Forum Thread

Sanders is ahead in everything.

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 121 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 .. 9 Next
  • Dutch
    2018-02-09 01:23:18 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote:

    What’s most important is that Democrats pick up seats and win the presidency in 2020.

    To that end, we need candidates that get the base excited and attract people to vote for Democrats. And ideally without the baggage of the neoliberals or a Clinton or a Sanders or a Biden.

    I have said before I think a Tammy Duckworth-Tulsi Gabbard ticket would provide that rockstar level excitement and capitalize on the prevailing atmospherics. And it would bring our factions together without the baggage.

    Carlitos, I agree we need new blood with "brains" and "common sense" who went to "school" ( university or higher) and have "worldwide experience" and is not a "racists" nor being a "white supreme promoter" nor an "evangelical" fanatic.

    Of course the candidate should get the "right" background checks/vetting and not be an "billionaire"(this is asking for corruption) or someone who only "loves" money or "corruption" and cares for an healthy and well educated society as well hates spending money on waste type programs, like "wall's" or "parades" or "military overpriced" junk, as well demands strict budgets for the military with strict account management and of course is not a "warmonger".

    One of the first actions should be getting rid of the "electoral college" as well get all the "donor" money out of the "elections" (only money up to a certain amount to cover well defined cost ) as well forbid the lobbying system.

    However I think none of my "points" will be met or considered; thus the "swamp" is here to stay!!

    Congratulations "Un- United Banana Republic of America"

  • Chet Ruminski
    2018-02-09 02:43:02 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Carlitos Wrote:

    What’s most important is that Democrats pick up seats and win the presidency in 2020.

    To that end, we need candidates that get the base excited and attract people to vote for Democrats. And ideally without the baggage of the neoliberals or a Clinton or a Sanders or a Biden.

    I have said before I think a Tammy Duckworth-Tulsi Gabbard ticket would provide that rockstar level excitement and capitalize on the prevailing atmospherics. And it would bring our factions together without the baggage.

    Carlitos, I agree we need new blood with "brains" and "common sense" who went to "school" ( university or higher) and have "worldwide experience" and is not a "racists" nor being a "white supreme promoter" nor an "evangelical" fanatic.

    Of course the candidate should get the "right" background checks/vetting and not be an "billionaire"(this is asking for corruption) or someone who only "loves" money or "corruption" and cares for an healthy and well educated society as well hates spending money on waste type programs, like "wall's" or "parades" or "military overpriced" junk, as well demands strict budgets for the military with strict account management and of course is not a "warmonger".

    One of the first actions should be getting rid of the "electoral college" as well get all the "donor" money out of the "elections" (only money up to a certain amount to cover well defined cost ) as well forbid the lobbying system.

    However I think none of my "points" will be met or considered; thus the "swamp" is here to stay!!

    Congratulations "Un- United Banana Republic of America"

    It is not just small points you bring up. The country is on the edge of an economic cliff and no comments from any possible Democratic Candidate.
  • Chet Ruminski
    2018-02-09 02:49:14 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Duckworth/Gabbard has the baggage of Gabbard to deal with. She has entertained a little of a lot of bad ideas. I haven't paid much attention to Duckworth. Ill research both of them in the context of 2020. Wonder who will come up with the memorable 2020 sound byte? Could win the election with it.
  • Chet Ruminski
    2018-02-09 10:25:45 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote:

    What’s most important is that Democrats pick up seats and win the presidency in 2020.

    To that end, we need candidates that get the base excited and attract people to vote for Democrats. And ideally without the baggage of the neoliberals or a Clinton or a Sanders or a Biden.

    I have said before I think a Tammy Duckworth-Tulsi Gabbard ticket would provide that rockstar level excitement and capitalize on the prevailing atmospherics. And it would bring our factions together without the baggage.

    About Gabbard :

    Tulsi has been a strong advocate for Wall Street reform, including breaking up the big banks and reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act.

    Tulsi believes Americans should have peace of mind knowing that the health of their mortgage, retirement plan, or even salary isn’t tied to a roll of the dice on Wall Street.

    Duckworth and Gabbard say everything I like. Gabbard called for reinstating Glass/Steagall. Doesn't get any better than that.

  • Chet Ruminski
    2018-02-09 11:33:07 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    "He is a much lesser choice "

    Right now Bernie is ahead in every category including a 75% approval rating.

    I can't find a single poll that shows Bernie with a 75% approval rating. RealClearPolitics has an ongoing list of all of his polls and they range from the high 30's to the low 60's, but none of them come close to 75%.

    Regardless, Bernie has decent poll numbers because people know his name. It the same reason Oprah and Ellen DeGeneres make the top ten of the most admired women in the world. Just because someone has name recognition doesn't mean they would be a good President.

