Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II

[Mister Earl]

So your's life's going well, new home, promotion, good relationship. Yet you don't like the political status quo? Interesting.

Ginger, here's something to consider. Perhaps the reason I like Bernie Sanders is simply because I believe the country would do better with him at the helm? Not 1% garbage, not anti-Hillary conspiracy nonsense, but simply because I feel he's a better candidate. That's all.

You seem to be conflating two different things. When he was a viable candidate the narrative was, he might win like Obama did. After he had clearly lost, the narrative was, he lost. What a surprise.

I disagree. I don't recall at any time during his campaign being treated like a contender by any major media. He's always been treated as the underdog.

You have this bizarre fantasy going here.

Are you aware that when Hillary does fundraising for downticket state candidates, she keeps most of the money?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

A nobody? Why do you keep repeating this lie?

Hillary was and is a household name. At the start of the race, Bernie was not. But by all means, provide documentation to support your assertion otherwise.

Yes. If you don't think so you are in lala land.

I gave you a link directly to the delegate counts as they are now. I provided proof of my assertion, based on objective fact, and I gave you an easy way to confirm the numbers. You disagree, but provide no evidence, no references, and only more condescension.

AKA you are spouting assertions without any evidence.

Please read what you said for that snippet that I was responding to. There were no assertions I made there. I think you're losing track of the conversation. Also kindly note that between you and me, only one of us has provided *any* references, and it wasn't you.

Hillary has won. Imagining she hasn't until the convention is ludicrous. CA latest count: 56% to 43%. WTF are you imagining here that this is going to be close when the final count is in?

Ginger, I'm talking about the delegates needed overall to cinch the democrat party nomination. There's pledged delegates, and super delegates. I made the assertion that Hillary did not have the delegates needed to get the nomination. This is fact, and is supported with the link I gave you. I also said that she'll almost certainly get the nomination when the superdelegates vote in the convention. That's not fact, but probability. Again, I gave you evidence to support my assertion.

What is wrong with you?

Amongst the usual that plague people? I suppose we can add in attempting to have an adult and respectful conversation with someone who has been scornful, rude, condescending, and worse. I've been perfectly nice to you, Ginger, and I'm not asking a lot to expect you to respond in kind. If you cannot, then please don't speak to me any more.

Straw man much?

Okay, if that wasn't what you meant, by all means, feel free to clarify.

EDIT: And just for clarification purposes, here's how I feel about Hillary. She isn't bad. I don't think she's a criminal. I don't buy that Benghazi nonsense. I don't think she broke the law with her email server, but I don't think she had clean motives for having one. I don't think she'll be indicted for anything. As President, she won't be bad. I expect it'll be a continuation of President Obama's policies, for the most part, with some personal touches. Not amazing, not horrendous. Good, not bad.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Not sure what I said that this is in response to. I don't think I even mentioned Obama, TTP, or so on. I note you seem to think of Bernie supporters in a pejorative manner. Why? Did you have a bad experience with one supporter, and decide that they're all like that?

I stated to Fudbucker above what my objection to continuing this children's crusade is. And I've stated it elsewhere. For background: I am farther left than Bernie or his Socialist-Democrats. Part of my objection to many of the die-hard Bern Bros is that they are threatening, and I believe many will, to take their volleyball and go home.

There is a danger in the USA and it's the safe harbor and comfy home that the GOP has made for racists, misogynists, paleo-conservative reactionaries, neo-fascists and South Will Rise Again apologists. This divide was not even as apparent during the New Deal years. The current, post seventies GOP is flat-out dangerous. The thought of them being able to stack the courts for another full generation is frightening.

There is one battle right now, and it is to trounce the GOP in November. You want to fight for a progressive wing of the Democratic Party? I'm your boy. The platform committee is not the place for it. Right now, there's a job to be done, and that's making sure the GOP crashes and burns in November. Fighting the fight to have a minority view represented in the platform is not conducive to that end. And yes, I'm being completely Machiavellian. The end justifies the means. I'll sacrifice some of my pet desires in order to achieve the immediate and necessary goal.

 

[Mister Earl]

I stated to Fudbucker above what my objection to continuing this children's crusade is. And I've stated it elsewhere. For background: I am farther left than Bernie or his Socialist-Democrats. Part of my objection to many of the die-hard Bern Bros is that they are threatening, and I believe many will, to take their volleyball and go home.

Some are. It's my own personal view that many of them are speaking out of anger. I expect they'll vote Hillary, like I will, when it's time, simply because a Trump presidency will probably be disastrous. I also feel that the majority of the "die hard bern bros" are 4chan-style trollers who are trying to make discussion more heated. I think a good number of the trump supporters are them as well. They're in it for the laughs. I just ignore the extremists on all sides.

