Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II

[The Big Dog]

I've got a Berntard on Facebook right now who's still sticking with the "Iowa was a tie" nonsense, then doubling down on "even if Hillary won, it's only because she won 6 straight coin tosses". Jesus christ these people are idiots!

Crucial update from your Facebook feed. Thanks

Here is a tip: don't go on facebook.

Problem solved.

eta: lessons learned, "news" from Twitter and Reddit bad, "news" from Facebook? Worth sharing.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

eta: lessons learned, "news" from Twitter and Reddit bad, "news" from Facebook? Worth sharing.

Wooooosh!!!!!

Par for the course (it is Masters week, after all).

 

[BenBurch]

Why not fight for it now? Take it up with your fellow Bernie supporters. It's no good if Bernie wins on a platform of dismantling nuclear energy. He'll be held to that.

Picking my battles.

I don't see this as being as important as the other issues on the table, and moreover, renewables have advanced to the point where generation IV reactors and these new technologies mature at about the same time. I still think we need to pursue thorium piles, but am prepared to argue for that later.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I'd hardly call taking someone to task for their demonstrated voting record and documented campaign financing "crossing the line".

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...ry-clinton-not-qualified-be-president-n552141

"I don't think that you are qualified if you get 15 million dollars from Wall Street through your Super PAC," said Sanders. "I don't think you are qualified if you have voted for the disastrous war in Iraq. I don't think you are qualified if you've supported virtually every disastrous trade agreement, which has cost us millions of decent paying jobs."

If you thats what you call "taking someone to task", you really haven't been paying attention.

BTW, Clinton did not say Sanders wasn't qualified
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-called-him-not-qualified-for-the-presidency/

If you think Sanders crossed a line and Clinton didn't, you really haven't been paying attention. In fact, Clinton has been trying hard to damage Sanders using distortions and flat out lies. She recently tried to blame Sandy Hook on Sanders, and was called on it, not just by Sanders supporters, but by her own.

Hillary Clinton Using Sandy Hook Victims as Political Props Just Backfired Completely

Speaking of flat out lies ... "She recently tried to blame Sandy Hook on Sanders" ... Where does it say that in the article you linked ?

In a Twitter message she tried to lay the Sandy Hook shooting at Sanders feet, and her own supporters fire back and tell her how badly she screwed up. A few switched sides. Screencaps of the actual messages are at the link.

Random peoples political comments and claims about "switching sides" on twitter is not really news.

Like her false claim that the gun problem in New York is because of guns coming from Vermont, which she also tried to blame Bernie for. And she was called out on that by her own superdelegate supporters[/url]. Not only is Vermont responsible for less than 1% of the firearms in New York; but according to the FBI report, the largest source of guns on New York streets is from the Southern states, Virginia and Georgia, who are Clinton's biggest support base. Something I'm surprised the Sanders campaign hasn't brought up.

Pro-Clinton Superdelegate Says Hillary’s Latest Gun Claim Is Completely Wrong
Excerpt:

Hillary’s Latest Gun Attack On Bernie Is Not Backed Up By Federal Data
Excerpt:

Great arguments against the hearsay comment that isn't even what she said.
He was responding to comments Clinton made during a closed-door meeting the day before with Democratic lawmakers and lobbyists in Albany, N.Y.

Of course, she's not the only one who has been caught trying to smear Sanders. New York Daily News and CNN reporters were called out by the New York Times and The Accountability Project for taking quotes out of context to try and make Bernie look bad. Naturally, Hillary continues to use the distorted quotes as part of her increasingly vicious campaign.


CNN Just Got Called Out for Manipulating Bernie Sanders’ NY Daily News Interview

Excerpt:

Again, by the same newsite that considers twitter comments news.

Confirmation bias, it's not just for breakfast anymore.

 

[The_Animus]

It seems likely that Sanders will lose New York due to the odd Oct 9th 2015 deadline of registering with or switching party affiliation.

For being a leader among 1st world nations, this year has really shown me how our election system integrity is just awful.

 

[foophil]

BTW, Clinton did not say Sanders wasn't qualified.

Technically she questioned whether he was qualified to be president. While that isn't the same as flat out saying he isn't qualified, the way she presented would probably come across the same to anyone that doesn't have their blinders on.

