Forum Thread

Abandonment of the Middle Class by MSM

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 50 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Chet Ruminski
    2017-07-16 04:39:54 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Abandonment of the Media was evidenced by the media on George Stephanopoulos's show this morning. The entire panel agreed the Democrats had a target rich environment. Then the entire panel agreed the Democrats had nobody to take advantage of the target rich environment. Not one time was Bernie's name mentioned. It was blatantly obvious by the strained effort to talk about the Democrats with a chance to gain and advantage but no leader to lead the charge. The panel as well as others are obvious in their disdain for helping the middle class by totally ignoring Bernie. Bernie would do as well as or better that Trump in working with Congress. And once people realize that Bernie would benefit the entire country he will be a force to deal with. Sanders is the white knight savior for this Country and the world. His plan of fairness will instill another conception of the United States to the world. That of a friend.
  • wwjd
    2017-07-16 10:40:00 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Bernie Sanders still has strong support, and he would get a majority of Trump voters if he were to run for office again. A lot of votes (millions) for Trump were really anti-Clinton votes. I think it safe to conclude that those who did vote for Hillary Clinton would have voted for Sanders.

    In the year 2020, if man is still alive, we shall find a Sander Vs Pence show down. Trump will be out of picture by then, or he will decide not run for a second term. No way does Trump want to waste another 4 years of his life being president. There is 100 other things he'd like to be doing every day that he can't as president. He wants to be hosting "The Apprentice", playing golf, being on Tonight show, having dozen mistresses that are 1 phone call away, having rallies, and so-on.

  • Dockadams
    2017-07-17 03:12:06 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Sanders has one huge problem, he has socialist ideas, mainstream America ain't ready for that, yet. But wait till the GOP begins stripping Medicaid and Medicare and tries to cut SS benefits, Americans will be crying for a Bernie to run again.
  • Dutch
    2017-07-17 08:43:19 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    It is the indoctrination here about socialism what is giving it an bad name. What Bernie proposed is working already in Europe for more than 40 years. We rather stick with an corrupt capitalistic system; results known. In Europe they have therefore decent healthcare for everyone, free schools (until University levels) an progressive sliding scale tax system ( the rich pay up to 70%, the poor max 10%), infrastructure which works, decent minimum wages, hardly any unemployment, an clean environment, even the refugee's get an roof above their heads as well start-up money, plenty of clean energy; no more coal. Due to our capitalistic system we will never achieve the same living standards due to our antique laws in all area's, such as voting, taxes, schools, environment, energy etc.which stops development in kids as well grown-ups. Especially in the "Bibble belts", "Coal belt", "Rust belt", "Slave belt"and an huge "Dumb belt" they don't have "social" money to help these backwards area's due to our government structure as well States structure; it is certainly not an UNITED States. Social services are destroyed one by one, instead of improved, such as the destruction of Planned Parenthood as an example.

    Socialism works for everyone, not solely for the rich as it does here. The difference between socialism and capitalism is as follows: Socialism is for making life better for everyone. Capitalism is solely for money (and who can grab the most of it); not for an better life for everyone.

  • TJ
    2017-07-17 09:42:55 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    We were blessed to have MR. Obama for 8 years. It blew the White southern and plains states minds. We followed with a white woman because "it was her turn". 'murica wasn't ready. Maybe we'll select a gay Mexican woman next because we don't want to flirt with winning. I personally want great opportunity for all people and I voted and hoped for Ms. Clinton. We failed to reach the prize and seem misguided in understanding the country. Yes we got the most votes but don't confuse that with winning. Supreme court, cabinet, and healthcare would be reasonable if we had won. We did not.

  • Dutch
    2017-07-17 02:21:42 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Here is an neat video which could save cost from filthy smoking school buses here:

    https://www.facebook.com/wiggleaustralia/videos/1935975996645857/

  • jaredsxtn
    2017-07-17 02:43:39 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The media certainly has a major role when it comes to educating a country, but sometimes people need to look at themselves in the mirror and ask whether or not they are doing what it takes to make this country a better place.

    More than forty percent of eligible voters didn't bother to vote in the 2016 election and that number skyrockets when it comes to midterm elections. Thirty-six percent of eligible voters turned out in the 2014 midterms.