There is a danger in the USA and it's the safe harbor and comfy home that the GOP has made for racists, misogynists, paleo-conservative reactionaries, neo-fascists and South Will Rise Again apologists. This divide was not even as apparent during the New Deal years. The current, post seventies GOP is flat-out dangerous. The thought of them being able to stack the courts for another full generation is frightening.

I agree with you here, 100%, and without condition.

There is one battle right now, and it is to trounce the GOP in November. You want to fight for a progressive wing of the Democratic Party? I'm your boy. The platform committee is not the place for it. Right now, there's a job to be done, and that's making sure the GOP crashes and burns in November. Fighting the fight to have a minority view represented in the platform is not conducive to that end. And yes, I'm being completely Machiavellian. The end justifies the means. I'll sacrifice some of my pet desires in order to achieve the immediate and necessary goal.

I don't totally agree with you, here. I don't think Bernie pushing for his agenda really harms the general election odds any. I'd even say that by being a bit more inclusive, they'd probably net more independent voters who like Bernie. But that's subjective, and hard to say for sure. Let's say I can agree with you in principle; The general election is what matters, and defeating Trump is the most important exercise. And getting a moderate supreme court justice, for that matter.

 

[Tony Stark]

I stated to Fudbucker above what my objection to continuing this children's crusade is. And I've stated it elsewhere. For background: I am farther left than Bernie or his Socialist-Democrats. Part of my objection to many of the die-hard Bern Bros is that they are threatening, and I believe many will, to take their volleyball and go home.

There is a danger in the USA and it's the safe harbor and comfy home that the GOP has made for racists, misogynists, paleo-conservative reactionaries, neo-fascists and South Will Rise Again apologists. This divide was not even as apparent during the New Deal years. The current, post seventies GOP is flat-out dangerous. The thought of them being able to stack the courts for another full generation is frightening.

There is one battle right now, and it is to trounce the GOP in November. You want to fight for a progressive wing of the Democratic Party? I'm your boy. The platform committee is not the place for it. Right now, there's a job to be done, and that's making sure the GOP crashes and burns in November. Fighting the fight to have a minority view represented in the platform is not conducive to that end. And yes, I'm being completely Machiavellian. The end justifies the means. I'll sacrifice some of my pet desires in order to achieve the immediate and necessary goal.

Agreed.

The GOP is the biggest danger that exists to the American people (I am not being even slightly hyperbolic). They must be defeated. This purity test nonsense is just stupid and counterproductive.

 

[Mister Earl]

There we go. A general agreement on an important point.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Fewer than half of Bernie Sanders backers in Texas say they'll vote for Clinton, poll shows

Texas supporters of Bernie Sanders are more reluctant to support Hillary Clinton than Ted Cruz supporters are to support Donald Trump, according to a new poll released Monday.

The University of Texas / Texas Politics Project poll found that Texas voters who supported Cruz's presidential campaign are more likely to support Trump than Sanders supporters are to support Clinton. Nearly 70 percent of Cruz voters are ready to vote for Trump, but just 40 percent of Sanders supporters are ready to vote for the former secretary of state.

Read more:
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/poli...s-say-they-ll-vote-for-clinton-poll-shows.ece (June 27, 2016)

CNN | New Day Sunday (June 26, 2016):

CNN host Victor Blackwell, interviews Laurie Cestnick of Occupy DNC Convention on why most Bernie Sanders supporters will not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Watch the 2 minute video: "We will be de-registering from the Democratic Party"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDGVa6ZwXiQ
​

Facebook: Occupy DNC Convention July 2016

Twitter: #BernieOrBust #OccupyDNC

 

[Tony Stark]

Such horrible news for Hillary that Texas Bernie Bro dumbasses claim they won't vote for her. We all know how important winning Texas is for Democrats.

LOL

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Bernie Bro dumbasses

Also known as, nearly half of the Democratic party (44%).

 

[Tony Stark]

Also known as, nearly half of the Democratic party (44%).

Not all people who voted for him are Bernie Bro dumbasses. Just the petulant morons that want to bern everything down and see to it that the orange racist conman becomes the President of the United States because Bernie lost.

I voted for him, do not consider myself a Bernie Bro, and will definitely be voting for Hillary in November. Because I'm not an idiot. Bernie himself says thay he is going to vote for her.

Also, his support with Democrats was much lower than 44%; he did very poorly with Democrats and much better with independents.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Also known as, nearly half of the Democratic party (44%).

We already know you don't do math real good.

How many Texans actually voted for Bernie in the primary?

Forty per cent of "not many", is pretty small potatoes. Plus, of course, as the article identifies and we still see in at least one major poll,.... because Bernie hasn't come out to support her yet, there are a lot of holdouts.

But 178,000, if that forty per cent figure holds is a lot of votes to lose. OMG she's toast.

Oh, but wait..... 30% of Ted's supporters won't be voting for Trump. Wonder who they'll vote for? Thirty per cent of the Cruz vote is 360,000. All she needs is half the disaffected Cruz supporters to surpass the lost Bern Bro vote. How about disaffected Rubio and Kasich supporters?

