[Megathread] Bernie Sanders 2016

[Caolela]

It's a measure of just how far the country has fallen when you have the Fox News of newspapers, the Washington Post, supporting a so-called "Democrat" over their own party's front-runner.

And you thought pigs didn't fly and King Kong is a monkey.

[infinitemeridian]

Not taking Trump seriously is probably the single biggest thing that caused the GOP to lose to him. You honestly think general election voters don't have amnesia and Trump isn't going to pivot even more than Hillary? Sorry, but she better take him as a serious candidate or she will also lose and the only people shocked will be Hillary supporters and the main stream media.


Lets also forget the fact she is the most unliked candidate in the history of the democratic race before a general election and she has more dirty laundry that still needs to be aired out.

First of all, I was never arguing that she shouldn't or won't take him seriously. She had better take him seriously. That being said, given her current trajectory, Trump's public persona, and past elections, she SHOULD theoretically have it in the bag.

She may be the most unliked candidate (source?), but that doesn't mean people like Trump over her. She polls better than him on average and he is too divisive.

[Mavick]

First of all, you have 4 times as many posts as me. I'm not choosing Clinton because she's the "less of two evils" but rather that one is evil and the other isn't, and nobody has given any solid, concrete evidence to the contrary. Of course I don't take those things at face value, she's a politician in the end. But so is Sanders, so the same argument applies to her.

I'm basing my arguments on those positions, because at the end of the day, they ARE relevant, and have NOT been contradicted by anything she's said in this campaign that I can tell.

You're the one who is saying we should just believe you that she is corrupt and a "flip-flopper" who only cares about power. The burden of proof is on you my friend. You make the claims, you back them up. She's winning this election, whether you like it or not. You're not doing yourself, or any of the people who think similar to you, any favors by refusing to actually argue the case here. The Hillary camp doesn't have to prove shit to you guys, because they don't need you. They know that nothing they say will be good enough, that all the facts in the world can't change your opinions on things. They've moved on. And so has the public that rejects your point of view, otherwise it would be ME on your side trying to argue as to why Hillary is better than Sanders or why Sanders is a bad choice to begin with.

- - - Updated - - -



Refer back a couple of pages to Skroe's post from the WashPost about how easy it will be for Clinton to beat Trump. He has no chance. And she has a better chance than Sanders anyways, seeing as the GOP machine has largely ignored him because they don't deem him as a threat.

Any polls comparing Sanders vs. Trump are premature at this point. They've been attacking Hillary for years, as has the Sanders camp for a year now, and she's STILL winning. I can't really offer the same opinion about Sanders.

Oh my, the Washington Post and some random scrub on MMO Champion said it, so it must be true.

And by your poll logic, the same would apply to Hillary as well, which she only marginally does better than Trump in to start with.

But keep fighting the good fight cupcake.

[infinitemeridian]

It's a measure of just how far the country has fallen when you have the Fox News of newspapers, the Washington Post, supporting a so-called "Democrat" over their own party's front-runner.

And you thought pigs didn't fly and King Kong is a monkey.

So do you want Trump to win over Hillary then?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh my, the Washington Post and some random scrub on MMO Champion said it, so it must be true.

And by your poll logic, the same would apply to Hillary as well, which she only marginally does better than Trump in to start with.

But keep fighting the good fight cupcake.

She does marginally better AFTER THE FACT of all the attacks against her from the GOP AND Sanders. Sanders doesn't have that luxury. He's remained relatively unscathed by the GOP machine this whole cycle, because they have recognized that he won't be the nominee. You can bet that they would certainly like him to be.

Oh, so some random person on mmo-champion calls Hillary a warhawk and corrupt, must be true huh? Would it be more valid if I posted an article from Uncut or reddit sfp?

[Caolela]

So do you want Trump to win over Hillary then?

I think we should write-in 3rd-party candidates. Better than voting for Daffy Duck or Spongebob.

Edit - with many states/localities using e-voting machines, write-ins are not possible, and as has been shown in this thread several times there is election fraud in many districts going back at least to Shrub & Darth.

Good luck.

[Mavick]

So do you want Trump to win over Hillary then?

- - - Updated - - -



She does marginally better AFTER THE FACT of all the attacks against her from the GOP AND Sanders. Sanders doesn't have that luxury. He's remained relatively unscathed by the GOP machine this whole cycle, because they have recognized that he won't be the nominee. You can bet that they would certainly like him to be.

Oh, so some random person on mmo-champion calls Hillary a warhawk and corrupt, must be true huh? Would it be more valid if I posted an article from Uncut or reddit sfp?

She does marginally better without accounting of where the field stands out now with no Cruz/Kasich and accounting for who Sander's supporter would vote for. Think about what you're saying. The largest voting bloc in this country is Independent, and she is demonstrably bad at getting those votes.

In the end, one of us "random scrubs" are right and one's wrong. Can't wait for you to find out come November, for I will be spamming many "LOLOLOLOLOL's"

[Daerio]

This has certainly been THE election cycle for lulzing at establishment assumptions. Stay tuned for more.