    Is that the medias fault or the fault of the American voter for being too lazy to vote? You lament the mainstream media for failing to educate a populace, but you also neglect to point out that 10 times as many people tune in to "Dancing With the Stars" than do "Meet the Press" (10.98 million to 1.24 million).

    It doesn't matter what the media says or does as long as ten times as many Americans tune in to variety shows over news shows. And it doesn't matter what the media says or does as long as sixty-four percent of Americans are too lazy to vote in midterm elections.

  • jaredsxtn
    2017-07-17 03:09:17 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Bernie would do as well as or better that Trump in working with Congress.

    How are you so sure of this? Bernie is a registered Independent that caucuses with the Democratic Party.

    He has been in Congress for twenty-six years and has only succeeded at getting a whopping three pieces of his sponsored legislation passed into law and two of those three are renaming post offices in his home state!!

    Please explain to me and everyone else how someone who has been in Congress for twenty-six years and has only managed to get one piece of legislation (that wasn't renaming a post office) passed into law will somehow be able to strong arm Congress to bend to his will?

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: And once people realize that Bernie would benefit the entire country he will be a force to deal with. Sanders is the white knight savior for this Country and the world. His plan of fairness will instill another conception of the United States to the world. That of a friend.

    Goodness gracious man. Get a room.

    The white knight savior?! Someone has drank just a little too much white kool-aid.

    No one man or woman can single-handedly waive a magic wand and rid the country and world of all strife and conflict.

    What do you think the tens of millions of people who vehemently disagree with everything that Bernie Sanders stands for will do if he were somehow elected President? Bend over and worship him because he's your white knight in shining armor? Or do you think it's more likely that they would react in a way that would make their reactions to Obama's Presidency look like child's play?

    Obama was a moderate who actually tried to work with the opposition party and they still made his life a living hell. Have you honestly convinced yourself that the Republicans would simply roll over and play dead if Bernie were somehow elected President?

    This is why I think it's imperative that Americans understand basic civics. The Executive Branch is one third of the Federal Government. The other branches are co-equal branches that provide a check and balance among the other branches.

    Then we get to state and local politics. That's where the vast majority of things that actually affect your day to day life take place. Yet only a tiny fraction of Americans actually participate in state and local elections. Ask anyone who their city councilman, state representative, or state senator is and I'll wager that 95% or more of respondents will give you a blank stare.

    Donald's day to day actions are fodder for late-night comedians, but they pale in comparison to the decisions made by local school boards, your city council, and your state government.

  • Chet Ruminski
    2017-07-17 07:18:50 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    MSM is getting worse. Tonight ABC referred to the Republican Health Care Bill as overhauling Obamacare. That is at the least an unbelievable attempt to soften the perception of the Kill Bill. It can't possibly be called an oversight because the Republican opposition has never said anything about Obamacare other than repeal it. MSN. Are they starting to worry about the danger of disrespecting a billionaire. Just another example of how bad privatizing for profit has no redeeming value other than profit.
  • Chet Ruminski
    2017-07-17 07:25:02 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    jaredsxtn said: "Please explain to me and everyone else how someone who has been in Congress for twenty-six years and has only managed to get one piece of legislation (that wasn't renaming a post office) passed into law will somehow be able to strong arm Congress to bend to his will?"

    I have a better one than that. Explain to me how a self avowed socialist reached national prominence and in spite of all opposition is still viable.

  • TJ
    2017-07-17 07:39:16 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I loved Bernie the man but not candidate. He wanted to provide all w/o any explanation of how it was paid for. I hope he is well enough to run in '20 but chooses more wisely. In early '21 a cabinet position.
  • jaredsxtn
    2017-07-17 08:27:47 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: I have a better one than that. Explain to me how a self avowed socialist reached national prominence and in spite of all opposition is still viable.

    Who's saying he's still viable?

    And it's quite easy to explain Bernie's rise to prominence in the 2016 campaign. Multiple Democrats, myself included, weren't terribly happy with the junior varsity individuals who tried to take on Secretary Clinton in the primary. Just because I wound up supporting her in the election didn't mean that I wanted to give her a free pass. The best way to vet a candidate is to make it difficult for them to win the primary.

