Jump to content
Stefani Tee
politics

Bernie Sanders is in trouble

Featured Posts

HorusRa2
12 minutes ago, Whispering said:

Bernie has his own record on voting for bills that supported war. He voted twice in support of regime change in Iraq which had long lasting and devastating consequences in the nineties. He voted in favor of the war on Serbia: once, twice… and on April 28, 1999, he did it again. This was the astounding 213-213 tie vote, which meant that the House of Representatives repudiated the war on Serbia. Sanders also voted for the 2001 Authorization for Unilateral Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), which “pretty much allowed Bush to wage war wherever he wanted”. 

Sanders clings to his death-dealing F-35 Lightning II fighter jet. As Andrew Cockburn reported in Harper’s, Sanders and his Vermont colleague Patrick Leahy waged a fierce bureaucratic fight to bring the jet to the Burlington Air Base as the premier weapon of the Green Mountain Boys, the 158th Fighter Wing of the Vermont Air National Guard. At $191 million per aircraft, the F-35 represents a technological wish-fulfillment for the defense lobby. So, while Bernie Sanders is saying we should cut military spending to fund free college for everyone, his defense of the F-35 means that despite everything else, Sanders is still just a politician.

According to opensecrets.org, in the 2016 race, Sanders took $366,458 from the Defense Industry, only 8% less than Trump.

 

Personally, I prefer Warren’s plan to pay off college debt. The healthcare debate is going to need a dominant Senate and an evolution over the next decade or longer. It will take several steps along the way to get to anywhere close to M4All and Warren would be supportive of pushing for a better healthcare system for everyone. Her anti-corruption proposal is something that also sealed the deal for me. I see her as Presidential and I have confidence in her to be able to do the job at the highest level possible. She is incredibly intelligent and can handle vast amounts of detailed and complex information. Warren is an educator, she is open to learning and changing and has an innate ability to explain complex matters to help others around her understand what she knows and understands. I find all of these attributes to be important for the job of President and for a world leader. 

 

So let's review...since you want to talk about foreign policy, let me show you all the ways that Warren is even worse than Bernie despite having a shorter legislative record to go by. 

 

1.  HR 2810 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 - Warren voted for it. Bernie did not. This provided more money to the defense budget than Trump even ASKED for. 

2. She has stated she will not ease sanctions on Venezuela, which we are placing onto the country illegally. 

3. She has stated she will not condition aid to Israel (Bernie Sanders has indicated multiple times now that he would). This means that Israel can't just do whatever they want to in terms of their treatment of the Palestinians and expect the US to continue to provide monetary aid to them. 

4.   S 722 - Countering Iran's Destabilizing Activities Act of 2017 - Warren voted for this and Bernie did not. He was the only person other than Rand Paul to vote against these sanctions against Russia & Iran. If you're really going to talk about war, let's also establish that sanctions is a form of economic warfare. 

5. If you want to discuss, contributions from the military industrial complex, one senator is from a state where Raytheon. There's an interesting article concerning this topic...   https://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/elizabeth-warren-defense-massachusetts-115157

6. Suggesting that Trump s/b more aggressive with North Korea is not a good look either. 

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/05/elizabeth-warren-foreign-policy

 

Also, if you are so enamored by her anti-corruption bill, I'm sure you're definitely concerned that she is willing to take donor money in the general election. I know everybody in this forum seems to think that it's okay for her to say this because she has to "win" in order to change everything, but if you think she is going to fool these rich people into giving them money so she can turn around and back stab them, you have another thing coming to you. Obama said the same thing and look where that got us. 

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that Bernie is perfect on foreign policy because he's not. However, he is the best on foreign policy with the exception of Tulsi Gabbard. The rest of the democrats are within the party lines and are part of the imperialists that exist in both parties. And if we are going to be part of an actual peace discussion, we're going to have to enter that understanding that the US has committed crimes consistently against the rest of the world, undermined economies, toppled regimes for the sake of oil and committed crimes against humanity. 

 

Both Warren and Bernie are intelligent and capable of processing complex information. They wouldn't be in the positions they are currently in if they were not. Also, if you think Warren is going to push for medicare for all, you're in for another reality. Healthcare is the only thing she does NOT have a plan for. She continues to be vague on this issue whether intentionally or not. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
OG Gaga Stan
21 minutes ago, Whispering said:

It shows that Bernie has voted for bills that supported war and funding war machines. 

I don't find Bernie to be the better candidate on many issues. Period. 

Some people simply don’t agree with your pick. Everyone isn’t for everything that you, or Bernie, is for. Some people have a candidate they like better for various reasons. 

I love Beto’s stance on guns, but don’t see him as one of my first choices. I love Pete’s national service plan, but think he is inexperienced for now. No candidate is perfect. You’ve got to pick the one that is for you, but you can’t force everyone else to think the same as you.

