Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Do The Bernie?
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > The General Forum

Author Message
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1847
Location: Earf.
Do The Bernie?  Reply with quote  



Does he actually have a chance or is everyone just accepting the new Prez will be Hillary?

The media seems to already be ramping up for Clinton vs Bush 2 - Dynasty Wars Boogaloo.

Wow, what a choice!

Everything Bernie says seems to make sense so far, and he's been saying the same sort of things his whole career.

Imagine if all that effort and HOPE that went towards the original Obama campaign was put into someone who wasn't an undercover stooge.








Nobody's taking Ted Cruz seriously. He's just the first open tent at the freak show.

Post Tue May 12, 2015 7:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sage Francis
Self Fighteous


Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21718
 Reply with quote  

Bernie Sanders is the only person who will get me into a voting booth in 2016.
Post Tue May 12, 2015 8:00 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
xGasPricesx



Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 1611
 Reply with quote  

Yeah, I would love for Sanders to get the nomination and then win the general, but I don't see either of those things happening. I think Obama became President under a very unique and specific set of circumstances and that all the stars aligned perfectly for that to happen. Even if we were at a similar place in our country as we were during the 2008 election, I still don't think Sanders could build the same kind of grassroots campaign Obama did. Maybe I'm being overly cynical here, but I feel like a lot of the support Obama received, specifically from younger demographics, had a lot to do with the fact that he was handsome and just seemed so cool. Sanders doesn't have any of the looks, youth or swagger that helped Obama get young people so excited about him.

We also live now in a post-Citizens United country, so the ability to fundraise insane amounts of money from large donors is more important than ever. I mean, Jeb Bush is basically using his Super PAC to run his campaign, so the amount of money he can pump in from wealthy donors is absolutely insane, and I'm sure Hillary will follow suit soon enough if she hasn't necessarily done so already. Not that money can win you an election in and of itself, but it certainly helps a lot, and a lack of money can absolutely cripple a campaign, especially when you are already at a disadvantage with other aspects like name recognition.

I'd like to see Sanders stay in the fight for as long as possible, because I'd like to see him challenge Hillary on her corporatism and what not. I definitely don't see him winning the nomination under pretty much any circumstance though, and even if by some miracle he managed that, I don't see him winning the general election. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the coming months, but unfortunately I'm not very optimistic.
Post Tue May 12, 2015 8:27 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Limbs



Joined: 04 Feb 2011
Posts: 1027
 Reply with quote  

I'm finding it tough to start thinking about another election. I've got a tough decision to make as an ohio voter. I'll stay one as long as I can but its getting tougher and tougher to function in this place. I stopped voting in local elections a while ago. Its just tough.
Post Wed May 13, 2015 4:39 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Sage Francis
Self Fighteous


Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21718
 Reply with quote  

Penn Jillette's take on campaign announcement videos: http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/11/opinions/jillette-presidential-candidate-videos/index.html

Surprisingly, he's leaning more toward Bernie Sanders. Very surprising when you consider how he's a major proponent of libertarianism. But at least Bernie has ideas and doesn't hide behind empty rhetoric.
Post Wed May 13, 2015 6:07 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Limbs



Joined: 04 Feb 2011
Posts: 1027
 Reply with quote  

I'm always conflicted with Penn. I think at the end of the day he just trusts people WAY more than I do.

I guess thats my whole thing with libertarianism.

I will say, i don't even consider a republican a possibility for the white house (stupid of me?) and I know for sure I do not not not want hilary.
Post Wed May 13, 2015 7:37 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Mark in Minnesota



Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 2065
Location: Saint Louis Park, MN
 Reply with quote  

Jillette wrote: "I'm a political hedonist. I want to feel good about my gal or guy. I don't want to just feel only less horrible. And I won't vote for the 'lesser of two evils' so as not to 'waste my vote.' Someone needs to really deserve my vote to get it."

I'm at least a little sympathetic to that worldview (or the "I'll probably stay home because I don't feel represented" one) in elections for things like seats in the House, but when people give it to me about Senate elections or Presidential elections, it makes me feel real frustration, pretty much every single time.

At the risk of repeating myself, the next President will likely be appointing replacements for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, and perhaps also Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer. By the end of the 45th's President's first term, all four of those justices will have been appointed at least 26 years ago and be over the age of 81. The President we elect in this next cycle will strongly influence how the court considers challenges to landmark cases like Roe, Citizens United, and Windsor.