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35990351

The latest row began on Wednesday when Mrs Clinton was asked if Mr Sanders was qualified to be president, after he gave a newspaper interview in which he appeared to struggle to answer some questions.

"I think he hadn't done his homework and he'd been talking for more than a year about doing things that he obviously hasn't really studied or understood, and that does raise a lot of questions," she told MSNBC's Morning Joe.

On Wednesday night, Bernie Sanders told a crowd of supporters at Temple University that Mrs Clinton had accused him of being unqualified.

"Well let me, let me just say in response to Secretary Clinton, I don't believe that she is qualified if she is, through her super PAC [fundraising committee], taking tens of millions of dollars in special interest funds," he said.

"I don't think you are qualified if you get $15 million from Wall Street through your super PAC."

It turns out she was the one who was wrong, hadn't done her homework, and was called out on it. Bernie certainly came back with some hard hitting responses that probably turned off some potential swing voters. I guess we'll see how it pans out for him.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

It seems likely that Sanders will lose New York due to the odd Oct 9th 2015 deadline of registering with or switching party affiliation.

Or due to more people preferring Hillary.

The Bernbots sure are good at excuses.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Technically she questioned whether he was qualified to be president. While that isn't the same as flat out saying he isn't qualified, the way she presented would probably come across the same to anyone that doesn't have their blinders on.

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35990351

Technically ... she was asked 3 times if she thought sanders was qualified, and said, that it's up to the voters to decide who is qualified.

 

[foophil]

Technically ... she was asked 3 times if she thought sanders was qualified, and said, that it's up to the voters to decide who is qualified.

Right... and then went on to say the additional things I quoted above which makes it sound very much like she was questioning his ability to lead (without outright saying it).

That being said, I don't think questioning whether someone is fit to lead the country is wrong by any means (whether done outright or by JAQ'ing). At all. It should be encouraged. What I question is whether Hillary was just ignorant or whether she was lying regarding her remarks about Sanders' responses on how to break up the banks. And I question why people are defending her when it was pretty clear that she was listing reasons on why he might not be qualified to be leader.

Probably just politics as usual I guess.

 

[luchog]

What I question is whether Hillary was just ignorant or whether she was lying regarding her remarks about Sanders' responses on how to break up the banks. And I question why people are defending her when it was pretty clear that she was listing reasons on why he might not be qualified to be leader.

That depends on whether she was depending solely on the NY Daily News article for her interpretation of Sanders' speech, or whether she was aware of the full context. If the former, then she was simply latching onto something she felt was a useful weapon without bothering to fact-check it properly; which paints her as more incompetent than dishonest. However, she has made outright dishonest claims about Sanders, and tried to create specious connections to national tragedies, so I'm about 50-50 on this. At this point, I think it's clear that she will say and do anything that will harm Sanders' campaign, and cares less about truth than she does about getting elected. She'll do whatever it takes to get elected, even if that means distortions or outright lies, as long as she doesn't think it will backfire and cost her votes. Although she badly miscalculated that on her Sandy Hook claim.

Probably just politics as usual I guess.

Which is the biggest problem with American politics right now.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Right... and then went on to say the additional things I quoted above which makes it sound very much like she was questioning his ability to lead (without outright saying it).

That being said, I don't think questioning whether someone is fit to lead the country is wrong by any means (whether done outright or by JAQ'ing). At all. It should be encouraged. What I question is whether Hillary was just ignorant or whether she was lying regarding her remarks about Sanders' responses on how to break up the banks. And I question why people are defending her when it was pretty clear that she was listing reasons on why he might not be qualified to be leader.

Probably just politics as usual I guess.

That's what makes her a good politician. While Sanders OTOH, did a knee jerk and kicked himself in the ass.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...
For being a leader among 1st world nations, this year has really shown me how our election system integrity is just awful.

While I respect the right of the parties to run their own nomination process, I agree with you that in the general election we don't have the untainted system people imagine we do. Like how people have this idealistic idea the justice system is perfect when it is seriously flawed, our 'democracy' is not the ideal democracy people believe it to be.

 

[Childlike Empress]

That's what makes her a good politician. While Sanders OTOH, did a knee jerk and kicked himself in the ass.

Unbelievable.

 

[BobTheCoward]

While I respect the right of the parties to run their own nomination process, I agree with you that in the general election we don't have the untainted system people imagine we do. Like how people have this idealistic idea the justice system is perfect when it is seriously flawed, our 'democracy' is not the ideal democracy people believe it to be.

What do you consider taint?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'd hardly call taking someone to task for their demonstrated voting record and documented campaign financing "crossing the line".

If you think Sanders crossed a line and Clinton didn't, you really haven't been paying attention. In fact, Clinton has been trying hard to damage Sanders using distortions and flat out lies. She recently tried to blame Sandy Hook on Sanders, and was called on it, not just by Sanders supporters, but by her own.

Hillary Clinton Using Sandy Hook Victims as Political Props Just Backfired Completely

In a Twitter message she tried to lay the Sandy Hook shooting at Sanders feet, and her own supporters fire back and tell her how badly she screwed up. A few switched sides. Screencaps of the actual messages are at the link.

Excerpt:




Like her false claim that the gun problem in New York is because of guns coming from Vermont, which she also tried to blame Bernie for. And she was called out on that by her own superdelegate supporters[/url]. Not only is Vermont responsible for less than 1% of the firearms in New York; but according to the FBI report, the largest source of guns on New York streets is from the Southern states, Virginia and Georgia, who are Clinton's biggest support base. Something I'm surprised the Sanders campaign hasn't brought up.

Pro-Clinton Superdelegate Says Hillary’s Latest Gun Claim Is Completely Wrong

Excerpt:



Hillary’s Latest Gun Attack On Bernie Is Not Backed Up By Federal Data

Excerpt:


Of course, she's not the only one who has been caught trying to smear Sanders. New York Daily News and CNN reporters were called out by the New York Times and The Accountability Project for taking quotes out of context to try and make Bernie look bad. Naturally, Hillary continues to use the distorted quotes as part of her increasingly vicious campaign.


CNN Just Got Called Out for Manipulating Bernie Sanders’ NY Daily News Interview

Excerpt:

It's all one big plot, maybe the Clinton Foundation paid off the news media?


It's media business as usual. If you think they don't quote Clinton out of context, and distort the facts about her, you haven't been paying attention. They've convicted her on the email issue before she's even been charged. And they plastered Benghazi over the airwaves despite the fact the biggest charge the GOP was making didn't even happen. Somehow Susan Rice's talking points becomes a big coverup when the POTUS himself called it a terrorist act the day after it happened. Did the news media call out the GOP on their fake crime? No, because scandal sells, fake or not, they don't care.

And gawd, could they possibly broadcast more wall to wall Trump than they already are? All three broadcast stations put his NY speech on live this morning. Have we not seen enough of his speeches yet?

There's no media plot against Sanders. There's crappy news coverage of the candidates all the way around and I do agree with you that it's shameful, and harmful. But no one is singling Sanders out.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What do you consider taint?

Regarding which election, the party selection of their nominee or the general election itself?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Regarding which election, the party selection of their nominee or the general election itself?

In the general.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Unbelievable.

...snip...

Edited by jsfisher: 

Edited for compliance with rules 0 and 12 of the Membership Agreement.

 

[dudalb]

Or due to more people preferring Hillary.

The Bernbots sure are good at excuses.

Good at ignoring reality,also.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In the general.

So what do I consider taint in the general election:

Voter caging
Voter ID with admitted goal of disenfranchisement of Democratic Party candidate supporters
Purging voter registration roles so people show up to vote find themselves no longer registered
Inconsistent policies from state to state about where full time students reside for the purposes of voting
The shenanigans involving GW Bush's firing of 8 states attorneys general who wouldn't go along with schemes to use the DoJ to affect the outcome of elections
Having the SCOTUS override the FL State SC when they had no jurisdiction to do so and if you read the ruling it's clear they overstepped their bounds saying said decision should have no case law effect
Republican controlled states effecting gerrymandering that instead of preserving the status quo (bad enough on its own) sought to shift the power of Republicans in the House


Is that enough?