|
Requesting itshappening.gif with Bernie instead of 
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
 ftfy
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:The most socialist president we ever had was one of the wealthiest presidents we ever had. Aren't there a handful of very wealthy people who have promised to donate their entire fortunes upon their death?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
It looks like the beginning of a dance off.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Hillary will fight for a public option, maybe. Bernie will fight for a public option, for sure. In either case I just want them to fight for it. Even if it loses. Bernie will fight for single-payer for all. Hillary will likely fight for gradually opening up Medicare to those under 65 who want it. Republicans will fight for voucherizing Medicare and thus turning it into Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Bernie will fight for single-payer for all. Hillary will likely fight for gradually opening up Medicare to those under 65 who want it. Republicans will fight for voucherizing Medicare and thus turning it into Obamacare. This is pretty close to how I think, but with Hillary maintaining the ACA instead of expanding Medicare to those who want it. It would be nice, but given the power of her donor base, it's not likely she'd go that far.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
everyone knows who hillary which is why those results are going up for bernieNeeksy posted:This is pretty close to how I think, but with Hillary maintaining the ACA instead of expanding Medicare to those who want it. It would be nice, but given the power of her donor base, it's not likely she'd go that far. are insurance companies donating to her or just banks
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
Neeksy posted:This is pretty close to how I think, but with Hillary maintaining the ACA instead of expanding Medicare to those who want it. It would be nice, but given the power of her donor base, it's not likely she'd go that far. Sure she will (propose expanding Medicare); she campaigned on something like that in 2008 and it'd be a way of showing she's to the nominal left of Obama, while partially co-opting Bernie at the same time. Medicare for 55+ would've been a part of the ACA anyway if Pres. Lieberman hadn't vetoed it; in Dec. 2009 there were something like 55 senators' supporting it. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 05:23 on May 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Bernie Sanders is a total WalNut: godbless hillaryis44 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
If you vote for not-Bernie Sanders in the primary please remove yourself from the gene pool
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Sure she will (propose expanding Medicare); she campaigned on something like that in 2008 and it'd be a way of showing she's to the nominal left of Obama, while partially co-opting Bernie at the same time. But there is that 60-vote requirement, which has become the new normal. Didn't Ben Nelson block most of the better proposals?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Neeksy posted:But there is that 60-vote requirement, which has become the new normal. Didn't Ben Nelson block most of the better proposals?  The ACA was passed in reconciliation, which only required 51 votes. But yeah, "no, we can't" was the Dem motto in Obama's earlier years, especially when public sentiment was in favor of the more-progressive option. Now that there's a GOP Congress, Dems can tilt at lefty windmills.That's old news, though; we're stuck with the ACA for better or worse. Hillary has said she wants to "improve" it, but we're still waiting to hear her concrete proposals. In the meantime, Bernie's solidly in favor of single-payer for all.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Google Bernie Sanders
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
Single-payer health care is my single-issue voter pet issue, and is the only reason I voted for that duplicitous gently caress Obama the first time, so go Bernie.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:
Yeah, thus why I am gonna back/donate to Bernie. At the very least I'm hoping for a slight shift/widening of the overton window.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Bernie Sanders is a total WalNut: Has the actual person behind this blog ever been doxed?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Do candidates ever pick their running mate before they win their primary? If I'm Bernie I'm trying really hard to get Elizabeth Warren on board.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
deadkiller615 posted:Do candidates ever pick their running mate before they win their primary? If I'm Bernie I'm trying really hard to get Elizabeth Warren on board. Good luck with that since Warren is already a signer of an OMG HILLARY YES letter that's been public for a while.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