Bernie can call the shots in some places. Texas ain't one of those places.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

And yes, I'm being completely Machiavellian. The end justifies the means.

That's Ovid, not Machiavelli. Machiavelli used the phrasing "si guarda al fine" in The Prince, typically translated as "one mist consider the final result". He also said "though the means be harsh, the ends may justify them" in Discourses on Livy, which is not a very Machiavellian script, and that was only in reference to establishing a new constitutional order.

Instead the phrase derives from Ovid's "Exitus acta probat", "the result justifies the deed".

 

[Foolmewunz]

That's Ovid, not Machiavelli. Machiavelli used the phrasing "si guarda al fine" in The Prince, typically translated as "one mist consider the final result". He also said "though the means be harsh, the ends may justify them" in Discourses on Livy, which is not a very Machiavellian script, and that was only in reference to establishing a new constitutional order.

Instead the phrase derives from Ovid's "Exitus acta probat", "the result justifies the deed".

Well, it was one of those furriners.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Berntards need to understand that they have no political capital to trade on and vote with the rest of the Democrats or else Donald Trump might win but we're not willing to incorporate more than token values of theirs even though the fate of the nation is on the line so please come back oh god don't go Nader please come baaaaack but don't ask for anything in return because you're scum and you lost and we hate you

 

[Foolmewunz]

Berntards need to understand that they have no political capital to trade on and vote with the rest of the Democrats or else Donald Trump might win but we're not willing to incorporate more than token values of theirs even though the fate of the nation is on the line so please come back oh god don't go Nader please come baaaaack but don't ask for anything in return because you're scum and you lost and we hate you

There's so much straw in there I'd worry about spontaneous combustion.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

As of June 7th, Bernie Sanders had received 44% of the Democratic primary nationwide vote:

"Hillary Clinton received approximately 13.5 million votes so far in primaries and caucuses, compared with 10.5 million for Sanders."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-clinches-democratic-nomination-according-to-ap/ (June 7, 2016)​

 

[Foolmewunz]

As of June 7th, Bernie Sanders had received 44% of the Democratic primary nationwide vote:

"Hillary Clinton received approximately 13.5 million votes so far in primaries and caucuses, compared with 10.5 million for Sanders."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-clinches-democratic-nomination-according-to-ap/ (June 7, 2016)​

I take it that's to refute my claim that you're not real good at numbers? Are you channeling the Orange Fungus? "Numbers? I know all the numbers. Big numbers; and they're great. The best numbers anyone knows. Here's a 44... and I got a very classy 13.5 right here. That's a decimal, you know. I went to one of the best,... very best business schools. The healthiest student they ever had. Want another? I 've got all the best numbers."

 

[Tony Stark]

As of June 7th, Bernie Sanders had received 44% of the Democratic primary nationwide vote:

"Hillary Clinton received approximately 13.5 million votes so far in primaries and caucuses, compared with 10.5 million for Sanders."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-clinches-democratic-nomination-according-to-ap/ (June 7, 2016)​

Yeah. They let independents vote in primaries in many states. He got a much lower percentage of the vote of people who are actually Democrats.

 

[Tony Stark]

Berntards need to understand that they have no political capital to trade on and vote with the rest of the Democrats or else Donald Trump might win but we're not willing to incorporate more than token values of theirs even though the fate of the nation is on the line so please come back oh god don't go Nader please come baaaaack but don't ask for anything in return because you're scum and you lost and we hate you

What would you say to Hillary supporters if she lost the primary resoundingly yet they were trying to force Bernie to adopt her entire platform with the threat of staying home and letting Trump win?

 

[wareyin]

Please provide evidence that the winning candidate gets to choose less seats in the convention committees that what Bernie was offered. I don't feel I can take your word on this.

DNC rules allow the chairman to pick the entire slate of 15 people who govern the platform that will be presented at the party convention in July. Past chairmen have done just that, in consultation with the White House or the winning Democratic candidate.

Traditionally, the Chairman picks 15 out of 15, which means the winning candidate is left with how many picks?

Are you serious? The media treated his campaign like a joke from day one. Even when he was successively winning states, when they did report on him, it was to the tune of "Here's why Bernie should drop out now." or "Bernie: Finished?"

Yes, I am quite serious. The media never treated Sanders campaign like a joke (unless you have evidence for this assertion?), and there was no speculation on Sanders dropping out until it was well past obvious that he could not win. This was obvious to those who paid attention to the numbers in April, and most candidates with Sanders' delegates and popular votes would have dropped out by March.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Are you making the assertion that Sanders and the voters he represents should get no say whatsoever in the Democrat party? Why? I feel that those votes might be handy to have come later this year.

Should everyone who tries hard and/or does better than expected get a say in the Democratic party? If not, why not?