Jump to content
The Evolution of Gaga
politics

Bernie Sanders raised $18.2M in 41 days


Morphine Prince

Featured Posts

Just now, Marionette said:

Someone scourged wikipedia :triggered:

I'm glad you're so passionate about politics! I respect your opinion, and let's hope to bring down the Orange Trash! :tony:

Thank you. Trump must be defeated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Just now, hurricane326 said:

Thank you. Trump must be defeated

We @OG Gaga Stan have to be careful as Democrats to not divide ourselves again. We learned this lesson hard when Hillary lost, and we cant have it this time around! As a Jewish gay immigrant (yep, I'm all three lol) I will be overwhelmingly devastated if this degenerate snake is in the White House for another four years. 

Beto, Pete, Bernie I will stand by any of these three men to ward off hate. 

knight dilly dilly GIF by Bud Light

Link to post
Share on other sites

Othon
6 minutes ago, Marionette said:

Someone scourged wikipedia :triggered:

I'm glad you're so passionate about politics! I respect your opinion, and let's hope to bring down the Orange Trash! :tony:

No, I just care/pay attention to politics. The information about his paper wasn't reported on until this morning. None of that came from Wikipedia. :laughga: 

Clinton didn't lose to Trump because the democrats were "divided." Significantly more Sanders voters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton voters voted for Obama in 2008 (and he still won in a landslide). She lost because she was an unpopular candidate with a horrible record, running on a platform woefully out of touch with the mindset of the electorate.

Obviously I'm voting for the dem in 2020. I just want it to be a. the most popular politician in America with b. the most progressive platform, that c. can actually motivate young people to get out and vote and d. has the strongest chance to beat Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, OG Gaga Stan said:

No, I just care/pay attention to politics. The information about his paper wasn't reported on until this morning. None of that came from Wikipedia. :laughga: 

Clinton didn't lose to Trump because the democrats were "divided." Significantly more Sanders voters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton voters voted for Obama in 2008 (and he still won in a landslide). She lost because she was an unpopular candidate with a horrible record, running on a platform woefully out of touch with the mindset of the electorate.

Obviously I'm voting for the dem in 2020. I just want it to be a. the most popular politician in America with b. the most progressive platform, that c. can actually motivate young people to get out and vote and d. has the strongest chance to beat Trump.

ok 

Let's beat Trump :tony:

Link to post
Share on other sites

rumours
1 hour ago, Morphine Prince said:

Harambe

Don’t make fun of Harambe. I campaigned for him all over Nebraska :nails:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shadow

People are allowed to have different views. Stop the bullying and insulting.

Stand in the light, cast your shadow.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Economy
5 hours ago, KleinGa said:

I agree it is amazing but his campaign has been actively asking people to make multiple small donations instead of a big large one. 

They've actually been asking people who donate $1000+ to split that up into no less than 5 payments. In fact, it was earlier revealed that the interns are focusing on the QUANTITY of donations over total amount.

Regardless of that, he still raised A LOT but I wouldn't look at the average donation as any indication of his demographics since they're being fudged a bit...

Why are they asking donations to be split?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morphine Prince
29 minutes ago, Economy said:

Why are they asking donations to be split?

Not sure if that is true, but the reason to split donations would be so that the average donation amount can remain low to give off the appearance that most contributions are coming from regular people donating small amounts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Economy
Just now, Morphine Prince said:

Not sure if that is true, but the reason to split donations would be so that the average donation amount can remain low to give off the appearance that most contributions are coming from regular people donating small amounts. 

Ughhhhhhh I hate politics... Everything has to be a game of appearances always, no exceptions :saladga:

Link to post
Share on other sites

KleinGa
34 minutes ago, Economy said:

Why are they asking donations to be split?

to increase the total number of donations and have a lower average amount donated. 

For Example:

Ron wants to donate $1000. If he donates the full thing it would mean that its one donation and a high amount. Meanwhile, if Ron is to split his donations into 5, that would be $200  donated 5 times. That increases the total amount of donations (5) and contributes to a lower average rate of donations. 

