luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
It's not enough to win, you have to make sure your opponent is thoroughly destroyed and humiliated in the process. That's how you build consensus and cooperation.
Last edited:
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II
- Thread starter Foolmewunz
- Start date
It's not enough to win, you have to make sure your opponent is thoroughly destroyed and humiliated in the process. That's how you build consensus and cooperation.
Belz...
Fiend God
Not sure that answers her actual question, though. She asked why Hillary supporters pretended that she did so well in the race.
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
I guess reading comprehension isn't something you're concerned with, I've already addressed this a number of previous comments. But feel free to keep beating that dead horse.
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
My reading comprehension is just fine, thanks for the gratuitous insult, though !
Here are the request(s) following you post:
And here is the only thing you have posted since then:
So no, I don't see which "previous comments" addressed anything. Perhaps you could be so kind as to point them out for the benefit of all of us who requested you back up your claims ?
Childlike Empress
Banned
No, I didn't. luchog understood me correctly. I was asking why the effort if she does so well.
Belz...
Fiend God
Ok, but I don't see how all this serves to humiliate Sanders or anything. I didn't see the connection.
Sorry, luchog. Carry on.
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
You've made a single post since the request was made, which is the one in response to Childlike's question. Again, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your statement, but I'd like to see evidence for this alledged pattern.
Sanders has faults, but the Iraq war is not one of them. When it came down to authorizing Bush to use force against Iraq, Sanders voted NO, Clinton voted YES. That's it, right there, and that cost Clinton the 2008 nomination, because Iraq was THE issue, during the primaries. Iraq has faded from the public eye now, but it doesn't change the fact that she blew the most consequential vote of her Senate career, and Sanders got it right.
AND, Sanders voted against the first gulf war too. So trying to paint him as the equivalent of Clinton is ridiculous.
It's not about humiliating Sanders. Sanders is just a convenient distraction from Hillary's terrible polling numbers, her being under investigation, tenure as SoS, previous Senate votes, etc.
wareyin
Penultimate Amazing
Those "terrible" polling numbers are the ones where she's polling better than Sanders, and better than Trump, and better than Cruz, right? Wow, if Clinton's numbers are terrible, how would you describe Sanders' numbers?
Belz...
Fiend God
Terrible? She's winning! And I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad one, but where do you get the impression that she isn't?
What are you talking about? Clinton and Trump are the two most disliked candidates in the race. Sanders does better in every head-to-head matchup. A majority of those polled think she is not honest and trustworthy.
THOSE are the polls I'm talking about. People don't like Clinton, they don't trust her, and she doesn't do as well as Bernie against the GOP.
But yeah, other than that she's a great candidate.
Terrible, yes. When the first word that comes to mind in people's minds is "liar" about you, that's not good. See my post right above this. Hillary's poll numbers (on things that actually have to do with her as a candidate, not whether she's behind Sanders by five points in the next race) are godawful. The only person more disliked than Hillary is Trump.
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
As noted, this was addressed in previous posts. And I think you're reading more into my comments than I actually said.
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
To be fair, that is the first world that comes to mind for most people for almost any politician, rightly or wrongly.
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
I was referring to Clinton supporters in this thread, and their responses to Sanders supporters. I apologize if I misunderstood the context, but in that context my sarcasm stands.
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
Yes, Clinton has some strong negatives. I guess the question is "so *********** what?" when compared against the rest of the people she is running against ?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/188396/sanders-image-among-dems-clinton-maintains-edge.aspx
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary
wareyin
Penultimate Amazing
Clinton consistently polls above Sanders in head to head polls. That's what I'm talking about. If her polls are terrible, but she's polling 10 points higher than Sanders, then how do you describe Sanders' numbers?