User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » 2016 Democratic Primary Thread Page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 30, Prev Next  
moron
All American
31516 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2015/0727/Bernie-Sanders-talks-guns-racism-at-Louisiana-rally
Quote :
"Near the end, he addressed the case of Sandra Bland, a black woman who died in a Texas jail in what authorities said was a suicide, after she was arrested by a white police officer during a traffic stop.

"When an African-American woman gets yanked out of her car," he said, interrupted by shouts and cheers from the crowd in support of his remarks, "when we all know that would not have happened to a middle-class white woman, we know we need some serious change in criminal justice in this country."
...
He noted the national discord over the gun issue.

"But coming from a rural state, I think I can communicate with folks coming from urban states where guns mean different things than they do in Vermont where it's used for hunting," Sanders said. "That's where we've got to go. We don't have to argue with each other and yell at each other. We need a common sense solution.""


There aren't many politicians that can talk about these things without seeming insincere but Sanders definitely pulls it off well.

7/28/2015 2:52:55 AM

aimorris
All American
15004 Posts
user info
edit post

Too bad he's a "nut" and "not a serious person."

7/28/2015 3:08:29 PM

goalielax
All American
11252 Posts
user info
edit post

national discord over the gun issue?

such insight from a guy who voted against the brady bill and mandatory waiting periods.

you big city dummies just need to think like white new england hunters. then all the violence would end and we could all buy guns whenever we want!

[Edited on July 28, 2015 at 3:34 PM. Reason : .]

7/28/2015 3:32:32 PM

qntmfred
retired
39188 Posts
user info
edit post

Bernie's stance on gun rights is not going to have an impact on his campaign. If anything it makes him look better in the general election because he is actually willing to defend the point of view of those who use firearms legally (the majority of gun owners), which will appeal to many Republican voters, and will probably be respected at the least by many Democrats who prefer tighter controls but understand that that's not going to really solve the problems it intends to

[Edited on July 29, 2015 at 1:02 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2015 12:25:02 PM

Flyin Ryan
All American
7772 Posts
user info
edit post

7/30/2015 1:34:09 PM

synapse
play so hard
57123 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"Bernie's stance on gun rights is not going to have an impact on his campaign"


His current positions won't hurt him in the primaries, but his prior actions might.

7/30/2015 2:06:03 PM

Dentaldamn
All American
9692 Posts
user info
edit post

^ that's the ticket!

7/30/2015 2:13:39 PM

goalielax
All American
11252 Posts
user info
edit post

you're dreaming if you don't think him voting against the completely sane brady bill isn't going to hurt him in the democratic base. either that, or you don't know what the brady bill entailed.

[Edited on July 30, 2015 at 2:45 PM. Reason : .]

7/30/2015 2:45:05 PM

synapse
play so hard
57123 Posts
user info
edit post

^ It's mitigated by his current gun control positions, plus being an outspoken champion for most of the issues the liberal base are passionate about.

7/30/2015 2:54:31 PM

dtownral
All American
24463 Posts
user info
edit post

gun control isn't one of the top issues for democrats, sanders has a better position than clinton on all of the top issues

7/30/2015 5:36:38 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6092 Posts
user info
edit post

^this.

Let's not forget that Democrats couldn't even unite behind the "relatively" benign Manchin-Toomey bill after 20 elementary school students were gunned down by a lunatic. even in the most liberal states gun control actions have had to be passed through questionable legislative actions (NY SAFE act). It's clearly an issue that well meaning, wealthy liberals can wring their hands over, but in the end no serious person expects there to be any movement on this issue.

7/30/2015 6:28:50 PM

Flyin Ryan
All American
7772 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-progressives-2016-121298.html?hp=m1#.Vc1bIzZRHIU

Quote :
"Bernie Sanders, Progressive Enemy #1

The ultimate progressive is getting kicked in the teeth by fellow progressives.

By BILL SCHER
August 12, 2015

The presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders was supposed to put leftward pressure on Hillary Clinton. Instead, it’s Sanders who has become the left’s punching bag.

Sanders has been sandbagged by Black Lives Matter protesters for not prioritizing solutions for institutional racism, knocked by immigrant advocates for arguing that too much immigration would depress wages and had his bona fides on campaign finance reform challenged by new Democratic party presidential aspirant Lawrence Lessig.

