CNN releases audio between Warren and Sanders

[Endus]

We've had this discussion on multiple occasions... it is my money. The money you earn is your money.

It's your money when you earn it, but that does not mean you might not then owe it to others. Whether that's paying off debts or taxes is irrelevant; you have to pay those whom you owe. Because that money is their money, legally speaking. Which is why, push comes to legal shove, the courts will force you to hand it over. Because it belongs to those others, not you, because there are additional transactions that occur after you get paid.

You keep acting like the transaction where you were paid is the last transaction, and that you cannot owe money to anyone, and that's nonsense.

People do vote in their own self interest, and in this case, they are voting to have the government take more and more of other people's money to pay for the shit that they want. That's exactly why I oppose people like Bernie.

That's literally what taxes are.

"Taxation is theft" is a willfully ignorant maxim that's only pushed by ridiculous people. And that's what you're stooping to, here.

I want you to be able to keep YOUR MONEY. You are the selfish one in this equation.

Again, see above. It stops being "your money" when you owe it to someone else. Like, owed taxes. Then it's the government's money, and you're trying to hold onto it unlawfully.

As I said; you're arguing that you should have more money, and you're perfectly willing to see other people suffer hardship so that you can achieve that. And I'm the selfish one? You're out to fucking lunch, dude. You're the one arguing that you should take more at the expense of others, not me.

[Machismo]

It's your money when you earn it, but that does not mean you might not then owe it to others. Whether that's paying off debts or taxes is irrelevant; you have to pay those whom you owe. Because that money is their money, legally speaking. Which is why, push comes to legal shove, the courts will force you to hand it over. Because it belongs to those others, not you, because there are additional transactions that occur after you get paid.

You keep acting like the transaction where you were paid is the last transaction, and that you cannot owe money to anyone, and that's nonsense.



That's literally what taxes are.

"Taxation is theft" is a willfully ignorant maxim that's only pushed by ridiculous people. And that's what you're stooping to, here.



Again, see above. It stops being "your money" when you owe it to someone else. Like, owed taxes. Then it's the government's money, and you're trying to hold onto it unlawfully.

As I said; you're arguing that you should have more money, and you're perfectly willing to see other people suffer hardship so that you can achieve that. And I'm the selfish one? You're out to fucking lunch, dude. You're the one arguing that you should take more at the expense of others, not me.

Great, then reduce what is forcibly owed to the government via taxation. You seem to be outraged at the thought of wanting lower taxes, lower spending, and not supporting Bernie and his socialist policies. I don't want people like you to spend my children, and eventual grandchildren into financial ruin against their will.

So, you feel free to let me know when Bernie can balance a budget, then we'll talk.

[Endus]

Great, then reduce what is forcibly owed to the government via taxation. You seem to be outraged at the thought of wanting lower taxes, lower spending, and not supporting Bernie and his socialist policies. I don't want people like you to spend my children, and eventual grandchildren into financial ruin against their will.

So, you feel free to let me know when Bernie can balance a budget, then we'll talk.

Bernie wouldn't be the one balancing any budget, to begin with, since that's Congress' job, not the President's.

What I'm "outraged" at is your refusal to admit that you want more personal gain, and are willing to see other people suffer hardship to get it. Hardship you're not in danger of suffering, because your income is already well above that level, if you're being taxed that significantly. You're arguing for more human suffering among the working class, so the upper middle class and above can have even better lives.

Yes, that's outrageous. That's the bugaboo behind all this "lower taxes" stuff. You act like it's for everyone's benefit, but it's only to the benefit of the wealthy. And at the expense of the poor.

[Machismo]

Bernie wouldn't be the one balancing any budget, to begin with, since that's Congress' job, not the President's.

What I'm "outraged" at is your refusal to admit that you want more personal gain, and are willing to see other people suffer hardship to get it. Hardship you're not in danger of suffering, because your income is already well above that level, if you're being taxed that significantly. You're arguing for more human suffering among the working class, so the upper middle class and above can have even better lives.

Yes, that's outrageous. That's the bugaboo behind all this "lower taxes" stuff. You act like it's for everyone's benefit, but it's only to the benefit of the wealthy. And at the expense of the poor.

Don't pretend as if a President doesn't have any sway in spending.

I have made it quite clear, I want less government, less taxation. You are the one trying to paint me as selfish, and I dont much care that I'm not saying what you want me to say. I'm not here to answer for your straw men.

[Sorshen]

This thread has been derailed, and it's partly my fault... but it does not matter if Machismo opposes Bernie's policy, because this is about Warren vs. Bernie policy and how that will play into picking the person running against Trump.

[Machismo]

This thread has been derailed, and it's partly my fault... but it does not matter if Machismo opposes Bernie's policy, because this is about Warren vs. Bernie policy and how that will play into picking the person running against Trump.