I'd personally prefer someone as far left as Sanders over someone as plastic and centrist as Clinton, but I'll vote for Clinton without a moment's hesitation over any Republican on my ballot. Supreme Court appointments last decades, and there's no room in my worldview for strategic withholding of a vote when that's what's at stake.
Post Wed May 13, 2015 10:45 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sage Francis
Self Fighteous


Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21718
 Reply with quote  

The only reason I'd ever vote for Clinton (what happened to the Rodham hyphenation?) is if Bush becomes her prime opposition. But I'm still firm on my stance that the only person who will get me into a voting booth is Sanders.
Post Wed May 13, 2015 10:56 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Limbs



Joined: 04 Feb 2011
Posts: 1027
 Reply with quote  

Much like Larry Wilmore with Obama (and maybe me too), if hilary gets the nomination i'll vote for her only because she's a woman.

Also from the Penn article:

"I disagree with KoBros a lot, but probably less with them than I disagree with Bernie Sanders -- it's hard to measure. It's like comparing Vermont apples and billions of barrels of oil. Bernie is kind of a socialist and I'm kinda not. He's for big government, and I'm not. He thinks central planning can solve problems and I think even if central planning could solve problems, I'm against it."

That's what i don't like.

I'll probably vote for Bernie. I haven't thought about him since 08 at least so I'm catching up. He's consistent and I more or less agree with everything he says as talking points. I'm not sure how he's gonna reconcile the socialist label with the baby boomers and them. Really I don't see many reagan (clinton) democrats taking him seriously. Maybe he won't need them and I'm most certainly cynical.
Post Thu May 14, 2015 1:14 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
DeadAwake



Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 596
Location: Aus.
 Reply with quote  

I can not say much about politics, because from where i stand i cant really say i personally see any of the effects, aside from increasing prices. And i am curious as to what everyday people, blue collar civilians, have categorically proved to themselves as regards the actual effects of a certain president and his team on a country.

When Obama first got elected that was crazy though, just seeing the televized reactions and so forth. It really didnt hit me how big it was until fairly recent. I can see i am convinced now that to be a president someone has to be a highly esteemed public speaker (obviously), but as to what their actual job involves besides public speeches i have no idea, other than writing new policies. But how they are instituted etc remains a mystery. Also what weight the whole campaigning/advertising side of it carries. The use of emotionally charged words/slogans , for instance, in the Hope and Change campaign, seems to override peoples critical faculties (or maybe influences people without them) greatly. What was the Hope FOR? and the supposed CHANGE, in what direction was it supposed to be? I am not in America, so maybe it was elucidated and i missed.

More or less, in the realm of politics, i am of the belief that the whole THING, the weight, movement and direction of the societies of countries is something that is far too large and complex for governments to pull the reigns on and control according to their principals. That vicissitudes mostly influence what happens and for example, one change can produce ten repercussions in different areas. All a governing body can do is offer some passive resistance.

But maybe my outlook is poor and im not seeing something that many ordinary people see.
Post Sun May 17, 2015 2:38 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Mark in Minnesota



Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 2065
Location: Saint Louis Park, MN
 Reply with quote  

If McCain had beaten Obama in 2008, United States v Windsor would have been decided by a Supreme Court bench where Justices Kagan and Sotomayor's seats were filled by more conservative Republican appointees. Large numbers of same-sex marriages in this country would never have happened.

Not to keep seizing on that one hugely critical example of a Presidential power that changes lives for decades after a term ends.
Post Sun May 17, 2015 10:28 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1847
Location: Earf.
 Reply with quote  

DeadAwake wrote:
i am convinced now that to be a president someone has to be a highly esteemed public speaker (obviously),


Post Sun May 17, 2015 6:58 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1847
Location: Earf.
 Reply with quote  

Also, after the Bern Unit, is there anyone on the political horizon who hasn't been bukkake'd by corporate juices?

We're pretty much at the point where every politician is bought and paid for.

Post Sun May 17, 2015 8:45 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DeadAwake



Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 596
Location: Aus.
 Reply with quote  

Plum Puddin' wrote:
DeadAwake wrote:
i am convinced now that to be a president someone has to be a highly esteemed public speaker (obviously),





I think through what said... good.
Post Tue May 19, 2015 7:00 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Limbs



Joined: 04 Feb 2011
Posts: 1027
 Reply with quote  

Is Aus. short for Australia, DeadAwake?
Post Tue May 19, 2015 1:36 pm
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:32 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon