Sanders transforms into contender, still pitches revolution

[boomerangutang]

Missed the "click on link" while computer was crashing, damned Windows Exploder...lol. This one should work: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-health-care-bernie-sanders-219643 She was part and parcel of the war on working people, the end of Glass-Steagall (still supports that), the pipeline from school to prison for mostly blacks and other minorities, NAFTA the disaster for the middle/working class and will immediately push for TPP, and all the rest of the secret corporate coup "trade" (not) deals if electe. Hillary may be better than any of the buffoon car, but when picking the lessor of 2 evils, she barely makes the grade. She will continue to start wars, give the profits to the 1% and destroy the working/middle class, perhaps a minute or 2 slower than the buffoon car would. That bunch is all evil. Bernie stands mountains tall above all.

Ok, we get it. You intensely dislike the idea of Hillary Clinton as POTUS. Yet you agree she would be better than any Republican contenders. I like Bernie also, but I don't detest Hillary. Hopefully one of the Dems will get in the WH. If it's a Rep, it will bode ill for the US, except rednecks (who will be able to buy any sort of military weapon) and very rich people (who will be able to continue to hide their money overseas while avoiding taxes, while also keeping min.wage as low as possible).

[sgtsabai]

I wholly agree that a Republican insane buffoon in the White House, especially with control of Congress, is extremely dangerous, for the US and the world. Unfortunately, Hillary in the White House won't be a lot better. Social policy will be somewhat better, that's about it. She will nominate a corporatist judge for the Supreme court, Obama could bring back Scalia from the dead, nominate him and still couldn't get him confirmed. The money will continue to flow to the 1% and the very rich and corporations will continue to destroy what's left of America. One way or the other, unless the Dem's take back the Senate, nothing will get done, no chance of the house. Then after 4 more years of insanity and traitorous obstruction Dem's wake up and somehow work around the gerrymandering, voter repression and out and out computer voting fraud to take back both houses. Bernie recognizes this, so should you. It won't happen with Hillary in, she is the status quo. Like Obama, she won't try. Yes, I intensely dislike her because she is an out and out fraud only interested in being the 1st woman pres and could give a damn less about the real people in America.

[sgtsabai]

Let me add, that I fear Hillary will loose a general election. Making a bad situation even worse. She is intensely disliked by many, including many in the Democratic Party, the real part, not the corporatist. She is hated by the right wingnut Republicans, who like with Obama hate for all the wrong reasons. I will not vote for Hillary and I believe there are many others the same, won't vote for any of the buffoon, batshit crazy Republicans, but cannot bring themselves to vote for a fraud. I can predict many non-voters when they need to vote and many switching to Jill in the Green Party. I voted in the last election, all Democrats (never have, never will vote for Republican) but could not bring myself to vote for Obama, for the correct reasons, not any of the batshit crazy crap the right wingnut Republicans have in their tin foil pointy little pea pickin' brains.

[sgtsabai]

Ok, only one more and it is time to hit the rack. Please read this article closely and to the end, otherwise you will miss the point. I would point out that when the author says "liberal" what he means, at least to me, is neoliberal. https://harpers.org/blog/2016/02/nor-a-lender-be/

[SpokaneAl]

Here is a perfect example of how the Hillary "good squad" handles things and how the "1st strike" works. Friedman (Clinton supporter) was correct when he ran the numbers of Bernie's economic plan. It's a bit long but well worth the read for two reasons, first and foremost it explains how the plan will benefit the US and second it exposes the "good squad". https://ourfuture.org/20160223/the-sanders-economic-plan-controversy?utm_source=progressive_breakfast&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pbreak

It seemed to me that they made some valid points on the Sanders campaign over the top promises and conclusions.

