"No one likes Bernie Sanders": Hillary Clinton


Vort
 Share

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Neither am I. If you recognized my wording it comes directly from the Declaration of Independence which credits the Creator with granting these rights as do I(life liberty pursuit of happiness etc.)  I find it amusing that you credit 18 year olds with the maturity to learn how to kill someone, lead men in combat, and make life and death decisions on a split second basis, but not with the ability to decide who has the best tax policy. 

I'm with @Vort on this one.  18 year olds are allowed in the military because 18 year olds are found to have the ability to follow very explicit instructions from their betters without much need to understand the overarching objective.  That characteristic is a weakness in voting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I am one who likes Bernie.

@LiterateParakeet and other Sanders supporters, Do you see a repeat of the 2016 Primaries? When the DNC servers were hacked it showed that the fix was in, and the DNC was rigging the Primaries in Hillary's favor - even going so far as to give her the debate questions ahead of time. This last debate the moderator seemed skewed in Warren's favor. The moderator asked a follow-up question of Warren that completely disregarded Sanders' response. Is this a repeat of 2016?

Quote

PHILLIP: Let's now turn to — let's now turn to an issue that's come up in the last 48 hours. Sen. Sanders, CNN reported yesterday that — and Sen. Sanders, Sen. Warren confirmed in a statement, that in 2018 you told her that you did not believe that a woman could win the election. Why did you say that? 

SANDERS: Well, as a matter of fact, I didn't say it. And I don't want to waste a whole lot of time on this, because this is what Donald Trump and maybe some of the media want. Anybody knows me knows that it's incomprehensible that I would think that a woman cannot be president of the United States. 

Go to YouTube today. There's a video of me 30 years ago talking about how a woman could become president of the United States. In 2015, I deferred, in fact, to Sen. Warren. There was a movement to draft Sen. Warren to run for president. And you know what, I said — stayed back. Sen. Warren decided not to run, and I then — I did run afterwards.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes. How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States? And let me be very clear. If any of the women on this stage or any of the men on this stage win the nomination, I hope that's not the case, I hope it's me.

(LAUGHTER)

But if they do, I will do everything in my power to make sure that they are elected in order to defeat the most dangerous president in the history of our country.

(APPLAUSE)

PHILLIP: So Sen. Sanders — Sen. Sanders, I do want to be clear here, you're saying that you never told Sen. Warren that a woman could not win the election?

SANDERS: That is correct. 

PHILLIP: Sen. Warren, what did you think when Sen. Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?

 

Edited by mordorbund
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

PHILLIP: So Sen. Sanders — Sen. Sanders, I do want to be clear here, you're saying that you never told Sen. Warren that a woman could not win the election?

SANDERS: That is correct. 

PHILLIP: Sen. Warren, what did you think when Sen. Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?

Yep, truly a stellar example of good journalism.  Not even a hint of an agenda or pre-formed conclusion here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

@mordorbund To answer your question...since I'm not a Democrat, I don't follow the Primaries that closely.  I do think it was rigged in Hillary's favor previously, and yes, now that you ask, I believe it will happen again.  I do like Bernie, even though I've decided I can't support socialism....I think he is one of the few HONEST politicians....in for that reason the Powers that be (Yes, I am refering to Secret Combinations) will not allow an HONEST man to go any farther than Bernie has.   Don't feel left out Republicans....I think that side is just as infiltrated with Secret Combinations...which is part of the reason I align myself with neither party.  I just try to look for good people and true principles where ever (and in which ever party I can find them.)

Now I need to add....I try to stay out of political discussions around here - for a couple reasons that mainly point to ---->  I don't feel informed enough to defend my minority opinions against the onslaught that would surely come.  :)   

I will say for clarification that I am not a Democrat (nor a Rebublican).  In the last few Presidential elections, I voted third party.  Last election, I could not in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.  Because I am so opposed to Trump, I may be persuaded to vote Democrat in the next Presidential election.  We'll see. It's interesting to ask myself, knowing what I know now, if I could go back would I vote for HIllary?  I can't automatically answer yes to that because she supports some UN Resolutions that so far the US has stayed out of, and they scare me to death.  So she would likely be just as bad as Trump just in different ways.  The US is in a real mess right now. 