Meanwhile, Clinton is getting off light, as she skirts progressive wish list items like restoring Glass-Steagall bank regulations, scuttling the Trans-Pacific Partnership and blocking the Keystone pipeline—issues where Sanders’ aligns strongly with the left.

So why can’t Bernie win? To borrow a phrase from Sen. Elizabeth Warren: the game is rigged.

In effect, Bernie isn’t running for President of the United States of America. He’s running to be President of Progressive America. And when you are running to be an ideological standard-bearer, your ideological fellow travellers all demand you adhere to their own standard. That involves not just checking every box on the liberal to-do list, but giving maximum rhetorical emphasis to everyone’s top priority. Which is impossible. It’s a game that can’t be won.

Sanders has already proposed immigration reform more liberal than the 2013 bipartisan Senate bill in a speech to the National Council of La Raza and incorporated a searing critique of entrenched racism into his regular stump. His reward was a public scolding by Seattle activists who prevented him from speaking at a Social Security rally, one of whom demanded the crowd “join us now in holding Bernie Sanders accountable for his actions.”

The Vermonter also regularly fingers the Citizens United ruling for corrupting democracy and pledges to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn it. That wasn’t enough for Lessig, who complained Sanders dilutes his message by having the gall to campaign on other issues. He told the Washington Post that neither Sanders nor Clinton could enact his preferred package of small-d democratic reforms because both “would be coming to office with a mandate that’s divided among five or six different issues.”

The Lessig swipe parallels the critique coming from Black Lives Matter: For Sanders, all issues come back to economic inequality. For Black Lives Matter, that approach fails to fully confront the centuries-old scourge of institutional racism. For Lessig, only by prioritizing election reform can anything else be solved.

Sanders defenders are apoplectic that the ultimate progressive is getting kicked in the teeth by fellow progressives. “Don’t Piss On Your Best Friend” upbraided Gawker’s Hamilton Nolan. But the critics don’t see Sanders’ as their best friend, because his strategic approach doesn’t line up with theirs.

Sanders is forced to grapple with the various strands of the progressive movement in ways he hadn’t before because he decided to enter the presidential arena. A senator can pick and choose his issues more easily than a presidential candidate. While a traditional candidate succeeds by knowing when to cater to a party’s political base and when to keep it at arm’s length, a movement candidate doesn’t have that luxury. All that complicates the progressive objective of influencing the party Establishment.

If Sanders’ campaign ultimately proves incapable of pinning Clinton down on issues of progressive importance and moving the party farther to the left, it will be another strike against the efficacy of the ideological primary challenge—and against the tactics of single-issue liberal activists.

In the run-up to her announcement, Clinton kept a wary eye on the threat posed by Warren, who had invested considerable time and energy building grassroots support around a set of progressive economic proposals and arguments. Clinton invited her to a secret meeting in December to talk policy. Clinton’s presidential announcement used language that echoed Warren’s jabs at a “rigged” system: “the deck is stacked … my job is to reshuffle the cards.” One of her first policy speeches excoriated the upward distribution of wealth to “not just the top 1 percent but the top 0.1 percent, the 0.01 percent of the population.”

The threat of what Warren might do—run, scold, set tough bars to clear—produced enough pressure to at least shape Clinton’s rhetoric. If her policy prescriptions still fall short of the progressive ideal, they at least point in the desired ideological direction. Any inclinations for Clinton to “triangulate” and show off her willingness to reject liberal orthodoxy were greatly tempered at the outset of her campaign.

But a long held principle in chess is that “a threat … is often far more effective than its actual execution.” Warren only threatened. Sanders executed.

Sanders supporters will likely point his huge rallies and the latest New Hampshire poll, showing him in the lead for the first time, as evidence he is thriving despite the setbacks. But the rallies only show strength inside America’s bluest dots, and poll aggregates indicate that Sanders’ numbers are plateauing. In turn, Clinton is increasingly willing to put distance between herself and the populists.

She threw a brushback at Warren by responding dismissively to a question about her proposal to restore Glass-Steagall bank rules, “I am not going to be pointing at any one change and saying, you know, ‘that’ll solve all our problems.’” She practically trolled environmentalists by refusing to take a position on the Keystone pipeline at a New Hampshire town hall, “If it is undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.” Bernie’s insistences that Hillary take explicit positions on these matters are routinely ignored, to little consequence.