This did seem, to me at least, as a level headed analysis.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/varieties-of-voodoo.html

Edited February 23, 2016 by SpokaneAl

[SpokaneAl]

I wholly agree that a Republican insane buffoon in the White House, especially with control of Congress, is extremely dangerous, for the US and the world. Unfortunately, Hillary in the White House won't be a lot better. Social policy will be somewhat better, that's about it. She will nominate a corporatist judge for the Supreme court, Obama could bring back Scalia from the dead, nominate him and still couldn't get him confirmed. The money will continue to flow to the 1% and the very rich and corporations will continue to destroy what's left of America. One way or the other, unless the Dem's take back the Senate, nothing will get done, no chance of the house. Then after 4 more years of insanity and traitorous obstruction Dem's wake up and somehow work around the gerrymandering, voter repression and out and out computer voting fraud to take back both houses. Bernie recognizes this, so should you. It won't happen with Hillary in, she is the status quo. Like Obama, she won't try. Yes, I intensely dislike her because she is an out and out fraud only interested in being the 1st woman pres and could give a damn less about the real people in America.

The great thing about Sanders is that if he did somehow win the presidency little or none of his ideas would go anywhere.

And I sincerely hope the same can be said if Trump ends up in the White House.

Edited February 23, 2016 by SpokaneAl

[boomerangutang]

Let me add, that I fear Hillary will loose a general election. Making a bad situation even worse. She is intensely disliked by many, including many in the Democratic Party, the real part, not the corporatist. She is hated by the right wingnut Republicans, who like with Obama hate for all the wrong reasons. I will not vote for Hillary and I believe there are many others the same, won't vote for any of the buffoon, batshit crazy Republicans, but cannot bring themselves to vote for a fraud. I can predict many non-voters when they need to vote and many switching to Jill in the Green Party. I voted in the last election, all Democrats (never have, never will vote for Republican) but could not bring myself to vote for Obama, for the correct reasons, not any of the batshit crazy crap the right wingnut Republicans have in their tin foil pointy little pea pickin' brains.

As with many elections, it's often a choice of the less noxious option. Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with. A big factor will be the stay-at-homes who decide (dangerously) that it's all bullshit, and what's the use of voting. Yes, there are mountains of bullshit, but it's still important to vote. The more people who vote, the more liberal the vote will swing, because conservatives are generally better at getting off their butts to vote.

[SpokaneAl]

Let me add, that I fear Hillary will loose a general election. Making a bad situation even worse. She is intensely disliked by many, including many in the Democratic Party, the real part, not the corporatist. She is hated by the right wingnut Republicans, who like with Obama hate for all the wrong reasons. I will not vote for Hillary and I believe there are many others the same, won't vote for any of the buffoon, batshit crazy Republicans, but cannot bring themselves to vote for a fraud. I can predict many non-voters when they need to vote and many switching to Jill in the Green Party. I voted in the last election, all Democrats (never have, never will vote for Republican) but could not bring myself to vote for Obama, for the correct reasons, not any of the batshit crazy crap the right wingnut Republicans have in their tin foil pointy little pea pickin' brains.

As with many elections, it's often a choice of the less noxious option. Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with. A big factor will be the stay-at-homes who decide (dangerously) that it's all bullshit, and what's the use of voting. Yes, there are mountains of bullshit, but it's still important to vote. The more people who vote, the more liberal the vote will swing, because conservatives are generally better at getting off their butts to vote.

Regardless of the democrat candidate, that person will beat the republican candidate by tens of millions? That is a bit of a leap. Many, if not most of us seem to follow the news/analysis/conclusions of those with whom we agree with, which tends to validate our own personal opinions.

With all due respect, I think that your analysis verifies this, although, admittedly, at this point, all any of us can do is prognosticate on future events and some of us will be correct and others will be completely wrong. Time will tell - we are way to far out from the election, in my opinion, to generate much, if any meaningful election result conclusions.

[sgtsabai]

The NYT Krugman piece is part of the "hit team" the article I posted talks about. If you think the article "made some valid points on the Sanders campaign over the top promises and conclusions." I strongly suggest you re-read as you missed the point. I said in my original link to it, read carefully, if one does not read carefully and to the conclusion, one might mistakenly come to the wrong conclusion as you did. It does make valid points about Hillary's "goon squad". BTW, Sanders does not promise to do it all by himself and no president can. Not even he who would be fascist dictator, Trump. I do fear the fact that so many despise Hillary, and it well get worse as the campaign wears on, that Democrats and independents while not voting for any of the buffoon car, either will not vote at all (leading to the right wingnuts maintaining the Senate), not vote for the lessor, by fractions, of 2 evils, or vote for Green Party, throwing the election to the batshit crazy right wingnut Republicans. Thus throwing what is left of America to the wolves.

