[Megathread] Bernie Sanders 2016

[Theodarzna]

I think that bridge has been burnt. That's not to say that he can't get her to push for some of his policies. Elizabeth Warren might be an alternative running mate.

- - - Updated - - -



I can guarantee that the GOP would have taken her to the cleaners if there was any proof. Just look at the lengths they went to with Benghazi and the emails. Just because something is "on the web" that doesn't mean that it's true. Hell, I can go an edit Wikipedia right now. I can go and make a movie ripping a politician to shreds and claim that it's true but in reality, I would need to provide real proof if I want it to stick in a court of law. When did it become right to just make baseless accusations and pass them off the truth?

Strategically no, they won't until the DNC has no choice but to run her when they finally anoint her.

[Matchles]

Just on one specific point - Sanders is actually fairly decent at working with others. He has to be, he's been in Senate for how long as in independent? His rhetoric right now runs against that I agree, but generally he actually does cooperate. I think his tone of conquest during this election cycle is unhelpful though and matches some of the poorer qualities of the GOP.

Do you happen to have any article or quotes of coworkers backing that up? I just recall reading this from when the guy first got to Congress followed by the fact that he's gained exactly one endorsement in the body he currently works, from the junior Senator of Oregon.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?n...,3641940&hl=en

When the House Banking Committee approved an amendment to the Banking Reform Act last month dealing with affordable housing, Bernard Sanders took credit.

In a news release and later press conference, Sanders hailed the adoption of the amendment he sponsored as "a victory for creative partnerships aimed at meeting our country's urgent housing needs."

But U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a senior member of the committee, says the proposal nearly died -- solely because it was sponsored by Sanders.

"Frankly, we got it passed in spite of him," he said.

Frank Said Sanders had upset so many committee members with his sweeping speeches against the overall bill and attacking banks as enemies of the people and bankers as crooks that it was difficult to get enough Democratic votes to pass the amendment.

"Even Henry Gonzalez was offended by Bernie's remarks," said Frank.

Gonzalez, a Democrat, is the chairman of the House Banking Committee. Frank called Gonzalez, who was the first Mexican American ever elected to the House, one of the most progressive members in the House, noting that he had introduced impeachment resolutions against both Presidents Reagan and Bush.

"When you provoke Henry Gonzalez to attack you, that is an indication of the problems Bernie provokes," said Frank.

Frank is one of the more liberal members of the House. He was an opponent of the Persian Gulf War and is a strong proponent of civil rights legislation. He said he had been looking forward to Sanders' arrival in Congress, but has been deeply disappointed by Sanders' tactics and style.

"Bernie alienates his natural allies," he said. "He is completely ineffective as a lobbyist because he offends just about everyone."
"His holier-than-thou attitude -- saying in a very loud voice he is smarter than everyone else and purer than everyone else -- really undercuts his effectiveness," said Frank.

"To him, anybody who disagrees with him is a crook; there are no honest disagreements with people. Bernie's view of the world is that the majority of the people agree with him on all the issues and the only reason he does not win is that the Congress is crooked."

[Fugus]

Strategically no, they won't until the DNC has no choice but to run her when they finally anoint her.

That won't happen this election.

As it stands, Trump pretty well has the GOP primary locked down unless they intentionally try to fuck him which commits suicide on the party for a long time to come.

They hope it comes down to Hillary and Trump as they WANT Hillary to win that one. They wouldn't do anything to her on that one to hurt her chances. She is the GOP's safest option at this point as her overall platform leaves their goals relatively untouched while Trump would actually force the public more into demanding change and fixing shit if not outright burning the nation down and forcing a rebuild which would not work well for the GOP in the current climate with what the people are wanting.

This does get more interested in the future though. The push that got Sanders so far started years ago and has been getting stronger each election, it was the push with Ron Paul, it was the push that got Obama elected and it was the push so strong it turned Sanders into a real threat to Hillary that they had to pull every dirty trick they could at both the media and DNC level to keep him at bay. And as the older generation dies off and the newer generation whom actually had to grow up in this economic reality are gaining power, that push will only get stronger and stronger.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly can't help but wonder if the current redistricting the GOP has managed to make their seats safe against the will of the people removing them is what allowed the extremes so much power which is why Trump is killing it on their side while Clinton is taking on the DNC side in those same districts. It drags everything to the right when it comes to voting influence.

[Gray_Matter]

Strategically no, they won't until the DNC has no choice but to run her when they finally anoint her.

If that had that sort of dirt on her then they wouldn't have put so much effort into trying to discredit her with Benghazi and the emails.