Titus Sardonicus posted:I feel utterly indifferent about Kasich myself. Of course, that would change dramatically if he really does make an impact on the national stage. But if the Democrats actually ran a decent candidate last November, would Kasich have gotten the results he did? FitzGerald was just such a lousy candidate, dead in the water well before Election Day. And would that really translate well to a presidential election? Could he really even differentiate himself from the other bland, sort of lacking-in-personality Midwest governors in the running? I agree that he won in 2014 at least partly because the Ohio Dems are unbelievably bad and actively undermine their most promising people in favor of completely worthless shitheels, and also partly because midterm Ohio is practically a different state compared to presidential election Ohio (largely because of the first bit), but I do think he's enough of the Generic Republican Governor who isn't completely off his rocker that he might have some appeal if things go bad with the economy or some other national crisis comes along. Maybe my anxiety isn't justified and I would be totally cool with that. I just have a great deal of revulsion for this guy because I was working in state government when he was elected and I watched him actively dismantle functioning programs and projects that had been developed for years just to give poo poo away to his buddies, poo poo that undoubtedly happens all the time but ten times more disgusting when you see it first hand.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
Weltlich posted:
You might want to take a look at this, buddy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:Only to the extent that tiny overrepresented states are rural (not very much). I'll just leave this link since it explains (in detail) the point better than I can. http://themonkeycage.org/2012/11/15...t-the-congress/ Essentially, the configuration of voters can give a GOP bias even if you ignore gerrymandering. There's no reason this same principle does not easily apply to state level districts as well.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
WaPo article on Bernie says he got 100k people to sign up as volunteers. Now 'signed up' is meaningless when so far its just giving Bernie your email address, but I am curious as to what the average campaigns' volunteer pool size is if such a thing is even publically tracked.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
the lady who signed me up for Obama's volunteer list was a little person who hit the lottery. she lived on Victory Lane.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Sure she will (propose expanding Medicare) You're way more optimistic than I.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-IPuHpDWkU He looks and sounds like Larry David. That's a plus in my book! Joementum posted:Rubio has a page on his site where you can vote on his best stump speech joke. Where's the incredibly awkward water sip? If he had an actual sense of humor, that would be on there (and also it would win by a wide margin).
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 09:12
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:Has the actual person behind this blog ever been doxed? Yes.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
This is probably the most succinct description of the Discovery phase of a primary candidate.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
FOXDIE posted:Democrats haven't won the presidency after a two-term candidate but twice in all of the modern party's history, first when Van Buren succeeded Jackson, second when FDR won a third term. If you think a trend that has followed the Democratic Party for two centuries can be shrugged off, your political bubble is too dense for anyone to pop. FOXDIE posted:Ever heard of the six-year itch? It's the tendency for the president's party to lose a lot of seats during his sixth-year midterm, and has occurred to everyone two-term president since Reconstruction. And it's exactly what happened to Obama last year. Under the vegetable posted:hosed up how Hillary has a neoconservative foreign policy more enthusiastic about war than rand paul or jeb bush, is inextricably tied to wall street and raises most of her money from the same wealthy donors who support Republicans, has no interest in regulating banking or commerce, and claims the bible is the biggest influence on her thinking.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Bernie Sanders is a total WalNut: quote:It’s April 30 – Walpurgisnacht, when all the demons from Hell emerge and the Church of Satan was established. So, How Convenient – Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders today announced he will run for President in 2016 and try to wrest the nomination away from Hillary Clinton. It’s panic time folks! It’s panic time!  It just keeps going. The Hi44 crowd doesn't seem to have recovered from 2008.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
There are exactly zero reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the democratic primary and you are are a human poo poo pooped out of a butt if you do so
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Cubey posted:There are exactly zero reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the democratic primary and you are are a human poo poo pooped out of a butt if you do so You make a good point.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