[SpokaneAl]

The NYT Krugman piece is part of the "hit team" the article I posted talks about. If you think the article "made some valid points on the Sanders campaign over the top promises and conclusions." I strongly suggest you re-read as you missed the point. I said in my original link to it, read carefully, if one does not read carefully and to the conclusion, one might mistakenly come to the wrong conclusion as you did. It does make valid points about Hillary's "goon squad". BTW, Sanders does not promise to do it all by himself and no president can. Not even he who would be fascist dictator, Trump. I do fear the fact that so many despise Hillary, and it well get worse as the campaign wears on, that Democrats and independents while not voting for any of the buffoon car, either will not vote at all (leading to the right wingnuts maintaining the Senate), not vote for the lessor, by fractions, of 2 evils, or vote for Green Party, throwing the election to the batshit crazy right wingnut Republicans. Thus throwing what is left of America to the wolves.

I come to a different conclusion than you, ergo the wrong conclusion. Got it.

[boomerangutang]

Let me add, that I fear Hillary will loose a general election. Making a bad situation even worse. She is intensely disliked by many, including many in the Democratic Party, the real part, not the corporatist. She is hated by the right wingnut Republicans, who like with Obama hate for all the wrong reasons. I will not vote for Hillary and I believe there are many others the same, won't vote for any of the buffoon, batshit crazy Republicans, but cannot bring themselves to vote for a fraud. I can predict many non-voters when they need to vote and many switching to Jill in the Green Party. I voted in the last election, all Democrats (never have, never will vote for Republican) but could not bring myself to vote for Obama, for the correct reasons, not any of the batshit crazy crap the right wingnut Republicans have in their tin foil pointy little pea pickin' brains.

As with many elections, it's often a choice of the less noxious option. Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with. A big factor will be the stay-at-homes who decide (dangerously) that it's all bullshit, and what's the use of voting. Yes, there are mountains of bullshit, but it's still important to vote. The more people who vote, the more liberal the vote will swing, because conservatives are generally better at getting off their butts to vote.

Regardless of the democrat candidate, that person will beat the republican candidate by tens of millions? That is a bit of a leap. Many, if not most of us seem to follow the news/analysis/conclusions of those with whom we agree with, which tends to validate our own personal opinions.

With all due respect, I think that your analysis verifies this, although, admittedly, at this point, all any of us can do is prognosticate on future events and some of us will be correct and others will be completely wrong. Time will tell - we are way to far out from the election, in my opinion, to generate much, if any meaningful election result conclusions.

Al, you changed my sentence. I wrote; "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans..."

I didn't write, " that person will beat the republican candidate by tens of millions"

There's a difference between, 'will be voted for by....' and 'beat.....'

[SpokaneAl]

Let me add, that I fear Hillary will loose a general election. Making a bad situation even worse. She is intensely disliked by many, including many in the Democratic Party, the real part, not the corporatist. She is hated by the right wingnut Republicans, who like with Obama hate for all the wrong reasons. I will not vote for Hillary and I believe there are many others the same, won't vote for any of the buffoon, batshit crazy Republicans, but cannot bring themselves to vote for a fraud. I can predict many non-voters when they need to vote and many switching to Jill in the Green Party. I voted in the last election, all Democrats (never have, never will vote for Republican) but could not bring myself to vote for Obama, for the correct reasons, not any of the batshit crazy crap the right wingnut Republicans have in their tin foil pointy little pea pickin' brains.

As with many elections, it's often a choice of the less noxious option. Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with. A big factor will be the stay-at-homes who decide (dangerously) that it's all bullshit, and what's the use of voting. Yes, there are mountains of bullshit, but it's still important to vote. The more people who vote, the more liberal the vote will swing, because conservatives are generally better at getting off their butts to vote.

Regardless of the democrat candidate, that person will beat the republican candidate by tens of millions? That is a bit of a leap. Many, if not most of us seem to follow the news/analysis/conclusions of those with whom we agree with, which tends to validate our own personal opinions.

With all due respect, I think that your analysis verifies this, although, admittedly, at this point, all any of us can do is prognosticate on future events and some of us will be correct and others will be completely wrong. Time will tell - we are way to far out from the election, in my opinion, to generate much, if any meaningful election result conclusions.