    We have a different system of governance than the vast majority of other Western democracies. A President isn't a Prime Minister who can build a coalition and rule with an iron fist. And America doesn't have a system of governance where a coalition can break apart and spark new elections that might bring in a new Prime Minister who can build a new coalition.

    We can bitch and moan and cry about how stupid/unfair/etc. that is, but the reality is that it's the type of Federal government we have and it's the type of Federal government we're going to continue to have for the foreseeable future.

    That's why I worry about the Bernie or busters out there because they have convinced themselves that one person will somehow magically fix all of their problems. They genuinely don't seem to understand the basic fundamentals of how our government functions under our Constitution and that is a dangerous thing.

    We're witnessing, in real time, what happens when people vote with their hearts and not with their brains.

    Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is also the most popular politician in general, held onto his title with a 75 percent approval rating

    www.newsweek.com/senate-approval-ratings-bernie-sanders-mitch-mcconnell-634882%3famp=1

    Newsweek › senate-approval-rati...

    Jul 11, 2017 · Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is also the most popular politician in general, held onto his title with a 75 percent approval rating ...

    Bernie Sanders has an incredible 75 percent approval rating ...

    IGN.com › ... › Politics and Current Events

    Aug 30, 2017 · In July, a Morning Consult poll found that Sanders was the U.S. Senate's most approved member, with a 75 percent approval rating. And in April of 2016—at the ...

    These Are the Most Popular Senators in America Right Now - Morning Consult

    Morning Consult › july-2017-senator-ran...

    By comparison, over 20 senators saw their net approval rating decrease in the first .... Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) remained the most popular senator in the country, with 75 percent of ...

    Bernie Sanders holds highest approval rating at home, Mitch McConnell is ...

    Salon.com › 2017/07/12 › bernie-sander...

    Jul 12, 2017 · The longest-serving independent in Congressional history holds a 75 percent approval rating among his constituents and only a 21 percent disapproval rating, ...

    Salon - Bernie's approval rating is 75%. | ...

    Facebook › salon › posts

    Bernie's approval rating is 75%. People like Bernie Sanders, hate Mitch McConnell. According to a poll, the top Senate Republican is the least liked, while people are feeling the Bern.

  • Schmidt
    2018-02-10 12:43:08 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Chet -- Sorry you're citing a Morning Consult poll taken from April 1 through June 18 of 2017, and all the 75 percent links you cite tie to that same poll. A more current (and therefore more reliable) CNN poll (Jan 2018) show Sanders with a 57 percent favorability rating which is good, but Joe Biden is slightly better.

    As I said in other posts, Bernie Sanders has not been vetted by Hillary or the Republicans. Actually, he has been vetted by Republicans, but they are sitting on the information which will be released if he becomes the Democratic nominee. Trump would love to run against Bernie...not the good Bernie that we know today, but the one that he'll attack incessantly with all the socialist (dare I say Marxist communist stuff) as well as being labeled a "dead beat dad". Republicans are ruthless and they will crucify Bernie. Believe me!

  • jaredsxtn
    2018-02-10 01:03:58 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    This is why I pull my hair out whenever someone “cites” something without digging deeper. You seem to come to a conclusion and then search for proof after coming to that conclusion, Chet.

    The poll you cited shows a Senators popularity based off what their specific states constituents say. That is far (and I mean FAR) different than their popularity nationwide.

    I absolutely love Senator Wyden, but I have a feeling he doesn’t poll well in Texas or Arkansas. I’m sure Republicans in Texas absolutely love John Cornyn, but he doesn’t poll well in California or Oregon. Polling numbers in one state are worthless.

    Bernie is not the most popular politician in the United States. That is a fact. I hate to break it to you, but the most (current) popular politician in the United States is Donald J. Trump. What Donald probably hates is that his predecessor is far more popular than him.

    Bernie needs to run for governor of Vermont. He’ll be the most popular governor the state has ever had.

    What he won’t be is a popular President and that’s because Presidents don’t get to rule by fiat and his gullible supporters will learn that the hard way if he ever happens to get elected.

  • Carlitos
    2018-02-10 01:50:36 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    It’s weird how you are fixated on assuming his supporters expect a “Sanders dictatorship”.

  • jaredsxtn
    2018-02-10 02:13:02 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote: It’s weird how you are fixated on assuming his supporters expect a “Sanders dictatorship”.

    Sanders basically promised a “Sanders dictatorship” during his 2016 campaign. He convinced his supporters he’d give them free! healthcare and free! college and free! lunch without ever once explaining how he was going to actually follow through on any one of his promises.

    Not just that, but he convinced his die hard supporters that Hillary and Donald were one in the same.