Their strategy is pretty smart if you ask me. Its being done to showcase Bernie as the frontrunner as having loads of small donations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Economy
Just now, KleinGa said:

to increase the total number of donations and have a lower average amount donated. 

For Example:

Ron wants to donate $1000. If he donates the full thing it would mean that its one donation and a high amount. Meanwhile, if Ron is to split his donations into 5, that would be $200  donated 5 times. That increases the total amount of donations (5) and contributes to a lower average rate of donations. 

Their strategy is pretty smart if you ask me. Its being done to showcase Bernie as the frontrunner as having loads of small donations.

Yeah... It's manipulative and not truly honest

 

I hate the way politics works :madge:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Othon
11 minutes ago, Economy said:

Yeah... It's manipulative and not truly honest

 

I hate the way politics works :madge:

I really doubt that this is true. I haven't been able to find anything confirming it in any major news outlet and the user claiming that this is happening is on twitter calling Sanders voters "deplorables," so... they're probably not the most reliable source.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HorusRa2

So. Since I received WP for my hateful post from before, I am going to state that the “what” I said was wrong. However, the point that I was trying to make clear was substantive. 

 

For @hurricane326

lets talk about Beto.

what do you know about him? What is your belief on climate change? If you care about climate change, you should really be wary of a candidate like Beto who has only received less oil & gas company money than Republican Ted Cruz aka The Devil Personified. 

 

Lets talk about Kamala. 

Where do you stand on criminal justice reform? Would it bother you to find that Ms. HRC Harris herself likes to toot the horn that she is a Capital P Progressive but historically is very harsh to people of color & chose not to prosecute a CEO from a big bank for crimes committed (because she received campaign contributions from them). Doesn’t mean the contributions were quid pro quo but the context makes you wonder why she chose not to prosecute. 

 

Lets talk all about Mayor Pete. Yes. He’s very articulate, represents millennials in an overwhelming positive light; however, his stance on Medicare for all is really interesting. For someone that wrote an ode to Bernie Sanders back in 2000 on how great him and his ideas were, Mayor Pete sure doesn’t sound as progressive as Bernie. He wants to do Medicare for those who want it. In other words, he wants to give a public option. The goal is to make healthcare costs go down because the federally funded program is cheaper. That said. While that is a good program, it does not go as far as to say healthcare is a right to all Americans and there is no reason access to healthcare is dependent on you having enough money to pay the doctor. This is a moral objection to the current system. Pete’s idea is in fact better than the current system, but offers opportunity for us to get back to the debate that we’ve been on just getting “universal coverage” much less “universal healthcare” since before I was born (90s). 

 

So so while you can object to Bernie Sanders because of his age and the fact that he doesn’t represent you overly in terms of demographics, I really do not understand how you can literally say he needs to stop and let younger candidates run. If he believed that other candidates would fight for and actually support these policies, do you really think he would be running? Why would he spend what could be some of the last good years of his health to be president? Because he is the only candidate with a consistent record who will actually attempt to implement real capital P, progressive policies. 

If you still disagree with me, fine. But I don’t see how an objective person can object to one’s candidacy due to age. We have the 25th amendment and the line of succession (VP, etc) for a reason. If Bernie became president and died, that doesn’t spell a disaster for the country. What is more important is that we get Donald Trump out. 

 

Note: that does not mean Bernie is a perfect candidate (see his stance on reparations), but when you look at the entire platform, his platform is the most comprehensive and most likely to actually change the economic and political life of working class Americans in a positive way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Economy
1 minute ago, OG Gaga Stan said:

I really doubt that this is true. I haven't been able to find anything confirming it in any major news outlet and the user claiming that this is happening is on twitter calling Sanders voters "deplorables," so... they're probably not the most reliable source.

Ah it's just a rumour ok

 

Cuz I was gonna say... If Bernie is supposed to be so much better than other politicians him playing dirty like that doesn't exactly sell his case to me lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...