Al, you changed my sentence. I wrote; "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans..."

I didn't write, " that person will beat the republican candidate by tens of millions"

There's a difference between, 'will be voted for by....' and 'beat.....'

You said, "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with."

Sorry for the misinterpretation, that is what it sounded like to me, and, to be honest, it still kind of sounds like that.

Edited February 24, 2016 by SpokaneAl

[SpokaneAl]

Pretty much my thoughts as well . . .

http://opinion.injo.com/2016/02/253451-i-will-never-vote-for-donald-trump-with-god-as-my-witness-i-will-never-vote-for-donald-trump/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=Partners&utm_term=PRM7&utm_campaign=

[sgtsabai]

Your "conclusion" against all facts doesn't surprise me in the least.

[CWMcMurray]

Don't think he stands a chance in beating the HRC Dem party machines.. but...

Would be a much More interesting election if both parties had outside the box candidates

Edited February 24, 2016 by CWMcMurray

[boomerangutang]

You said, "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with."

Sorry for the misinterpretation, that is what it sounded like to me, and, to be honest, it still kind of sounds like that.

I admit my sentence structure was obtuse. I'll rephrase it:

There are millions of Democratic voters who are going to vote Democratic even if they're not particularly jazzed by Hillary or Bernie (whomever gets the Dem' nod). Republicans simply can't come up with a decent candidate. The proof is the 3 top vote-getters in the Rep' primaries. If Republican party execs could do what they really wanted, they'd probably pull Romney out of the stable.

[SpokaneAl]

You said, "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with."

Sorry for the misinterpretation, that is what it sounded like to me, and, to be honest, it still kind of sounds like that.

I admit my sentence structure was obtuse. I'll rephrase it:

There are millions of Democratic voters who are going to vote Democratic even if they're not particularly jazzed by Hillary or Bernie (whomever gets the Dem' nod). Republicans simply can't come up with a decent candidate. The proof is the 3 top vote-getters in the Rep' primaries. If Republican party execs could do what they really wanted, they'd probably pull Romney out of the stable.

Romney is a decent man with a great, great life. I think they would be hard pressed to convince him to leave that life to run for president again.

[boomerangutang]

You said, "Regardless of which Dem candidate gets the nod, that person will be voted for by tens of millions of Americans over whomever the Reps wind up with."

Sorry for the misinterpretation, that is what it sounded like to me, and, to be honest, it still kind of sounds like that.

I admit my sentence structure was obtuse. I'll rephrase it:

There are millions of Democratic voters who are going to vote Democratic even if they're not particularly jazzed by Hillary or Bernie (whomever gets the Dem' nod). Republicans simply can't come up with a decent candidate. The proof is the 3 top vote-getters in the Rep' primaries. If Republican party execs could do what they really wanted, they'd probably pull Romney out of the stable.

Romney is a decent man with a great, great life. I think they would be hard pressed to convince him to leave that life to run for president again.

The US armed forces would like Romney back in the running: Romney and Ryan pledged to allocate more billions to the military budget than the military would ask for.

[up2u2]

It is evident that the always present strategy of the GOP is to deflect from the real issues that face the American People. Building idiotic walls, racist attacks of minorities, in Party factional fighting, feared ghosts of the past, the dreaded Socialist boogie man, ISIS is at the door waiting to kill you, motivating the Middle Class to point at the poor insisting 'it is all their fault'. All just a smoke screen to avoid the real issues that America is in desperate need of reform.

Not a free health care system but a vastly more affordable health care system that treats people on need not on how much they are able to pay, funded by the public, a similar affordable pharmaceutical schedule funded by the public and providing subsidised key pharmaceuticals to the public. Both these social mechanisms push cost down and provide infinitely better outcomes for taxpayers. Criminal Justice reform. America is a perfect example as to why 'for profit' prison systems are devastating to a community. Harsher penalties for non violent crime equals billions of dollars profit for 'for profit' prison investors. 3 million people locked up! Have you lost your minds. A society that invests in the youth providing tuition paid higher education for the best and brightest. Also investing in training colleges for plumbers, electricians, builders, welders, draughtsmen etc. A fair minimum wage rather than people languishing on wages they are not even able to feed themselves and a family. A financial system that invests in the skills and ambitions of the People not in derivatives, price fluctuations or two flies crawling up a wall and certainly a number of small entities competing in a market place. Less money spent on meddling in other countries affairs and that money directed towards rebuilding infrastructure and employment.