About Bernie, I "liked"  @JohnsonJones post because I thought he was bold (and either brave or looking for a fight, LOL) to "go there.".  Second, even though I understand that Socialism is a bad idea (I know what our Leaders have said, and I trust them)....I think Bernie brings up important issues of our society that exist in part because of the flaws and weaknesses of Capitalism.  Still with all of that, I choose Capitalism.  So I wouldn't necessarily vote for Bernie accept as a vote against Trump.   I also thought JohnsonJones made a good point in the many ways that the United States has already embraced socialism.  I'm not supporting that, I simply think we need to be aware of it.

Now before a bunch of you jump on this and my "notifications" blow up with people quoting me, I refer you back to my first point..-------> 
 I don't feel informed enough to defend my minority opinions against the onslaught that would surely come.   Just because I don't feel prepared for debate doesn't mean that my opinions and points are not well considered.   So speak your peace, but if I don't respond, don't assume that silence means consent or agreement.  It just means I'm not going to jump "in the ring" with you. For that and other reasons...lack of time being one.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mordorbund said:

@LiterateParakeet and other Sanders supporters, Do you see a repeat of the 2016 Primaries? When the DNC servers were hacked it showed that the fix was in, and the DNC was rigging the Primaries in Hillary's favor - even going so far as to give her the debate questions ahead of time. This last debate the moderator seemed skewed in Warren's favor. The moderator asked a follow-up question of Warren that completely disregarded Sanders' response. Is this a repeat of 2016?

 

I think the DNC is not so happy with Sanders.  I think there are many that would prefer to have him as a token to the more socialistic wing of the party and then ignore him than to have him ever win the nomination.

There has been some speculation (and some of these conspiracy theories are probably pretty ridiculous) that this entire Impeachment hearing is not actually against Trump, but a targeted way to ensure Bernie does not do as well against Biden (as ridiculous as that sounds).  The Senate hearings being designed to keep the Senators busy (so I suppose that also includes Warren) while Biden continues to campaign.  Thus, they can hopefully keep Bernie Sanders busy while Biden builds up his base.

I'm not sure how deep it goes, but even among the more moderate Democrats there is a feeling of deep corruption currently within the Democrat party.

There is a bright side to this for Conservatives.  Much of the Democrat party is not in line with Bernie Sanders opinions.  If he were elected, even if the Democrats win by a landslide and somehow eventually have 2/3 of both the House and the Senate...it would as if he were of a different party from them in getting anything passed.  He has big ideas, but the probability of most of them getting through Congress, even if controlled completely by the Democrats, are very little.  If you want a stalemated government and had to vote for a Democrat nominee, Sanders is probably a better bet than any of the others.

That does not mean Sanders wouldn't try though.  He'd try anything and everything he could.

I'm not sure if it will be a repeat of 2016 or not.  I think there is a great deal of unhappy people among the Democrats at how the Democrat party handled 2016 and Sanders specifically.  It may repeat itself, but it probably won't be as blatant this time around.

To be honest, I think Biden is still going to be the frontrunner with Bernie Sanders as a close second...though Sanders is supposedly doing very well among the early states looking to do their primaries.

We'll see what happens.  Warren could surprise us all still and be the next up and coming winner.  I think the establishment would prefer Biden or Warren over Bernie Sanders any day.

I think the question I'm looking at is if Biden gets the nomination, who he'll select as a Vice President running mate.  I think a choice of Warren would be a wise one from him, but if he selected Bernie Sanders he might gain more overall.  (then again, he could throw tradition completely to the wind and select Romney.  I think Biden and Romney would get along well together, they have very similar views in my opinion, but by selecting Romney he'd throw a LOT of Republicans into a tizzy over what to do next in their votes.  If Romney actually accepted that...I think Biden would win as it would divide the Republican party just enough so that Trump would not be able to hope to win the election).