    Sure, Bernie has tapped into the real angst that many Americans are feeling, but he’s using that angst to boost his political profile instead of actually having a real conversation with his supporters about the complexities of life in a modern day economy that is going through rapid technological changes.

  • Carlitos
    2018-02-10 07:09:04 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Carlitos Wrote: It’s weird how you are fixated on assuming his supporters expect a “Sanders dictatorship”.

    Sanders basically promised a “Sanders dictatorship” during his 2016 campaign. He convinced his supporters he’d give them free! healthcare and free! college and free! lunch without ever once explaining how he was going to actually follow through on any one of his promises.

    um....no. He had proposals and legislative sketches. He built in tax increases. He was pretty clear on what his policy preferences would be and that final legislation would be the work of Congress.

    Not just that, but he convinced his die hard supporters that Hillary and Donald were one in the same.

    He campaigned for Hillary.

    Sure, Bernie has tapped into the real angst that many Americans are feeling, but he’s using that angst to boost his political profile instead of actually having a real conversation with his supporters about the complexities of life in a modern day economy that is going through rapid technological changes.

    Are you sure you “like” Sanders?
  • Schmidt
    2018-02-10 09:02:23 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Okay, Jared can reply to Carlitos, but I'll carry on with my theme. First, I consider myself highly qualified on Republican "dirty campaigning" as I have watched their tactics again and again, both in my home state elections and in federal elections. They are professionals at digging out dirt, and where they cannot find it they will make it up, and then repeat the lie or exaggeration again and again and again. That's not just my personal observation. Read books and articles on how authoritarian dictators were able to control the masses. Read article by George Lakoff. Read about the Koch brothers and how they work behind the scenes.

    You have to almost admire how effective their tactics are. Hillary Clinton was polling at 67 percent favorability as Secretary of State, but when the smear campaign started with the rumors she was running for office her popularity started to plummet. In fact I wonder now how much of it was aided by Russian trolls and how much by the Republicans themselves -- and of course Donald Trump and his unorthodox sleaze campaign of lie after lie after lie. It gave rise to a Never Hillary movement of both far right and far left haters of Hillary. On the left it was the Susan Sarandon and her ilk and also Jill Stein (who also visited Russia and sat down at a table with Putin). It gave rise to the Bernie or Busters many of whom voted for Trump and helped elect him. Over 90 percent of that hate was based on lies and outright bullshit. They played to the ignorant, and I know first hand how ignorant people are as I have knocked on over a thousand doors to help sell my various candidates.

    In March of 2016, Steve Almond wrote an article in Salon, Hillary will never survive the Trump onslaught: It's not fair but it makes her a weak nominee. Almond was indeed correct as he cited all the baggage that Hillary had from her past, much of which had been debunked again and again. But the human mind is a fascinating thing how they will cling to a lie long after it has been debunked, and for Hillary's past there was a long list of debunked Republican smears against her that were dusted off and used to change the narrative and image of her. "Crooked Hillary!" Her polls dropped.

    Based on her policies and an impeccable record as senator and secretary of state alone she should have won by a landslide. Trump destroyed her image much the same as he destroyed Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and all the other Republican pretenders. When Carly Fiorina was throwing her name into the ring, Trump cried, "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!'" Very little outrage from the people who now claim the "Me Too Movement." Americans looked away.

    It was a masterful by world's premier con artist. Just look at how he is now craftily turning public opinion on the FBI and Robert Mueller. It's amazing. And it might just work. It scares the shit out of me.

    But getting back to Almond's article in Salon, much of what he said was true. But what he missed is that he too was a victim of propaganda. If he would have applied his exact same line of thinking to Bernie and looked at all of his baggage, he would be able to see dark clouds on the horizon with the Sanders candidacy. Trump and the Republicans would have crucified him, much the same as they did to Hillary. Hillary to her credit didn't use that baggage against him, but Trump and the Republicans have no such scruples. Liberal/progressives who are so intent on applying purity tests to good Democratic candidates should take a hard look at their own messiah, Bernie Sanders. And then ask themselves, what would Trump do with this information?

    I have cited my sources in other posts in this website in the past, and won't repeat them here again lest I be accused of conducting my own smut campaign against Bernie. If Bernie is the nominee, I will knock on doors for him much as I have for every Democrat whether I agree with them or not on every issue of the day. I just wish the far left had felt the same way when it came to Hillary. I met some real Hillary haters out there, and they weren't Republicans. That hate still resides with many in the Our Revolution movement today.

    My opinion based on years of watching what is happening to America. "We have met the enemy and he is us!" -- Pogo

  • Carlitos
    2018-02-10 10:07:04 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Schmidt, for 2020 it would best to “turn the page” and move on with new candidates.

    Sanders is too old and is needed in the Senate and we don’t need the Clinton vs Sanders 2016 drama.