And it, in no way, disproves the fact that he's the strongest on foreign policy of any of the 2020 candidates and is therefore irrelevant in the conversation I was having with someone else. There is no excuse for supporting Warren over Sanders, especially on foreign policy. 

Let me be clear, just so you know not to engage with me again: I have no interest in attempting to convert you. You, personally. You've made absolutely insane center-right arguments on this site for the last year that I've been here, you've dragged me into hours-long back and forths on multiple occasions with bad faith nonsense and defenses of absolutely atrocious centrist war crimes and anti-LGBT idiocy pushed by centrist politicians in an attempt to smear Sanders and I'm not going to do it again.

After I saw you attempt to lecture a Black user on this site about what it means to be Black after you defended Joe Biden's record of working to oppose desegregation efforts, I knew I wanted nothing to do with you: 

Leave me out of your mess. 

Edited by OG Gaga Stan
  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redstreak

I had this huge post detailing my thoughts on this and my computer deleted it so TL:DR Bernie is still rising in the polls albeit slowly and has massive fundraising and donor numbers. He's in the lead in one of the early primary states and leads the fourth place candidate by double digits. He isn't dropping out anytime soon nor should he. If the narrative is that Sander's ambitions are fundamentally over then I really want to ask those same people if they also think people like Buttigieg, Booker, Harris, and Klobuchar should drop out now as well. Methinks a different tune would start playing

Take a moment to think of just flexibility, love, and trust~
  • Thanks 3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering
14 minutes ago, OG Gaga Stan said:

And it, in no way, disproves the fact that he's the strongest on foreign policy of any of the 2020 candidates and is therefore irrelevant in the conversation I was having with someone else. There is no excuse for supporting Warren over Sanders, especially on foreign policy. 

Let me be clear, just so you know not to engage with me again: I have no interest in attempting to convert you. You, personally. You've made absolutely insane center-right arguments on this site for the last year that I've been here, you've dragged me into hours-long back and forths on multiple occasions with bad faith nonsense and defenses of absolutely atrocious centrist war crimes and anti-LGBT idiocy pushed by centrist politicians in an attempt to smear Sanders and I'm not going to do it again.

After I saw you attempt to lecture a Black user on this site about what it means to be Black after you defended Joe Biden's record of working to oppose desegregation efforts, I knew I wanted nothing to do with you: 

Leave me out of your mess. 

That black user did not live in the South during the time of segregation, before or after. I was not lecturing them about something that they didn’t have any way to understand, just simply explaining that their were different schools of thought in the Deep South out that time and even to this day. 

You ask for people who are Warren supporters, to explain why they support her, and then when someone gives you reasons, you attack them.  You are attacking me in the post above. 

In no way have I ever been anti-LGBT and I’m not Center-right. Why are you making accusations and attacking? Just because I prefer one progressive candidate over another one? Maybe I’m not as Progressive as you, but I would still support Bernie whole heartedly if he ends up being the nominee. What’s the purpose of attacking people for selecting another liberal candidate? 

Many Democrats are not “do or die” on just one person. I don’t have a perfect savior I’ve selected. I know they are all politicians, with faults and imperfections...but, it is my sincere belief that several of the current Democratic Nominees would be a good President. 

  • Love 1
  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
PartySick
6 hours ago, Robo Ga said:

"populist gospel" is an extremely bias way to describe his campaign, with the definition of "populist" being highly contested/controversial and the use of "gospel" meant to demean the content of his words and imply that it is a form of religious devotion to follow or support him. It's too bad  that I have to explain this to you bc it's very clear to most.

What is with y'all and trying to talk down to others :rip:

I don't see it that way. Populist isn't an insult and Bernie's always been a preacher, which I honestly appreciate about him. But go off.

🔪🐚🏹💋💎💅💃🔵🐷👠👗🚬💊💕👏
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
PartySick
23 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

I really want to ask those same people if they also think people like Buttigieg, Booker, Harris, and Klobuchar should drop out now as well.

I don't think Bernie should drop out but yeah, these ones probably should :poot:

Let's face it, this is a 3-way race between Bernie, Elizabeth, and Joe.

🔪🐚🏹💋💎💅💃🔵🐷👠👗🚬💊💕👏
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Morphine Prince
Just now, PartySick said:

I don't think Bernie should drop out but yeah, these ones probably should :poot:

Let's face it, this is a 3-way race between Bernie, Elizabeth, and Joe.

Biden is in trouble :giggle:

The friends I've had to bury, they keep me up at night
  • LMAO 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
PartySick
Just now, Morphine Prince said:

Biden is in trouble :giggle:

Good :triggered:

Sanders and Warren are the good candidates :triggered:

🔪🐚🏹💋💎💅💃🔵🐷👠👗🚬💊💕👏
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering
34 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

So let's review...since you want to talk about foreign policy, let me show you all the ways that Warren is even worse than Bernie despite having a shorter legislative record to go by. 