Or, the frontrunner... Biden.

The row between Sanders and Warren was almost nothing at all.

[Jehct]

Hey man. Ill have you know I'm supporting Bernie. Just gave him 7 dollars and 50 cents last night. Warren can go fuck herself for what she did with CNN. Trump is going down and the emperor doesnt have any clothes.

So Warren is the liar here? I'm gonna go ahead and believe her side of the story.

[GreenJesus]

So Warren is the liar here? I'm gonna go ahead and believe her side of the story.

Believe her side of the story? So you are saying that this private conversation that happened in 2018 was leaked to CNN the day before a CNN debate with a couple weeks before the first primary vote in Iowa seems legit? Bernie and Warren being buddy buddy all this time since then? Bernie was the one that pushed her to run for president in 2016 in the first place. He lost to Hillary in the primary in 2016. He has said a woman could win 30 years ago... All of this lines up well with the the theory that someone on her campaign leaked this "story" to CNN because she was falling in the polls to drum up drama. And then Warren had a mic set up by CNN so she could run over to Sanders on stage after the debate and say "Are you calling me a liar on national TV?". It's such obvious collusion between CNN and Warren. With everything Bernie has stood for and said in public it's incredibly hard to believe he would say that to Warren. Even if he did say something in private, she is probably taking it way out of context. She wasn't even confirming or denying it really. She is just taking advantage of the situation.

[JohnBrown1917]

So Warren is the liar here? I'm gonna go ahead and believe her side of the story.

If all we have is her word.. then yeah, she lied. Sanders was already talking about Female presidents in the '80s. Back when Warren was still a GOP member.

[Elegiac]

If all we have is her word.. then yeah, she lied. Sanders was already talking about Female presidents in the '80s. Back when Warren was still a GOP member.

We only have Sanders' word too.

And congrats, being a brocialist for forty years doesn't mean you didn't say that you don't think women are electable in 2020.

[Jehct]

Believe her side of the story? So you are saying that this private conversation that happened in 2018 was leaked to CNN the day before a CNN debate with a couple weeks before the first primary vote in Iowa seems legit? Bernie and Warren being buddy buddy all this time since then? Bernie was the one that pushed her to run for president in 2016 in the first place. He lost to Hillary in the primary in 2016. He has said a woman could win 30 years ago... All of this lines up well with the the theory that someone on her campaign leaked this "story" to CNN because she was falling in the polls to drum up drama. And then Warren had a mic set up by CNN so she could run over to Sanders on stage after the debate and say "Are you calling me a liar on national TV?". It's such obvious collusion between CNN and Warren. With everything Bernie has stood for and said in public it's incredibly hard to believe he would say that to Warren. Even if he did say something in private, she is probably taking it way out of context. She wasn't even confirming or denying it really. She is just taking advantage of the situation.

If all we have is her word.. then yeah, she lied. Sanders was already talking about Female presidents in the '80s. Back when Warren was still a GOP member.

Sure him saying that stuff back in the day and with Hilary was nice. But you and I are basically going with each of their word. But you are basically saying there is no way he could have ever said that even just to jab at her because he said back in the day and with Hilary that he supports women being president. They are political opponents. It's absolutely possible. It's weird that people still have a hard time believing women.

[JohnBrown1917]

Sure him saying that stuff back in the day and with Hilary was nice. But you and I are basically going with each of their word. But you are basically saying there is no way he could have ever said that even just to jab at her because he said back in the day and with Hilary that he supports women being president. They are political opponents. It's absolutely possible. It's weird that people still have a hard time believing women.

Yet it would make no sense for him to have said that, why are you blindly believing Warren, she made the claim.


And don't try to bring #metoo into this, that is just sad.

[Elegiac]

Yet it would make no sense for him to have said that, why are you blindly believing Warren, she made the claim.

And don't try to bring #metoo into this, that is just sad.

I dunno. Not like the Sanders campaign has historically had a problem with women or anything.

[JohnBrown1917]

We only have Sanders' word too.

And congrats, being a brocialist for forty years doesn't mean you didn't say that you don't think women are electable in 2020.

Warren is the one who made the claim, she needs to back it up. And brosocialism is such a tired smear. You just try to do anything at all, even if it makes no sense, to make Sanders seem sexist.


Its pathetic.

- - - Updated - - -

I dunno. Not like the Sanders campaign has historically had a problem with women or anything.

Sanders himself? No, not really.
Are you going to pull something out of your ass again?

But hey, the centre and right-wing will think up anything to prevent a centre-left president in the US, I suppose. Can't have that.