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2020 at 3:22 PM, MormonGator said:

No it doesn't. You obviously are having some trouble grasping that an 8 year old can't legally work. Or pay taxes. Or be drafted. Or enter into a marriage. Or a land deal. And that an 18 year old can. Because an 18 year old can be legally accountable, they have a right to choose how the system works.  

This is an ignorant statement.  Hollywood is full of children who are legally working and paying taxes.

It is not that children under 18 is DEPRIVED OF RIGHTS.  It is that their liabilities are held by their parents until they're 18 and the parents cease to be liable for them.  It's not that MAGICALLY, the child became responsible between the day he was 17 years and 363 days old to when he turned 18!  That's why, if you're going to institute the draft for 8 year olds, you can't take the 8 year old, you're going to have to take his parents or legal guardian because they are the ones legally liable for the child.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2020 at 4:00 PM, JohnsonJones said:

There is a bright side to this for Conservatives.  Much of the Democrat party is not in line with Bernie Sanders opinions.  If he were elected, even if the Democrats win by a landslide and somehow eventually have 2/3 of both the House and the Senate...it would as if he were of a different party from them in getting anything passed.  He has big ideas, but the probability of most of them getting through Congress, even if controlled completely by the Democrats, are very little.  If you want a stalemated government and had to vote for a Democrat nominee, Sanders is probably a better bet than any of the others.

This is not a good analysis.  Democrats have shown that they are very much capable of bringing the entire party in lock-step even to the point of jumping off the cliff.  And the threat to Conservatives is not that Bernie has bright ideas.  The threat to Conservatives is that Bernie will happily sign off on any bright ideas the Democrats in Congress passes - even to the most radical.  The past year has shown how radical Democrats can drive even a seasoned political veteran like Pelosi to radical action.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s amusing to me that Hillary “likeable enough” Clinton is now making pronouncements about whether other Dem candidates have the likeability factor.  
 

As far as Sanders’ honesty:  he has the same quality that Trump has, and McCain had, of saying whatever comes into his mind in a blunt way that resonates with the overall perceptions and emotions of his hearers and makes him seem like a “straight shooter”. But, also like Trump and McCain, he’s also not a particularly careful speaker; and if you dig down into the minutiae of what he says you’ll find a lot of statements that are factually untrue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It’s amusing to me that Hillary “likeable enough” Clinton is now making pronouncements about whether other Dem candidates have the likeability factor.

Which was actually my point in starting the thread.

3 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

As far as Sanders’ honesty:  he has the same quality that Trump has, and McCain had, of saying whatever comes into his mind in a blunt way that resonates with the overall perceptions and emotions of his hearers and makes him seem like a “straight shooter”. But, also like Trump and McCain, he’s also not a particularly careful speaker; and if you dig down into the minutiae of what he says you’ll find a lot of statements that are factually untrue.

All true, but it's simpler than this. Sanders is an avowed Communist who has leeched off the system for his entire life. I do not believe for a moment that Sanders really thinks that Communism is the path to Shangri-La. It's the path to feathering his own nest at the expense of those ignorant and/or stupid enough to buy into the Communist pack of lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Vort said:

Which was actually my point in starting the thread.

All true, but it's simpler than this. Sanders is an avowed Communist who has leeched off the system for his entire life. I do not believe for a moment that Sanders really thinks that Communism is the path to Shangri-La. It's the path to feathering his own nest at the expense of those ignorant and/or stupid enough to buy into the Communist pack of lies.

Perhaps.  I don’t know Sanders well enough to say what whether he is evil or merely extremely, stupendously, stubbornly dumb.  His net worth of $2-3 million doesn’t strike me as obscenely high for someone in the twilight of his life who has had a two-income household, a mayor’s pension, a congressman’s salary, and a book deal or two.  (Hypocritical as all-get-out, sure.  Enough to characterize him as a professional leech primarily intent on feathering his own nest?  Mmm . . . not sure about that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share