Bernie is the one and only choice if American's want to address these vitally important issues.

Feel the Bern - A Future To Believe In

[SpokaneAl]

Well said!

http://beta.fortune.com/2016/02/22/dear-bernie-sorry-im-the-problem-with-america/?xid=for_fb_sh

[chuckd]

Well said!

http://beta.fortune.com/2016/02/22/dear-bernie-sorry-im-the-problem-with-america/?xid=for_fb_sh

Very good article. Good find.

[up2u2]

Obviously this guys Degree did not involve mathematics. A part time menial $5 per hour income does not pay off a $100,000 Degree. Stupid Right Wing drivel.

[SpokaneAl]

Obviously this guys Degree did not involve mathematics. A part time menial $5 per hour income does not pay off a $100,000 Degree. Stupid Right Wing drivel.

I earned an undergraduate and masters degree precisely the same way. I started out with two years in a community college, transferred to a state school for my undergraduate degree, and continued on with an MBA. I did this in my early forties, worked the entire time while raising a family and finished with zero debt.

But, again, in your opinion, because it does not fit the socialist Sanders dogma, more right wing drivel.

[chuckd]

Obviously this guys Degree did not involve mathematics. A part time menial $5 per hour income does not pay off a $100,000 Degree. Stupid Right Wing drivel.

Degrees didn't cost $100,000 when this guy got his.

Back then the colleges and universities weren't obligated to pay liberal professors $150,000 annual salaries to ruin the minds of young people.

Stupid left wing drivel.

[helpisgood]

Obviously this guys Degree did not involve mathematics. A part time menial $5 per hour income does not pay off a $100,000 Degree. Stupid Right Wing drivel.

I earned an undergraduate and masters degree precisely the same way. I started out with two years in a community college, transferred to a state school for my undergraduate degree, and continued on with an MBA. I did this in my early forties, worked the entire time while raising a family and finished with zero debt.

But, again, in your opinion, because it does not fit the socialist Sanders dogma, more right wing drivel.

Congratulations on your personal success! That's great!

However, one anecdotal example is not how public policies that affect millions should be determined. How are the very many other people doing?

[up2u2]

Exactly the world has changed. The opportunities are no longer available.

"Higher education costs in the United States have outgrown the rate of inflation, and getting an MBA has associated tuition expenses along with rent and book costs. MBAs, especially those who go to private business schools, can accumulate between $100,000 - $200, 000 in debt and expenses in just over a two-year period."

You would need a pretty well paying job to afford an MBA and raise a family these days.

As I said Right Wing drivel.

[jetgumd]

True

[SpokaneAl]

Exactly the world has changed. The opportunities are no longer available.

"Higher education costs in the United States have outgrown the rate of inflation, and getting an MBA has associated tuition expenses along with rent and book costs. MBAs, especially those who go to private business schools, can accumulate between $100,000 - $200, 000 in debt and expenses in just over a two-year period."

You would need a pretty well paying job to afford an MBA and raise a family these days.

As I said Right Wing drivel.

So the answer is not to address the costs but simply push those costs on to taxpayers to pay the freight for those who seek to find their bliss in whatever kinds of higher education appeals to them?

[up2u2]

Exactly the world has changed. The opportunities are no longer available.

"Higher education costs in the United States have outgrown the rate of inflation, and getting an MBA has associated tuition expenses along with rent and book costs. MBAs, especially those who go to private business schools, can accumulate between $100,000 - $200, 000 in debt and expenses in just over a two-year period."

You would need a pretty well paying job to afford an MBA and raise a family these days.

As I said Right Wing drivel.

So the answer is not to address the costs but simply push those costs on to taxpayers to pay the freight for those who seek to find their bliss in whatever kinds of higher education appeals to them?

No. That is not how publicly funded tuition for higher education works. Watch a doco called Ivory Tower.

[SpokaneAl]

Here is an interesting profile of those evil, selfish millionaires who have obviously never done anything but take.

http://www.thesimpledollar.com/portrait-of-a-millionaire/