 

1.  HR 2810 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 - Warren voted for it. Bernie did not. This provided more money to the defense budget than Trump even ASKED for. 

2. She has stated she will not ease sanctions on Venezuela, which we are placing onto the country illegally. 

3. She has stated she will not condition aid to Israel (Bernie Sanders has indicated multiple times now that he would). This means that Israel can't just do whatever they want to in terms of their treatment of the Palestinians and expect the US to continue to provide monetary aid to them. 

4.   S 722 - Countering Iran's Destabilizing Activities Act of 2017 - Warren voted for this and Bernie did not. He was the only person other than Rand Paul to vote against these sanctions against Russia & Iran. If you're really going to talk about war, let's also establish that sanctions is a form of economic warfare. 

5. If you want to discuss, contributions from the military industrial complex, one senator is from a state where Raytheon. There's an interesting article concerning this topic...   https://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/elizabeth-warren-defense-massachusetts-115157

6. Suggesting that Trump s/b more aggressive with North Korea is not a good look either. 

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/05/elizabeth-warren-foreign-policy

 

Also, if you are so enamored by her anti-corruption bill, I'm sure you're definitely concerned that she is willing to take donor money in the general election. I know everybody in this forum seems to think that it's okay for her to say this because she has to "win" in order to change everything, but if you think she is going to fool these rich people into giving them money so she can turn around and back stab them, you have another thing coming to you. Obama said the same thing and look where that got us. 

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that Bernie is perfect on foreign policy because he's not. However, he is the best on foreign policy with the exception of Tulsi Gabbard. The rest of the democrats are within the party lines and are part of the imperialists that exist in both parties. And if we are going to be part of an actual peace discussion, we're going to have to enter that understanding that the US has committed crimes consistently against the rest of the world, undermined economies, toppled regimes for the sake of oil and committed crimes against humanity. 

 

Both Warren and Bernie are intelligent and capable of processing complex information. They wouldn't be in the positions they are currently in if they were not. Also, if you think Warren is going to push for medicare for all, you're in for another reality. Healthcare is the only thing she does NOT have a plan for. She continues to be vague on this issue whether intentionally or not. 

1. The defense policy bill (National Defense Authorization Act or NDAA) has passed 56 years in a row, and this time the vote was nearly unanimous, with both Republicans and Democrats.

Bernie voted YES to the NDAA in 2002, 2004, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2013.

4. I’m all for sanctions. I agree with Warren.

5. Yes, both Warren and Bernie have supported the military industry in their home state.

6. Bernie’s statements on Trump and Korea have left me feeling uneasy. 

 

No, I’m not. It will take well over a billion dollars to compete in the general election. I’m all for big donors at that point. Any candidate is going to need them in the general. 

I don’t trust Tulsi at all, so bringing her up isn’t going to be a good argument with me. 

I didn't say she would get M4All. Bernie wouldn’t either. They both will have to start taking steps to change over insurance as we know it. A President isn’t a King. We are going to have to have the Senate and massive popular support from the majority of states. The next President will pick a couple of big policy changes to push through, before they get screwed at mid-terms. You won’t get it all, not even close. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
HorusRa2
16 minutes ago, Whispering said:

1. The defense policy bill (National Defense Authorization Act or NDAA) has passed 56 years in a row, and this time the vote was nearly unanimous, with both Republicans and Democrats.

Bernie voted YES to the NDAA in 2002, 2004, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2013.

4. I’m all for sanctions. I agree with Warren.

5. Yes, both Warren and Bernie have supported the military industry in their home state.

6. Bernie’s statements on Trump and Korea have left me feeling uneasy. 

 

No, I’m not. It will take well over a billion dollars to compete in the general election. I’m all for big donors at that point. Any candidate is going to need them in the general. 

I don’t trust Tulsi at all, so bringing her up isn’t going to be a good argument with me. 

I didn't say she would get M4All. Bernie wouldn’t either. They both will have to start taking steps to change over insurance as we know it. A President isn’t a King. We are going to have to have the Senate and massive popular support from the majority of states. The next President will pick a couple of big policy changes to push through, before they get screwed at mid-terms. You won’t get it all, not even close. 

Then we don’t have much more to talk about. Sanctions is a form of warfare. Supporting them is extremely problematic in my view. 

 

Youre also stating in not so many words that you’re okay with corruption. Corporations and wealthy people should not be capable of rigging elections. To suggest that you’re okay with their influence is to welcome their corruption. FULL STOP. And if you want to say that Warren’s corruption bill is why you like her, I find that wildly fascinating. 

I’m left with the conclusion that you are in fact a neoliberal & I just want to say that your worldview is what has brought us to this point with Trump. It’s why we went to Iraq. It’s why citizens united and net neutrality are issues today. People like you and your political views are what destroyed what was left of our democracy in favor of the two class neoliberal oligarchy we have today. 