The usual argument against an insurgent challenging an incumbent or a heavily favored Establishment pick is the risk of damaging the eventual nominee in the general election. In 2010, national progressives tried to make an example out of right-leaning red stater Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), only to ease the path for her Republican opponent in the year of the Tea Party. Ted Kennedy softened up President Jimmy Carter before Ronald Reagan could finish the job. Anti-war candidate Eugene McCarthy (whom Lessig seeks to emulate) made it impossible for Democrats to unify around President Lyndon Johnson, and later, the eventual nominee Hubert Humphrey, paving the way for Richard Nixon and a longer Vietnam War.

There is also the risk of turning the target of the primary challenge into a more dangerous enemy. Progressives succeeded in beating Sen. Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic primary, only to see him keep his seat as an independent, freed from any need to cater to Democratic desires. Such primary challenges are a dicey proposition even when a president gets involved, as Franklin Delano Roosevelt learned in 1938. He tried to purge the Democratic Party of conservatives in the midterm elections. But his targets survived, then joined forces with Republicans to put the kibosh on additional New Deal reforms.

The Sanders challenge, which eschews scorched-earth tactics, doesn’t appear to be endangering Clinton’s general election prospects or driving her into the arms of Speaker John Boehner. In that respect, no harm, no foul. But if the risk was small this time around, the benefits remain hard to spot. Progressives eager to exert maximum leverage over Democratic administrations may want to ask themselves: was the threat of a primary challenge more useful than a real one?"

8/13/2015 11:09:06 PM

synapse
play so hard
57123 Posts
user info
edit post

Yeah that ridiculous picture perched atop that bullshit subject screams trying too hard

8/13/2015 11:36:56 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6092 Posts
user info
edit post

Bill Scher is exactly the type of "Third-Way" Democrat that I'd like to kick in the teeth.

First, the #BLM incidents, while well reported in the news, were really not that big of a deal. Second, does anyone think that this one-trick Lessig cat is going to generate any support or movement in the polls whatsoever? And besides, whats most important here is that these types of "attacks" are only occurring to Bernie because....... He actually makes himself available, he is actually out there giving speeches, answering questions, shaking hands, etc. Meanwhile, at the Clinton campaign........

And that's what Scher dismisses the most. The fact that Clinton refuses to be pinned down on the vast majority of important issues, refuses to answer difficult questions thoughtfully. That she only gives speeches in closely controlled environments, This is supposed to somehow be a strength and aid here in winning the nomination, how exactly????? - progressives and the democratic base have taken note, and they know exactly what comes next.

8/14/2015 10:26:45 AM

dtownral
All American
24463 Posts
user info
edit post

Sanders responded well to BLM campaign by quickly releasing his plan to address their concerns, I think the BLM issue made his campaign look good and I thought that they had made statements that they were happy with the response

8/14/2015 10:31:25 AM

Flyin Ryan
All American
7772 Posts
user info
edit post

what do people think of Biden possibly entering?

8/14/2015 2:33:50 PM

thegoodlife3
All American
34955 Posts
user info
edit post

that the administration smells blood in the water around Clinton

if he decides to run, that will more than likely mean that they know something that we don't know about Clinton

8/14/2015 2:36:47 PM

dtownral
All American
24463 Posts
user info
edit post

it means the establishment is afraid of sanders

8/14/2015 2:37:19 PM

shoot
All American
6207 Posts
user info
edit post

https://go.berniesanders.com/page/event/detail/rally/4jwz3

9/8/2015 11:08:17 AM

Pupils DiL8t
All American
4165 Posts
user info
edit post

https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/09/13/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-cbs-battleground-poll/


Quote :
"The new poll finds Sen. Sanders with 52% support among Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire, while former Secretary of State Clinton, long considered the front-runner for the 2016 Democratic nomination, receives 30%...

Possibly more worrying for the Clinton campaign is her performance in Iowa, where Sanders now leads by 10 points, with 43% to Clinton’s 33%."

9/13/2015 8:28:40 PM

moron
All American
31516 Posts
user info
edit post

Not too comparable, but Hillary's looking like Romney early on:


Looked like Romney had momentum but then a change.

Sanders could have a similar turning point, or he could keep on trucking. At least based on the few progressives on my Facebook, Sanders has a HUGE enthusiasm lead, i haven't seen a single Hillary supporter.

9/14/2015 1:15:09 AM

Kurtis636
All American
14984 Posts
user info
edit post

It is interesting that Clinton has failed to realize or has been unwilling to act on the obvious pressure to run more to the left. It's the classic strategy, run towards the left/right during the primary and then towards the center in the general election.

