General

@cuddymd:

I always find it amazing how one-note Bernie Sanders supporters are. Even when you try to make the conversation about his abysmal understanding of foreign politics, all Sanders supporters can talk about are PACs and how awful Wall Street is.

Does it not concern you that electing Bernie would almost certainly mean Russia gets to decide the fate of Syria? That they have already besieged Aleppo and displaced thousands more Syrians? And I suppose it's not a big deal that Iran should let it's alliance of Shiite forces run the area all while giving ISIS a respite from being the focus of attacks. While we are at it, let's let Russian relations with Turkey fester. I'm sure Saudi Arabia won't react violently to Iran's newfound presence. But hey! What does it matter to have Ukraine further destabilized since we have some candidate that didn't have a Super PAC?

Now, I'm going to assume you are a politically knowledgeable person who isn't spouting vapid talking points. How, exactly, has Obama catered to Republicans? Because given Obama's domestic policy, that's one highly dubious claim said with a lot of bravado.

Also, do Sanders supporters really think you can get money out of politics? Like somehow, electing on person into office will make the influence of money of no consequence? Please. Companies and rich people contributing to a political cause isn't necessarily a bad thing, let alone a thing that can be stopped by one election.

Also, you talk as if Clinton is the only alternative to Sanders. Please. I agree that we should be skeptical of Clinton's trustworthiness. But some of these criticisms are highly unfair. Citing her views on gay marriage in 2002 or whatever is a pretty lame and weak tactic. Most Americans at the time, and certainly of her generation, were against it. That's what socoal progress is all about. Chipping away at people's prejudices and having them change their minds. Saying Clinton changed her views from over 10 years ago shouldn't be a "gotcha!" moment. She's a human being. She is allowed to change and develop her views. Even if we accept that it isn't genuine but out of political expediency, isn't that what a good politician does? Represent what the people and their constituents want? So even if personally she feels marriage is just between a man and a woman, if she realizes that as a representative of the Progressive movement that's what people want, so she adapts the cause, what's the problem? Black cat, white cat, what does it matter so long as it catches the mouse?

At any rate, I'll just finish by pointing out that when asked to name how Clinton's PAC financing has influenced her vote in the debate, Sanders couldn't even provide one example. For all his rhetoric about how Clinton is bought, the guy is so incompetent in even his one talking point he couldn't list anything. Not to say that Clinton has never been influenced by lobbyists, but more, people who support his rhetoric seem to fill the same space, were everything is bought by the elite but no concrete examples for it. My view has always been that it's not necessarily wrong forna candidate to be able to listen and compromise with Wall Street. Financing and the markets are a part of the economy and being able to work with this sector of the US is as important as anything else.

For what it's worth, I actually don't support Clinton because I don't trust her, albeit for different reasons. But I do think a lot of Sanders supporters really are super unfair to her and have an appallingly awful understanding of financing sectors and no interest in foreign policy.

@wontpostmuch For all the flaws you're pointing out about bernie, he is still lightyears better for our nation than hillary clinton. He will be the only president ever to not pay bidding to his donors, and he will actually repeal citizens united AND reinstate glass steagall. At BEST hillary does exactly what obama did for 8 years, catering to republicans and cowering to her donors left and right. There will be no progress if hillary is in office, she will not get money out of politics, and big corporations will continue to buy legislation with donor money. Besides, how could anyone legitimately trust hillary clinton? She's a pathological liar and the evidence is everywhere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI.

Bernie is the best chance we have to shift the political power dynamic from the establishment's inner circle, and give it back to everybody. Because right now, the rich elite runs the government with little interest in helping regular citizens.

#bernie2016

Bernie Sanders kickin arse and taking names.

Anyway, Republicans only win with low turnout, so in their attempt to suppress votes, they mandate weekday votes and no holidays on that day.

Isn't it interesting how people can nitpick every candidate just as well? At this point why does it even matter who becomes President, when so many people hate every candidate, and for good reason?

@tuffghost:

No, Sanders would be a huge disaster for other reasons. Mainly, the guy is extremely incompetent when it comes to foreign policy. This is a guy that suggested that Saudi Arabia and Iran could work together to fight Syria, completely unaware that those two countries are currently engaged in two proxy wars, have completely differing objectives on Syria's outcome and are facing economic competition over oil production. Suggesting these two form a coalition by themselves is literally one of the stupidest, most uninformed suggestions you can make.

He would be comfortable letting Russia take over the fight against ISIS, even though they just recently displaced thousands of Syrians in Aleppo and have focused almost entirely on bombing Syrian rebels and almost disregarded military action against ISIS.

I could go on and on about how absolutely uninformed he is on foreign policy. Quite frankly, someone so ignorant to what is going on abroad has no business running for president.

That's not even getting into how his plans would be almost unrealistic to implement. The way our system is set up, states and governors would get heavy say on how his reforms are implemented. I highly doubt Republican states would cooperate and I doubt that the Supreme Court would allow such radical changes to pass. Our government just isn't built or structured that way.

@wontpostmuch: well that's a contrarian post if I ever read one. I'm sure you picked crossbow because it's just as fast as bow too.

But really, the only problem with electing Sanders is the political fallout that would occur from republicans in having a self procalimed demo-socialist in executive branch.

I seriously hope Sanders loses momentum from here on out. The only good thing to come out of his nomination would be the Bloomberg would probably enter the race. But seriously, why do people support Bernie so much? He is the third worst choice for president, behind Trump and Jeb!

USA USA USA USA

lol honestly, Bernie has my support but it's still fun to see how retarded Hillary is.