[Matchles]

It's not at all similar when it comes to funding, and to consider it so is incredibly dense.

And don't even try to compare my views on health insurance. You might want to remember I'm for the guy who wants guaranteed, no deductible insurance for everyone that would actually lower the cost everyone is paying compared to now. You're the boneheads who somehow think we can continue on with this bastardized half-measure that half the country (last time I looked) still hates.

That doesn't explain how they won't support it. You really think a $15 billion is too large a price tag to implement Trump's main issue? Jesus, we've spent well over a trillion on Bush's wars.

I'm for universal coverage too. I just don't want to deal with the economic fallout of blowing up the insurance industry to do it. Are you going to be the one to tell the 2 million or so that work in insurance billing and for the industry that they are out of a job? You really have to think a bit broader about this. There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy and job market.

- - - Updated - - -

I think we should write-in 3rd-party candidates. Better than voting for Daffy Duck or Spongebob.

Edit - with many states/localities using e-voting machines, write-ins are not possible, and as has been shown in this thread several times there is election fraud in many districts going back at least to Shrub & Darth.

Good luck.

And say you managed to get a viable 3rd party candidate. You would be guaranteeing that the House picks the next president.

[Pterodactylus]

You really believe Sanders hasn't been attacked, misquoted, and lied about by the GOP?

Nothing even close to the level of which Hillary has been attacked, and for the most part - he has been completely ignored by the republican attack machine this election cycle - and will continue to be since he won't be the nominee. That being said, there is only one group of people that have lower numbers than an atheist when asked "Would you vote for a ____________ for President?" and that's socialist.

Of course, either Sanders or Clinton will easily beat TRUMP.

[Mavick]

That doesn't explain how they won't support it. You really think a $15 billion is too large a price tag to implement Trump's main issue? Jesus, we've spent well over a trillion on Bush's wars.

Yes, I do, considering they've already said they won't support it. And comparing funding for a wall to a war is not an actual comparison, merely you stretching as far as you can to make a failed point. The war had major support in Congress at the time (including from your beloved flip-flopper), this does not.

I'm for universal coverage too. I just don't want to deal with the economic fallout of blowing up the insurance industry to do it. Are you going to be the one to tell the 2 million or so that work in insurance billing and for the industry that they are out of a job? You really have to think a bit broader about this. There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy and job market.

You have no idea what, if any, fallout there would be, nor would you be likely to deal with any of it if it occurs. You're merely adopting all the ignorant talking heads views that "x happens if we try", while ignoring the plentiful sources of how to do it right that exists around the world. Will I shed a tear for the insurance industry that basically exists to take our money then make it as hard as they can for us to claim? Not a fucking chance.

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing even close to the level of which Hillary has been attacked, and for the most part - he has been completely ignored by the republican attack machine this election cycle - and will continue to be since he won't be the nominee. That being said, there is only one group of people that have lower numbers than an atheist when asked "Would you vote for a ____________ for President?" and that's socialist.

Of course, either Sanders or Clinton will easily beat TRUMP.

For a bit of perspective, but he also hasn't brought it upon himself nearly as much as she has, either. I think his main point was that people have indeed tried and about as much as they can come up with is "uhh, socialist?". With Hillary it's basically playing spin the wheel, "I'll take Clinton Foundation for 1500".

And btw, your poll is from June of last year, I'd like to see updated numbers on that now that people actually have a fucking clue who Bernie is and what his platform is.

[Pterodactylus]

You really have to think a bit broader about this. There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy and job market.

The public option - which was killed because at about 17% of our economy, the healthcare lobbyist did everything they could to kill it. Crazy all these Bernie folks think he can single-handedly deliver the utopia, when all the power in our government is in Congress. Folks need to understand that "feel the Bern" will take a generation to come to fruition - with lots of hard work, and constant civic participation. Of course, this is the entitled "I want it now" generation we are talking about.

- - - Updated - - -

For a bit of perspective, but he also hasn't brought it upon himself nearly as much as she has, either. I think his main point was that people have indeed tried and about as much as they can come up with is "uhh, socialist?". With Hillary it's basically playing spin the wheel, "I'll take Clinton Foundation for 1500".

He is a pretty low-key senator from the 2nd least populous state in the union - not quite the same level of profile in his career.

[Mavick]

The public option - which was killed because at about 17% of our economy, the healthcare lobbyist did everything they could to kill it. Crazy all these Bernie folks think he can single-handedly deliver the utopia, when all the power in our government is in Congress. Folks need to understand that "feel the Bern" will take a generation to come to fruition - with lots of hard work, and constant civic participation. Of course, this is the entitled "I want it now" generation we are talking about.

- - - Updated - - -



He is a pretty low-key senator from the 2nd least populous state in the union - not quite the same level of profile in his career.

Or another way of saying it is - not quite the same level of political, deceitful bullshit.

[infinitemeridian]

Or another way of saying it is - not quite the same level of political, deceitful bullshit.