I guess maybe the sense that she was the chosen one and would have no challengers means that her campaign didn't prepare for this? You would think that the machine behind her would have responded by now with a little more action since she's actually in danger of losing relevancy. If Biden enters the race it will only be because the establishment has abandoned Hilary.

This has been a very odd 18 months out period, but I guess it's also been a long time since we've had a Huey Long type in the mix.

9/14/2015 2:47:56 AM

shoot
All American
6207 Posts
user info
edit post

9k people went to Greensboro to see the old man last night.

9/14/2015 9:15:53 AM

eyewall41
All American
2129 Posts
user info
edit post

Yep 9,100 in attendance for Bernie with many more turned away. There was an overflow room which was full as well.

9/14/2015 10:50:24 AM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

Sellout at liberty

9/14/2015 10:52:36 AM

rjrumfel
All American
21320 Posts
user info
edit post

It will end up being Bernie and Trump, and Bernie will not get elected. I'm telling everyone that will listen...Trump is going to trip his way into the Oval Office. Lord help us all.

9/14/2015 10:54:06 AM

shoot
All American
6207 Posts
user info
edit post

No. Ted Cruz will emerge at the end of this year/early next year and beat Trump.
Trump divorced twice. He has some marriage issues.

9/14/2015 11:18:50 AM

Bullet
All American
24638 Posts
user info
edit post

Well, Cruz is a total nut-job.

9/14/2015 11:46:22 AM

shoot
All American
6207 Posts
user info
edit post

He's a passionate freak.

9/14/2015 12:06:52 PM

Pupils DiL8t
All American
4165 Posts
user info
edit post

If Sanders and Trump win their parties' nominations, I wonder if mainstream establishment candidates will then run as third party candidates. It would be a hilarious way to break out of the two-party system.

[Edited on September 14, 2015 at 12:39 PM. Reason : ]

9/14/2015 12:30:19 PM

synapse
play so hard
57123 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"It will end up being Bernie and Trump, and Bernie will not get elected. I'm telling everyone that will listen...Trump is going to trip his way into the Oval Office. Lord help us all."


What's the bet? I'm willing to give you odds on each piece of that stupidity.

9/14/2015 12:45:44 PM

moron
All American
31516 Posts
user info
edit post

Ben Carson is the #2 spot on the Republican side, and I think his biggest "problem" for the general election is that he's probably the most religious of the bunch (IMO, he's the only genuinely religious politician running for president).

If it turned out to be Carson vs. Bernie, these are 2 candidates currently considered "unelectable" by the mainstream.

9/14/2015 3:14:57 PM

shoot
All American
6207 Posts
user info
edit post

Isn't Ted Cruz No. 2 now?
I think starting next year it's gonna be Carson vs Cruz inside Republicans.

9/14/2015 3:24:49 PM

skokiaan
All American
26441 Posts
user info
edit post

Bernie means Trump wins. Let's see this happen

9/15/2015 12:53:48 AM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

Nah trump means bernie wins.

9/15/2015 1:21:01 AM

bdmazur
California Dreamin'
14493 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"If Sanders and Trump win their parties' nominations, I wonder if mainstream establishment candidates will then run as third party candidates."


Then it will only make Trump look better, as he was the only Republican candidate "genuine" enough when everyone else vowed not to run as a 3rd party candidate at the first debate.

Quote :
"Ben Carson is the #2 spot on the Republican side, and I think his biggest "problem" for the general election is that he's probably the most religious of the bunch (IMO, he's the only genuinely religious politician running for president). "


Nah, Huckabee has him beat on the religious right. He literally stood by Kim Davis' side.

[Edited on September 15, 2015 at 5:45 PM. Reason : -]

9/15/2015 5:44:29 PM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

The resistance to Bernie is unreal and its not just the establishment and media. He's campaigning against everyone trying to prevent the people from ever knowing who he is.

Elon's polling strategies are mindblowing. They didn't even poll a general election scenario with Sanders vs. a republican. You might immediately respond that this is because Hillary is winning which would be a good point. Sanders only has 23% in the Elon poll. That would all make sense but they have included trump and carson who both have less and Bush who only has 7% in his best poll.

If Sanders general election polls would be a waste of money then why are they wasting money polling bush vs clinton?

9/26/2015 8:16:28 PM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

Why are Chaffe Webb and Omalley invited to the debate? They have less than 1 % of the polls? Oh yeah thats right. To drown out Sanders. Can't possibly allow him to have head to head exposure with Hillary.