  • Dutch
    2018-02-10 10:32:28 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote:

    Schmidt, for 2020 it would best to “turn the page” and move on with new candidates.

    Sanders is too old and is needed in the Senate and we don’t need the Clinton vs Sanders 2016 drama.

    Carlitos, yes it is as simple as that. Look at my "thread" (above on this subject) what the candidate should have related to "qualities". If I was the Dem's, I would not try a "woman" again. This country is not "ripe" for it because of its "antique evangelical" beliefs and backwards culture.
  • Schmidt
    2018-02-10 10:51:18 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Carlitos -- I wholeheartedly agree. But there is a Bernie Sanders movement out there making noise, but also alive in the 2018 agenda for selecting candidates (Our Revolution). Bernie is still in the news almost daily giving much the same stump speech he gave during the 2016 primaries. And of course there is also a Hillary movement to "relitigate" the election, some of it driven by Hillary herself. So as much as I would like to see Dems move on, it isn't happening.

    For the Dems to beat the Trump/Koch/Mercer/ et al machine -- the Kochtopus, the Russian trolls still active, the corporatists, the Fox News propaganda, and more, they need to unify on a common message. It is perhaps more difficult to unite the left progressives and Democratic Party centrists than it is to unite the Democratic and Republican and Independent centrists. Maybe they'll all come together in the end united by their opposition to the Donald Trump agenda, but to make that happen we need to be smart and appeal to a broader range of the electorate and not just to a certain base.

    I keep monitoring the Our Revolution hand selected candidates for city councils, state offices and such and their success rate is always under 40 percent. And only one win for a House seat at the federal level in 2017. They can certainly win nominations in highly liberal districts and states, but to have a broader appeal they need to think how they might draw in centrists and independents. Their campaign is basically the polar opposite of the Freedom Caucus of the Republicans.

    I want to elect people who are capable of working across the aisle and compromise. With the purity tests we are conducting, we lose out on a lot of good candidates that could get us a majority in the House.

  • Dutch
    2018-02-10 02:46:14 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Carlitos -- I wholeheartedly agree. But there is a Bernie Sanders movement out there making noise, but also alive in the 2018 agenda for selecting candidates (Our Revolution). Bernie is still in the news almost daily giving much the same stump speech he gave during the 2016 primaries. And of course there is also a Hillary movement to "relitigate" the election, some of it driven by Hillary herself. So as much as I would like to see Dems move on, it isn't happening.

    For the Dems to beat the Trump/Koch/Mercer/ et al machine -- the Kochtopus, the Russian trolls still active, the corporatists, the Fox News propaganda, and more, they need to unify on a common message. It is perhaps more difficult to unite the left progressives and Democratic Party centrists than it is to unite the Democratic and Republican and Independent centrists. Maybe they'll all come together in the end united by their opposition to the Donald Trump agenda, but to make that happen we need to be smart and appeal to a broader range of the electorate and not just to a certain base.

    I keep monitoring the Our Revolution hand selected candidates for city councils, state offices and such and their success rate is always under 40 percent. And only one win for a House seat at the federal level in 2017. They can certainly win nominations in highly liberal districts and states, but to have a broader appeal they need to think how they might draw in centrists and independents. Their campaign is basically the polar opposite of the Freedom Caucus of the Republicans.

    I want to elect people who are capable of working across the aisle and compromise. With the purity tests we are conducting, we lose out on a lot of good candidates that could get us a majority in the House.

    Schmidt as always you say it correct. However I saw last night the head of the DNC (Perez) being interviewed by Ari on MSNBC. Ari nailed him. Sorry the Dem's don't have their act together. Having Nancy Pelosi speaking for just about 8 hours does not get any attention. Again the Dem's did bite the dust related to the budget. Likely also with the "dreamers" and "Daca". In the mean time Trump is breaking down the place "brick by brick". I saw Adam Schiff on Bill Maher; he at least understands, but can't do anything at all. Even the Dem's rebuttal on the Nunes "memo" got shoveled by Trump and Schiff can't do a thing about it. Sorry Schmidt, Trump has all the cards; the Dem's are only licking their wounds, but have nothing to show for, let alone an strong campaign message for the 2018 or 2020 elections. In the meantime the "castle" crumbles and like Humpty Dumpty no glue can fix it.

    It is finally time that Jared admits that the "checks and balances" never were there in the first place because of our "wishhy washy" laws. Malcolm Stance said it correct: "oversight" on this Government is gone and thus none existent. Government "rules or "laws" don't count anymore; everything is an "new never seen before event" on which "laws" don't apply or ever were made . An "dictatorship" is in the making. It is clear that even Mueller is powerless; Trump can do as he pleases; no one can touch him; he'll get out from anything as he has learned from the "mob".

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 121 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 .. 9 Next