    Republicans Jim Chaffee and Jim Webb and a governor from a deeply blue state named Martin O'Malley were her only other challengers. Is it of any surprise that a little known Independent Senator who caucuses with the Democrats was able to give her somewhat of a challenge. And I italicize somewhat because because 3,708,294 more Democrats voted for Secretary Clinton in the primary than they did for Senator Sanders.

    I'm not sure if you understand math, so let me put this a different way - 16,914,722 >13,206,428. Oh, and 65,853,516 > 62,984,825.

  • Chet Ruminski
    2017-07-17 10:36:50 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "I'm not sure if you understand math"

    I can solve hyperbolic paraboloid equations in my head, do you understand what that means. What you don't understand is that he made gains when he shouldn't have lasted a week. He took a chance but his recognizing the plight of the working class was recognized by them. He and they are not going away. Just because people don't take the time to dissect and explain the errors in your ways doesn't mean anything other than people don't take the time to explain everything to you. You have a forum in this forum, that means you have a place to express yourself, that's all it means. You totally miss the importance of a good quality of life being deserved by everybody. That doesn't mean to just give it to them which is your first knee jerk critical reaction. It means just make it a level playing field and make equal opportunity mean something. Supply and demand are not social solutions and it doesn't solve social problems. The quality of life for a majority of people has deteriorated in this country over the last thirty years while it has been improving for similar countries worldwide. I told you that Trump had a good chance of getting elected almost two years ago because he recognized worsening conditions and he used that for his platform. The problem is he has no concern for quality of life for the majority other than to use it as his campaign theme. He won when he shouldn't have and that was part of his winning. Continuing on with an incremental approach to solving problems will do nothing but let the conditions in this country continue to deteriorate. Neglecting Sanders will let the choice become between conservative and far right conservative. Which means austerity and further degrading of the quality of life for the working class in the USA. Crime and violence are growing and their are no countering influences.

  • Dockadams
    2017-07-18 08:25:34 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote: I loved Bernie the man but not candidate. He wanted to provide all w/o any explanation of how it was paid for. I hope he well enough to run in '20 but chooses more wisely. In early '21 a cabinet position.

    In Bernie's head, he would have the top 1% pay more in taxes, how to fund his socialist ideas, simple isn't it?

    The republicans on the other hand want to give tax breaks to the top 1% or the ultra wealthy, and make the poor and middle class pay more of their trickle down agenda. Just because a wealthy entity receives a tax break doesn't mean it'll trickle down to the lower class of people, this was disproven many times in the past. Some call it balancing their budget on the backs of poor and middle class or income Americans. We don't want that, do we?

    I don't see Sanders as being the white knight, he didn't have much appeal to voters of color, Latinos and black Americans. Had his appeal been greater to these demographics, he may have had a chance, as it stands, Obama got blacks to get out and vote, it was a movement, but as it turned out, Obama some say turned his back on black voters, they expected more of him.

    Clinton wasn't appealing enough to black voters either.

    I watch liberal media (back on topic) like NBC, ABC, PBS, and it seems they're more focused on bringing this presidency to an end, and not focusing at all on what democrats can bring to the table for 2018 and 2020. If anyone watches FOX, they're always presenting republican politicians in a positive manner, about how great they're going to make things for Americans, I'm still waiting for that to happen. Conservative media is always trying to drag liberals through the mud by saying how much money and jobs we're costing the government and republican voters.

  • Dutch
    2017-07-18 08:48:33 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Jared does not seem to realize that our system is at fault; voters stay home because their vote does not count; the "electoral college" did wipe out their votes. Also as an "independent", I was not allowed to vote in the "primaries", which is again voter discrimination. On top of that the voter suppression as well gerrymandering and relocation of voting booths, so minorities without transportation, can't vote etc. Also the manipulation on the voter "forms" by printing the GOP candidates first as well "legally written amendments which no one understands and makes voting time consuming, so less voters will be processed in the time the precinct is open. In this backwards country they make sure that there is no good public transportation in the "middle and lower part" of this country; which helps as well to get low voter turnout. Furthermore (as Trump noticed) use the "churches" as well, to promote the GOP "holy" cause.

    Thus it is not Bernie's or Hillary's fault; it is the fault of the "system" as well the manipulation in the system which does affect voter turnout.

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 50 1 2 3 4 Next