?
Agreed but Wisconsin up next is also huge and there's about 10 days leading up to NY after that. If he can pull 60+ of the 85 or so delegates in Wisconsin he's going to be in a really great position
Their real value has increased, productivity has steadily risen and hasn't shown any signs of stopping. Until 1975, these productivity gains were matched by higher wages that went up in lock step with productivity, but after 1975, median wages stagnated while the wages for the upper end of the income distribution have gone up faster. Nice assumption. It is easy to live in la-la land when you get your "information" from Bullsh!t Mountain. When you believe the talking heads in the Fox echo chamber, Joe Lieberman looks like a left wing extremist.
It's incredible to see Americans calling Bernie a radical leftist. At the same time, it's very scary to think about what governments are capable of, and how malleable humans are. These are the leftovers of the red scare injected into the American public for decades. I never thought that technology and information and more connectivity would be so weak in the face of a nation-wide anti-communism witch hunt decades ago. It's not a coincidence that a country of 350 million mostly educated people lean so overwhelmingly to the right vs the rest of the world and the world TRIED to follow but they just can't do it. It really really worked, a stunning part of history IMO and on such a grand scale. How many wars, how many political problems, how much terrorism as a result of it. It just makes me think about countries following the exact same red scare strategy today, with more money, more psychologists, more filmmakers, more experience and fewer people and those citizens are going to be even more radicalized to the right than Americans are, and the effects will linger for another generation of human beings. That's why Bernie is so important. Trump's damage or Hillary's maintenance of the situation will linger for way more than 8 years. I mean, look at Obama, a fine president when compared to his predecessors. However, imagine how badly he may have damaged the message of CHANGE by not accomplishing (for whatever reason) what he promised Americans? Is it having an impact on people who want to vote for Bernie but feel like they got burned by betting on dreams? Is it causing them to go more conservative than Obama with Hillary? The result could be that Obama's campaign contributed to making Hillary or Trump president. That's 8 years, plus whatever consequences it yields. Everything matters. Americans can't keep taking punches to the gut.
Lol, this one is new. I've never been accused of being a Fox News watcher before. But of course, when you're dealing with Bernie Bros you should expect such.
The healthcare "surtax" has gone into increased profits for Insurance companies for the most part. There probably are some savings on health care for the previously uninsured that use (abuse) community paid health services. I wonder if health related bankruptcies are headed lower. I am not aware of any changes in tax policy that has removed corporate deductions or subsidies, changed rate structures, change tax avoidance strategies, or repatriated any offshored profits. Again the press for populist ideas is really just to slow the pendulum of corporate dominance where lobbyist write all the tax laws for the benefit of their sponsors, capturing profits (cash flows within the system) and shifting burdens onto the middle class.
Deckard, I do not support Hillary's old style militaristic foreign policy. As I said there is discussion about how the neo-con crowd is backing her over Trump. I would oppose Hillary on war and peace even if Bernie was not running and likewise I suppose you would have your opinions on war and peace regardless of whether Hillary was running. IMHO it is time to give up on the old cold war liberal thing. The world has changed. Can you really have lived through the Vietnam War, the Iraq debacle, our support for Latin American dictators, the fall of the Soviet Union and remain largely unchanged in your foreign policy views? Hint the Chicoms, the Russkies and the Vietnamese commies are not coming to get you. The dominoes are not about to fall and it is not the Israel of the 1957? movie Exodus. . Hey, Sadam Hussein, Qadafi, Assad and for another example the Russian backed government of Afghanistan, pre Taliban were not ideal, but forgetting about the living hell to this day for the citizens of those countries of perpetual war do you really think these failed states make us in the US safer somehow? . Your also are more moderate than a neo-con on these issues. Do you remember when even Bush I and Cheney failed to overthrow Sadam in Gulf War I because of concerns about what that would unleash. Even Clinton's now released emails were discussing experts worried about the possibility of chaos and Al Qaeda type in Lybya post Qadafi. Do some research beyond your usual sources. Hillary since she usually