Proof? You just took what he said and misconstrued the whole thing without any reasoning other than politicians (which Bernie has been is whole life) = bad.

You people are like broken records.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I do, considering they've already said they won't support it. And comparing funding for a wall to a war is not an actual comparison, merely you stretching as far as you can to make a failed point. The war had major support in Congress at the time (including from your beloved flip-flopper), this does not.

Oh, so we're going to take congress's word for it that they won't do something, but we won't take Hillary's, even though many in Congress and Hillary both voted for the Iraq war?

If you're going to criticize Clinton, at least hold the same standards to the rest of your arguments.

[Daerio]

I'm for universal coverage too. I just don't want to deal with the economic fallout of blowing up the insurance industry to do it. Are you going to be the one to tell the 2 million or so that work in insurance billing and for the industry that they are out of a job? You really have to think a bit broader about this. There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy and job market.

Sounds like the first place we should be making cuts to health care costs.

If your argument is we shouldn't fix health care because it will hurt health insurance companies, fuck you. You must be employed by a health insurance company. And you must think you won't be needing health care one day.

[Pterodactylus]

Or another way of saying it is - not quite the same level of political, deceitful bullshit.

Sure guy, if you need to simplify the world in order to grasp it.

[Mavick]

Proof? You just took what he said and misconstrued the whole thing without any reasoning other than politicians (which Bernie has been is whole life) = bad.

You people are like broken records.

- - - Updated - - -

Proof of what? That's he's not a dishonest piece of shit like Hillary? I'm not even going to bother since there's plenty of proof of that already laid down in this thread and pretty much anywhere you want to bother looking. And I never said all politicians = bad, it was part of a phrase that included deceitful, so gtfo with that nonsense.

Oh, so we're going to take congress's word for it that they won't do something, but we won't take Hillary's, even though many in Congress and Hillary both voted for the Iraq war?

If you're going to criticize Clinton, at least hold the same standards to the rest of your arguments.

Hillary's word on what? WTF are you even talking about here?

But there is a current congressman running who DID NOT vote for the Iraq war.........

- - - Updated - - -

Sure guy, if you need to simplify the world in order to grasp it.

I just don't need to complicate it to justify my decision making process.

[Matchles]

Sounds like the first place we should be making cuts to health care costs.

If your argument is we shouldn't fix health care because it will hurt health insurance companies, fuck you. You must be employed by a health insurance company.

How about you read it a little more closely. "I'm for universal coverage too." "There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy."

The easiest way would be to reintroduce the public option or non-profits in the markets. If the government can provide a better alternative than private insurers, people will switch and the private insurers will change or eventually drift away. You get the same effect without the immediate shock to the economy. There are also tons of ways to introduce cost saving measures without slashing reimbursements like single-payer would.

No, I am not employed by the health insurance industry. I just happen to give a shit about those who are. It is pretty interesting to claim the moral high road while shitting on millions of workers.

- - - Updated - - -

Hillary's word on what? WTF are you even talking about here?

But there is a current congressman running who DID NOT vote for the Iraq war.........

A number of Sanders supporters haven't gotten the memo that voters don't really give two shits about the Iraq War anymore. Sanders is nearly a decade too late to run on this as an issue. It is also pathetic how this is being used as evidence that Clinton is some war hawk. Hell at the time she cast her vote she said.

My vote is not a vote for any new doctrine of preemption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose, all of which carry grave dangers for our Nation, the rule of international law, and the peace and security of people throughout the world.

[Mavick]

How about you read it a little more closely. "I'm for universal coverage too." "There are ways to get the government involved in providing medical insurance without tanking the economy."

The easiest way would be to reintroduce the public option or non-profits in the markets. If the government can provide a better alternative than private insurers, people will switch and the private insurers will change or eventually drift away. You get the same effect without the immediate shock to the economy. There are also tons of ways to introduce cost saving measures without slashing reimbursements like single-payer would.

No, I am not employed by the health insurance industry. I just happen to give a shit about those who are. It is pretty interesting to claim the moral high road while shitting on millions of workers.

- - - Updated - - -



A number of Sanders supporters haven't gotten the memo that voters don't really give two shits about the Iraq War anymore. Sanders is nearly a decade too late to run on this as an issue. It is also pathetic how this is being used as evidence that Clinton is some war hawk. Hell at the time she cast her vote she said.

Yeah you left out the rest of that, that it was a vote to put awesome power in the hands of George W. Bush on good faith. Maybe the people, like yourself, don't give two shits about the Iraq war anymore out of convenience to your candidate. But I'd be willing to wager there's a fair amount of people out there, both who were directly effected by it and not, who still care about it at least a little bit.

[Daerio]

I'm pretty sure there isn't an issue that Clinton voters do care about, so you can just throw the Iraq war on top of that pile.

Non-issues are what they seem to care about, like having our first woman president. How progressive.

[Caolela]

And say you managed to get a viable 3rd party candidate. You would be guaranteeing that the House picks the next president.

That's contradictory, since if a 3rd party candidate won the election it would obviate the need for Congressional involvement.