- - - Updated - - -

This does get more interested in the future though. The push that got Sanders so far started years ago and has been getting stronger each election, it was the push with Ron Paul, it was the push that got Obama elected and it was the push so strong it turned Sanders into a real threat to Hillary that they had to pull every dirty trick they could at both the media and DNC level to keep him at bay. And as the older generation dies off and the newer generation whom actually had to grow up in this economic reality are gaining power, that push will only get stronger and stronger.

They haven't needed to get up to dirty tricks. The simple fact is that he doesn't have enough support yet. He has well over 2 million votes less than Clinton and the only reason he is still in the race is because of the Caucuses. The Dems have moved left so there is a fair chance that that movement will continue. Perhaps things will be different in the future but it's not realistic to say he lost because of anything other than having less people voting for him.

538 have a breakdown on how the dems have gotten more liberal:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...inate-sanders/

[Fugus]

They haven't needed to get up to dirty tricks. The simple fact is that he doesn't have enough support yet. He has well over 2 million votes less than Clinton and the only reason he is still in the race is because of the Caucuses. The Dems have moved left so there is a fair chance that that movement will continue. Perhaps things will be different in the future but it's not realistic to say he lost because of anything other than having less people voting for him.

538 have a breakdown on how the dems have gotten more liberal:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...inate-sanders/

I didn't say they did something illegal that I know of. I said they did dirty which they did.

On the part of the DNC, they used Super Delegates to make Hillary look like she had some huge lead she didn't actually have to make her look much more electable than she actually was while making him look much less electable than he actually was which has known psychological effects on people to dissuade his supports from voting and try to get many to jump bandwagons to join the winning party. That was plain dirty on the part of the DNC.

Then we had them cut access to his own records and force him to sue to get access back and yes I know about the aid but I also know about other situations surrounding that event as well.

Then we also have something that I haven't been able to verify yet so I can't say much overall but I have heard a little about how the debates themselves and how they tried to limit them and with bad time slots to limit viewership. But like I said, I didn't get too far into reading this one, so you can ignore if you want.

Then when it comes to the media, my dear lord, they treated Sanders like digital-ebola. They had a full media blackout on them as much as they could and when they did mention him, it was typically to belittle him and marginalize his successes or inflate his failures. They did him real dirty.


His lack of media attention and both sides attempting manipulate perception of him against reality cost him tons of support and possibly (probably IMO) cost him this election. Most people still don't know crap about him overall and much of that tends to by lies. Those who vote without researching typically know him as "That guy running against Clinton" or "That guy who wants to raise my taxes to 90%" unless they go online and read on stuff beyond Facebook.

This wasn't even mentioning the debates where he killed her on typically along with the polls about the debates only to have the media many times declare her the winner anyways for those who didn't watch it.

I wasn't saying they outright stole votes, I was saying the did him dirty in ways that kept the majority of public away from him or knowing about him. Unless people wanted to go out of their way to research him, they wouldn't know crap or would mainly know lies.

[Daerio]

I wasn't saying they outright stole votes, I was saying the did him dirty in ways that kept the majority of public away from him or knowing about him. Unless people wanted to go out of their way to research him, they wouldn't know crap or would mainly know lies.

I'm noticing not even a single mention of the mass election fraud that's been going on.

Why bother pretending it was a legitimate election that she won, when the facts illustrate otherwise?

[Baltasar]

Bernie over feminist hillary totally.

[Fugus]

I'm noticing not even a single mention of the mass election fraud that's been going on.

Why bother pretending it was a legitimate election that she won, when the facts illustrate otherwise?

I noticed the election fraud claims, just didn't include them as they are still unverified while the things I posted were pretty well undebatable at this point.

[Daerio]

I noticed the election fraud claims, just didn't include them as they are still unverified while the things I posted were pretty well undebatable at this point.

http://usuncut.com/politics/arizona-...fraud-primary/

Well, there's video evidence such as this which has already been presented; Arizona's Secretary of State on the record about a specific type of election fraud which has effected every state with a closed primary.

What's considered verification, exactly? Does Obama or CNN need to come out and say it's happening for people to believe it? Seems like it's less about what the facts are, and more about who's telling you what to think.

Oh, and that's only one type of election fraud that's been in use this cycle.

[Deleted]

Do you happen to have any article or quotes of coworkers backing that up? I just recall reading this from when the guy first got to Congress followed by the fact that he's gained exactly one endorsement in the body he currently works, from the junior Senator of Oregon.

What the fuck is wrong with you people? Do you actually want to be run by kleptocrat stooges? Of course he gets no endorsements-he's not on the corporate payroll. That is the whole point of him running.

Jesus Christ-do you actually want your government controlled by a small elite of greedy vermin?