skews pro war (always thinking that as a woman candidate that she has to look tought?) discounted the discussions of what could happen. She keeps having poor judgement on these issues. You do realize that it is now pretty certain that Assad did not use sarin? The intelligence agencies told Obama they did not have certain proof. The red line statement was stupid, but it was folks like Hillary that kept pushing him to try to act needlessly tough. Why hasn't the Iraq War taught you that you sometimes have to get beyond the Washington consensus which has the more common positions of the NYT as the most left or liberal view allowed to be respectable if you want the truth. Even Steve? Cohen, occasionally allowed in the NYT, details the US role in that Ukraine "coup" or role in encouraging violent street demonstrations and pre-picking the new leader to replace the flawed but democratically elected Ukraine president. Consider this before talking about democracy as the main issue on our support for change of gvoernment in Ukraine. [ Wow!! I have to think you may be struggling with cognitive dissonance regarding some of your long held positions. Hey, it is still fairly reasonable to be for Hillary, just be a bit more aware of when her foreign policy judgement have been wrong. Edit. On rereading, I should not have said, and it was not fair, to say you "like" perpetual war, as i am sure you personally don't crave war,just that like Hillary your foreign policy tend to lead in that direction.
if Hillary ever perceives Bernie as a real threat, she will do to him what Trump is doing to Cruz (defamation) the difference is, the right will take no pleasure in it as the left does with Cruz
I don't think anyone "takes pleasure" in having the "news" of the day headlined by gossip exchanged between two grown men acting like sorority girls.
Voting against Sanders does not mean we are against all ideas presented by Sanders. Sanders is just not the best person to carry his messages. I am all for single payer system, but Sanders will not be able deliver that, he might cause the elimination of Obama care if he is not the ticket.
Sanders has been in Washington 25 years or so. All of sudden is a change agent? That is the biggest lie of his campaign.
LOL the your candidates and their supporters love these stuff thats why your primaries looks like a cluster *****..
I don't think that's very fair. He's been pushing all the change he's currently advocating in the Senate for years. I had looked at the legislative records of Rubio, Cruz, and Clinton before, all with fairly paltry records. By contrast, Sanders has sponsored or cosponsored 137 bills that have become law. Now, some of them are dumb little things, like bills to change the name of a post office. But, there are also a lot of things dealing with fair pay, equality, education, and everything else he talks about on the stump. He has been a change agent all along, but only had 1 vote in a 100 -- and he still got things done then.
My college-aged brother claims that "everyone" he talked to, prior to the Texas primary, was going to vote for Sanders (essentially his college-aged friends). Yet, my brother had absolutely no idea where Sanders stood on trade issues (or any issue for that matter). Sanders wants to: Ruin the Mexican economy by getting rid of NAFTA Ruin the Central American economies by getting rid of CAFTA Prevent any trade with Indochina by not supporting the TPP. Enhance the job-seeking ability of millions of illegal immigrants by providing a path to citizenship Enhance the incentive for more illegal immigration (path to citizenship) Yet, at the same time that Sanders wants to destroy the economies of where most of these illegal aliens are coming from while giving them a path to citizenship, he wants to: Raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour Make joining labor unions easier I don't understand how Sanders is going to do middle- and lower-income families any good by increasing existing illegal immigrants' job prospects, increasing the size of the labor force by tens of millions (new immigrants), raising minimum wage, and making it easier to "join a union". Sanders' policies, as mentioned above, would only undermine wage growth and union participation. His ideology is perverted, and the sad thing is that he hasn't changed in 50 years on these issues. I'm not saying I support both a higher minimum wage and increased union participation, but what I am saying is that there is no way that can happen under Sanders' plan. I haven't even touched on his tax plan. However, my brother is convinced that the most pressing issue for our economy is that the federal government does not have enough tax money.
The difference is your level of empathy. It could be genetic it could be learned behaviour but his brain feels a responsibility for his countrymen and yours is more focused on preservation of the self. I blame my empathy levels on watching The Lone Ranger in my formative years.