 

Good ****ing bye.

Edited by HorusRa2
  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
OG Gaga Stan
Just now, HorusRa2 said:

Then we don’t have much more to talk about. Sanctions is a form of warfare. Supporting them is extremely problematic in my view. 

Youre also stating in not so many words that you’re okay with corruption. Corporations and wealthy people should not be capable of rigging elections. To suggest that you’re okay with their influence is to welcome their corruption. FULL STOP. And if you want to say that Warren’s corruption bill is why you like her, I find that wildly fascinating. 

I’m left with the conclusion that you are in fact a neoliberal & I just want to say that your worldview is what has brought us to this point with Trump. It’s why we went to Iraq. It’s why citizens united and net neutrality are issues today. People like you and your political views are what destroyed what was left of our democracy in favor of the two class neoliberal oligarchy we have today. 

Good ****ing bye.

Yep. You're totally right about them. A total waste of time to even attempt to engage with them. Sorry you had to learn the hard way. :madge:

  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lion Heart

When will Bernie DROP OUT? 

  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering
13 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

Then we don’t have much more to talk about. Sanctions is a form of warfare. Supporting them is extremely problematic in my view. 

 

Youre also stating in not so many words that you’re okay with corruption. Corporations and wealthy people should not be capable of rigging elections. To suggest that you’re okay with their influence is to welcome their corruption. FULL STOP. And if you want to say that Warren’s corruption bill is why you like her, I find that wildly fascinating. 

I’m left with the conclusion that you are in fact a neoliberal & I just want to say that your worldview is what has brought us to this point with Trump. It’s why we went to Iraq. It’s why citizens united and net neutrality are issues today. People like you and your political views are what destroyed what was left of our democracy in favor of the two class neoliberal oligarchy we have today. 

 

Good ****ing bye.

Bernie has supported sanctions at various times, just like he has voted to fund the military budget. 

No, I’m okay with big donations in the general election, as I know that it will take a billion to compete. Until we change the rules on election funding, this is the playing field. If we can put in limits, then we can even the playing field.

I’m simply a liberal, who volunteers and votes in local, state and general elections. I’ve supported with my time and money and voted for many liberals over the years and will continue to do so. 

“People like me” are not the issue and did not give you Iraq, Trump or any of the other **** policies we got from the right. We are the ones who would vote for Bernie if he got the nomination. I would donate and put a sign in my yard. You are blaming the wrong people here because of your blind support of a singular candidate. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItsTommyBitch

She is essentially taking "progressive" as street cred, but her policies and positions are showing that shes barely one at all on certain key elements of progressive policy. I suspect her to move even further in the general, perhaps even to entirely reneg on her support for Medicare 4 All and her Wealth tax. 

I'm not sure what Bernie can do to make media cover him favorably when he does favorable things, they are quite biased against him. It's just unfortunate because he's almost certainly the best candidate to win the general election against Trump, his independent support alone eclipses all candidates, then you add his progressive base, young people, latinx people, women, etc. Warren could win, but unless she's able to be pushed back towards being a through and through progressive, I could see Dems ending up in the same spot they are now in 2024/2028 politically, with little power, little control... and the real kii is that the establishment will say "see, progressive policy loses!" (esp. if Warren wins the nom then loses the general) instead of listening to the critics that say she began to abandon the progressive policies that got her started in the first place, but kept the title.

Media isn't capable of the nuance to distinguish them as candidates, but people that are active on these things can see it quite clearly, so its disingenuous to just say "Warren and Sanders are the two progressives running, point blank" because its more complicated than that.

It is an acknowledgment however that the policies of Buttigieg and Harris and ESPECIALLY Biden aren't very interesting or exciting, since the 2 progressives are essentially leading together :rip: Further it SHOULD be a sign to Democrats that progressivism is popular but they dont want to face that reality because it challenges their power and corruption.


To me those candidates are DoA, but I had hopes for both of them at the beginning of this season really. Kamala ran as a progressive then backed away IMMEDIATELY, despite co-sponsoring Bernie's bills, etc. She was certainly looking to run as a progressive candidate because the policies and ideas are widely popular but she caved real fast. Buttigieg talks well, he has the best intentions in mind, but his policies coming out so late only to be "im 2 cents further left than Joe Biden!" overall is disappointing. The rest are irrelevant. Yang is interesting I guess.

Thanks for coming to my ted talk :laughga:

Edited by ItsTommyBitch
私自身もこの世の中も誰もかれもが, どんなに華やかな人生でも, どんなに悲惨な人生でも, いつかは変貌し, 破壊され、消滅してしまう. すべてがもともとこの世に存在しない一瞬の幻想なのだから
  • Thanks 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...