[Elegiac]

Warren is the one who made the claim, she needs to back it up. And brosocialism is such a tired smear. You just try to do anything at all, even if it makes no sense, to make Sanders seem sexist.

Its pathetic.

Ah, no.

I did not in fact say Sanders was sexist, at any point.

What I said was it's entirely feasible for him to have said to her that he doesn't think women are electable in 2020, something that people in the Democratic Party are still saying, mind you.

Just fyi, there's another candidate whose followers can't take any criticism of their dear leader and respond to any allegations of questionable conduct by dismissing it out of hand.

[GreenJesus]

Ah, no.

I did not in fact say Sanders was sexist, at any point.

What I said was it's entirely feasible for him to have said to her that he doesn't think women are electable in 2020, something that people in the Democratic Party are still saying, mind you.

Just fyi, there's another candidate whose followers can't take any criticism of their dear leader and respond to any allegations of questionable conduct by dismissing it out of hand.

What is funny is that back in 2016 democrats were talking about how hard it is for a women to win the presidency in America. Would it have been racist to say "I don't think it's currently possible for a black man to win the presidency" back in 2011? By saying that you are recognizing that there is racism in the country. I just don't even see the point of this controversy in the first place besides CNN wanting ratings for their debate.

[Elegiac]

What is funny is that back in 2016 democrats were talking about how hard it is for a women to win the presidency in America. Would it have been racist to say "I don't think it's currently possible for a black man to win the presidency" back in 2011?

Yet again, y'all continue to demonstrate you clearly have no recollection of the 2008 primary in which race was a contentious issue.

[eschatological]

Believe her side of the story? So you are saying that this private conversation that happened in 2018 was leaked to CNN the day before a CNN debate with a couple weeks before the first primary vote in Iowa seems legit? Bernie and Warren being buddy buddy all this time since then? Bernie was the one that pushed her to run for president in 2016 in the first place. He lost to Hillary in the primary in 2016. He has said a woman could win 30 years ago... All of this lines up well with the the theory that someone on her campaign leaked this "story" to CNN because she was falling in the polls to drum up drama. And then Warren had a mic set up by CNN so she could run over to Sanders on stage after the debate and say "Are you calling me a liar on national TV?". It's such obvious collusion between CNN and Warren. With everything Bernie has stood for and said in public it's incredibly hard to believe he would say that to Warren. Even if he did say something in private, she is probably taking it way out of context. She wasn't even confirming or denying it really. She is just taking advantage of the situation.

A follow-up article said that she told the comments to reporters on an off-the-record dinner with journalists, A YEAR AGO, IE, shortly after the actual event.

It seems like Warren got over it, but the media locked-and-loaded it for right before the CNN debate and the upcoming primaries.


And once again, the recounting has NEVER been that Bernie is misogynist or thinks women can't be President. Her side of the story is literally that Bernie said, "A woman can't win in 2020 against Trump." Guess what, Bernie's side itself says he said something similar, that "Trump would weaponize" a woman candidate's female side, and that would hurt...but not necessarily that a woman *can't* win.

Oh, and guess what Bernie's campaign is doing tonight, on the eve of the impeachment trial? EMailing his supporters that "Joe Biden has a corruption problem," when the whole impeachment trial is based around a call which the President claims is "perfect" because he has a legitimate reason to look into Biden's corruption. Good stuff, that.

[Gestopft]

Oh, and guess what Bernie's campaign is doing tonight, on the eve of the impeachment trial? EMailing his supporters that "Joe Biden has a corruption problem," when the whole impeachment trial is based around a call which the President claims is "perfect" because he has a legitimate reason to look into Biden's corruption. Good stuff, that.

Biden does have a corruption problem though.

Perception is more important than reality; Biden doesn't actually need to have done anything wrong for the G.O.trumP to weaponize "but Hunter Biden" and turn it into 2020's "but her emails."

[Endus]

And once again, the recounting has NEVER been that Bernie is misogynist or thinks women can't be President. Her side of the story is literally that Bernie said, "A woman can't win in 2020 against Trump." Guess what, Bernie's side itself says he said something similar, that "Trump would weaponize" a woman candidate's female side, and that would hurt...but not necessarily that a woman *can't* win.

There's a pretty whopping difference between "a woman should be able to be President", which is what Bernie's been saying for decades, and "in this election, there's enough misogynists out there that maybe being a woman is enough to lose it for you, right there, as stupid as fuck as that is", which is what Warren's claimed he said a year ago (paraphrased a smidge).

She never claimed he was saying a woman can't be President, her recollection was about practicality, and that's a statement on misogyny in the voter base, not a woman's ability to lead.

Frankly, the comment's so innocuous that I find it weirder that Bernie made this a thing to begin with, rather than just acknowledging he might have said something similar, and explaining that context, as I just did.