9/28/2015 1:38:07 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6092 Posts
user info
edit post

Wow, an actual (somewhat) interesting debate on gun control with some diverging views from the range of candidates.

I doubt it will differentiate the candidates that much, since most people generally don't give much of a damn about gun control, but interesting to see some slight disagreements.

10/13/2015 9:25:50 PM

dyne
All American
7321 Posts
user info
edit post

the democratic debate seems so tame compared to the republican. hopefully bernie seizes his opportunity to stand out as a frontrunner, but we'll see.

10/13/2015 9:34:08 PM

bdmazur
California Dreamin'
14493 Posts
user info
edit post

^^^I feel like the bottom three are frequently saying "I agree with Senator Sanders." I think Bernie's credibility is going way up after tonight.

^^It didn't sound like Bernie's stance is all that different, and yet the other candidates made it sound like he was a NRA Republican.

Also, when Anderson Cooper asked the question about greatest threat to national security, I just knew global warming would be his answer. Everyone else either mumbled through some cliched word vomit, blamed it all on the "middle east" as if it was just one singular situation...or China. Webb really really REALLY wants to talk about China.

[Edited on October 13, 2015 at 9:53 PM. Reason : -]

10/13/2015 9:50:59 PM

Geppetto
All American
1532 Posts
user info
edit post

I was hoping for a good debate but this is basically amateur hour.

10/13/2015 9:58:09 PM

TreeTwista10
Laugh, Think, Cry
140374 Posts
user info
edit post

Sanders would be 75 years old if and when he's elected

His VP would be pretty important

10/13/2015 10:00:03 PM

synapse
play so hard
57123 Posts
user info
edit post

Anderson Cooper came hard with the questions.

I don't know how Webb considers himself a Democrat.

Chaffe came off as weak as fuck.

O'Malley came off fake as fuck. Smiling like he doesn't believe the shit coming out of his mouth.

10/13/2015 10:33:00 PM

TreeTwista10
Laugh, Think, Cry
140374 Posts
user info
edit post

I didn't see anything that made me think Hillary and Bernie aren't the only two with a chance in hell of winning the nomination

10/13/2015 11:01:15 PM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

How the hell could any one view hillary as favorable after that? She's flipped on almost every issue and of course she won't go after banks her campaign is funded by them. They ganged up and drilled her a few times tonight.

What is webb even doing there? How did he get 1%?

Omalley seemed strong, charming, and called Hillary out on everything. It almost seemed like he and Chaffe were posturing to be Sanders' running mate.

Bernie was slow and stumbly with his speech at times and didn't knock a few opportunities out the park when he could have. Not the strongest debate for him.

i was at a campaign event during the debate and left feeling great about the debate. After coming home to get online to see the general reaction to the debate i'm depressed as hell and feel hopeless about the truth every triumphing over the lies of big money.

[Edited on October 13, 2015 at 11:28 PM. Reason : so many people are going to vote hillary no matter what.]

[Edited on October 13, 2015 at 11:29 PM. Reason : geeze people]

10/13/2015 11:25:51 PM

TreeTwista10
Laugh, Think, Cry
140374 Posts
user info
edit post

Bernie could've ended all hopes that Hillary had at another Clinton presidency, if he had just hollered at this dude: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.walletpop.com/blog/media/import/48aecd62-00091-056f2-400cb8e1_1634.jpg

10/13/2015 11:28:18 PM

The E Man
Suspended
15268 Posts
user info
edit post

cnn.com front page
"hillary's confident sweep" with a HUGE picture of her

What the hell?

10/13/2015 11:47:07 PM

TreeTwista10
Laugh, Think, Cry
140374 Posts
user info
edit post

lol CNN.com

Fox News for the left

[Edited on October 14, 2015 at 12:14 AM. Reason : damn this guy is a good troll...making me post in sections i don't usually even post in]

10/14/2015 12:13:24 AM

bdmazur
California Dreamin'
14493 Posts
user info
edit post

I only saw the first half, plan on watching the rest tomorrow. But I felt like Bernie came across as intelligent, genuine, and hard core in a good way. Hillary was rude, abrasive, deflective, and hard core in a bad way. The other three I've already forgotten everything they said other than Webb and China.

10/14/2015 12:48:22 AM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » 2016 Democratic Primary Thread Page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 30, Prev Next  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2019 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.37 - our disclaimer.