[kail]

Little addon for this joke of a race.

https://bgr.com/2016/04/22/hillary-c...ddit-facebook/

Especially loved this part

Correct the Record’s plan, in short, is to flood social media with paid shills and brag about it publicly. This not only further irritates people on social media by spamming them with pro-Hillary messages but it also has the unintended side effect of making your genuine supporters online seem illegitimate. After all, if anyone on Reddit now argues in favor of Hillary Clinton, everyone will naturally question whether they’re for real or just another Correct the Record throwaway account.

[Pterodactylus]

Little addon for this joke of a race.

https://bgr.com/2016/04/22/hillary-c...ddit-facebook/

Especially loved this part

The Sanders' Campaign spent 16 million to do the same thing. Revolution Messaging. Welcome to politics in the 21st century.

[Annoying]

As it stands, Trump pretty well has the GOP primary locked down unless they intentionally try to fuck him which commits suicide on the party for a long time to come.

Ouch, it would seem that this might be the case now:
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36127175

Cruz and Kasich teaming up to try and keep trump from getting enough delegates. Forcing a brokered nomination.

[Daerio]

The Sanders' Campaign spent 16 million to do the same thing. Revolution Messaging. Welcome to politics in the 21st century.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...thank-you.html

After a PAC working with Hillary Clinton's campaign pledged $1 million to "correct" her critics on Facebook and Reddit, the Sanders campaign shut down persistent rumors that their side did the same.

[Caolela]

You realize that you are deep into conspiracy theories here, don't you?

Clinton's shennanigans, lies, warmongering and Wall St. & corporate backers are a matter of record. It's why she's seen by a majority of voters as dishonest and corrupt, and has a 56% negativity rating.

Are you having trouble with your internet that you can't find it, or is it just willful ignorance like I've said already?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm noticing not even a single mention of the mass election fraud that's been going on.

Why bother pretending it was a legitimate election that she won, when the facts illustrate otherwise?

It's been going on for years as I posted earlier. Some operatives got 18 months prison time in connection with the '04 Ohio Bush fiasco, but it still didn't change the election outcome because the Dems didn't pursue it.

As I've said, both major parties do their best to ignore or or cover up election fraud. With widespread electronic voting machines instead of paper ballots, votes are easily hackable.

- - - Updated - - -

An event which galvanized Cuban-Americans towards Bush II in the heart of the precincts which ended up costing Gore the election. Yeah, Gore was a a fuck-up in his campaign, but that's the proximate cause, right there.

It was one of several causes, certainly not the only one. Gore could have lost the Cuban/FL vote and still won in many other ways as I've pointed out, and even though he did lose that constituency, he still actually won FL if the recount had been allowed by the S.C.

[kail]

The Sanders' Campaign spent 16 million to do the same thing. Revolution Messaging. Welcome to politics in the 21st century.

Every campaign spends money on advertising and the Revolution Messaging is employing interns to do just that. They are also not entirely dedicated to Sanders as they have been founded during the Obama campaign. They just decided to support Sanders this campaign. There is a line between advertising and trolling, even if it's a thin one.

Correct The Record's About page:

Correct The Record is a strategic research and rapid response team designed to defend Hillary Clinton from baseless attacks.

And where the $1 Million is being spent: http://correctrecord.org/barrier-bre...ct-the-record/

This campaign is doing more than just supporting Clinton. The Bernie they are designated to hitting Bernie supporters across social media. They will be responding more than just simply posting.

[Matchles]

What the fuck is wrong with you people? Do you actually want to be run by kleptocrat stooges? Of course he gets no endorsements-he's not on the corporate payroll. That is the whole point of him running.

Jesus Christ-do you actually want your government controlled by a small elite of greedy vermin?

Maybe the point is, I actually know some of these people (including the one senator that has endorsed Sanders) you are calling greedy vermin and they are anything but. Your view of the system is perverse and completely divorced from reality.

[InventiveMeasures]

[Pterodactylus]

Every campaign spends money on advertising and the Revolution Messaging is employing interns to do just that. They are also not entirely dedicated to Sanders as they have been founded during the Obama campaign. They just decided to support Sanders this campaign. There is a line between advertising and trolling, even if it's a thin one.

Sanders' Campaign paid them 16 million dollars. They did not "decide" to support Sanders. Again, welcome to politics in the 21st century. The fact that Hillary's PAC is only spending 1 million means she is still behind the times.

2008 people learned the value in big data. 2016 people are learning the value of social media.

[Daerio]

Sanders' Campaign paid them 16 million dollars. They did not "decide" to support Sanders. Again, welcome to politics in the 21st century. The fact that Hillary's PAC is only spending 1 million means she is still behind the times.

2008 people learned the value in big data. 2016 people are learning the value of social media.

Facts? Who needs em, I got an opinion.