I saw a Ben Carson for President 2016 sticker on the back of a brand new, still in temp tags Acura today and cracked up laughing. The phrase "more money than sense" was all I could think of.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Cubey posted:There are exactly zero reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the democratic primary and you are are a human poo poo pooped out of a butt if you do so What about "Bernie Sanders is close to winning and the GOP is running someone halfway electable"? ...Actually, maybe you're right even then, because if Hillary's caught eating toddler limbs as snacks during the primary, she might lose the general anyway. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:the GOP is running someone halfway electable? Not Going To Happen™
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
mooyashi posted:i think a unity ticket with Christie would have a lot of appeal  Also, I'm probably going to wind up voting in the GOP primary, because I have a fractionally higher chance of creating a better outcome that way. The only question is whether, as a Texan, I vote for Rafael "Eduardo" Cruz to drag out the primary longer, or for the least horrible Republican available.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Derby Day features Rand reunited with Jesse Benton. Also: Benton's wife Valori, who is Ron's granddaughter. Not pictured: any evidence of good sartorial sense on Rand's behalf. A dark jacket? Seriously? 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Quasimango posted:You might want to take a look at this, buddy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016 You might want to look at this, guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Massachusetts,_2010#Results_3 "Voter turnout in the 2010 special election was significantly lower than in the 2008 election. The drop in turnout was smallest—around 25%—in areas that supported Obama in the 2008 election by less than 60%. Turnout fell 30% among towns that supported Obama by over 60%. In Boston, which supported Obama by almost 79% in 2008, the decrease in 2010 voter turnout was even more pronounced, at about 35%." In the Scott/Coakley race, Coakley was polling well ahead of Scott right up until a couple of weeks before the election. Those numbers fell just ahead of the election, but a number of polls still had her as a favorite. Then the election happened, and all of the Red districts showed up to We're a solid 18 months from any sort of general election. Of course polls are going to say Hillary is in the lead, especially ones taken when the ONLY democratic candidate was Hillary! I'd imagine that if she wins the primary, polls will still say that she's the front runner until pretty close to election time. But when election day rolls around and people actually have to go out and vote? As of right now I don't think people are going to bother to turn out for her. Here's the post mortem of the MA senate race: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2010/01/21/coakley_aides_paint_portrait_of_missteps_on_campaign_trail/?page=1 "They described a campaign that was too sure of its own success, that waited too long to call in the cavalry, that made key missteps, including focusing on abortion at the expense of the economy, and that did little to court voters in the communities that led Governor Deval Patrick and President Obama to huge victories." Look, this is a general election for president, not a special election for senator - but I'm making the comparison between Clinton and Coakley because they've both started off their campaigns with an attitude that they are already the winner, and they just have to endure the hoi polloi for a few months until the formality of the election is done with. I'm not saying that the Republicans will run anyone nearly as charismatic as Brown was, or that they won't gently caress it up in their own special ways. But, thus far the attitude of the Clinton campaign has been "Get me in for a photo op, then get me away from these awful hillbillies, ugh." Hillary doesn't ever look comfortable talking to "voters," but rather like an aristocrat that's being forced to slum it. But, here's the thing - that's exactly what she is! The question is can she figure out how to convincingly be folksy as gently caress like Bush was, or will she stink of stale money and genteel embarrassment like John Kerry and Mitt Romney? I certainly don't think she can pull off the "distinguished, yet humble" that Obama won with in 2008. Cubey posted:There are exactly zero reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the democratic primary and you are are a human poo poo pooped out of a butt if you do so Pretty much the only thing people need to know. Weltlich fucked around with this message at 16:37 on May 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
 quote:Former Senator Rick Santorum, a longtime culture warrior known for his conservative views on marriage equality and other social issues, said on Saturday than he believes Bruce Jenner when he says he’s a woman. http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/rick-santorum-love-and-accept-bruce-jenner#.bjoWmg1o5
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:
Wow. I think my favorite part of your quote was the repeated references to "The Socialist Bernie Sanders." Resorting to Republican-level invective to make sure your only credible opponent is marginalized? Wow. George W Bush would be proud.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
Pretty much the only difference between hillaryis44 and freep is that hillaryis44 posters don't hate the clintons or gay people. Everything else is the same.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:43
|
|