Bernie takes the lead in first national poll post Warren attack

[Economy 53,112]

14 hours ago, mgmpochhit said:

You go Bernie. I truly believe he can do a significant change that would actually help the lives of Americans for better.

There's a lot he can change and him bearing Biden increasingly seems like a very real possibility

 

Now what I'm starting to wonder is what can he pass? I'm gonna tag @ItsTommyBitch for your perspective cuz I know ur such a strong supporter

 

I know in Government in order to pass anything you often have to compromise and stuff and even then it can be hard. Obama for example had such a hard time passing any of his agendas

 

And Bernie I get the sense is a bit stubborn and doesn't want to compromise on anything. Like on the new NAFTA (USMCA) he said the labor standards still weren't good enough and so he didn't vote for it...

 

But I'm thinking, there was literally no other serious proposal at the time, so if the new NAFTA didn't pass it would revert back to the old one... If no other serious proposal was on the table, wouldn't it make more sense to support an improvement to labor standards then to leave the status quo that was worse? What was he accomplishing by voting no?

 

I guess what I'm saying is, he's gonna have ideas much if the government won't support, and if he's not willing to moderate some of them, would he manage to actually pass anything?

 

I wasn't thinking of this before, but now that his chances of winning have seemed to increase, I find myself thinking about the technicalities of a Bernie Presidency rather than just generic across the board ideals  

[LibraLove 1,282]

21 minutes ago, Economy said:

There's a lot he can change and him bearing Biden increasingly seems like a very real possibility

 

Now what I'm starting to wonder is what can he pass? I'm gonna tag @ItsTommyBitch for your perspective cuz I know ur such a strong supporter

 

I know in Government in order to pass anything you often have to compromise and stuff and even then it can be hard. Obama for example had such a hard time passing any of his agendas

 

And Bernie I get the sense is a bit stubborn and doesn't want to compromise on anything. Like on the new NAFTA (USMCA) he said the labor standards still weren't good enough and so he didn't vote for it...

 

But I'm thinking, there was literally no other serious proposal at the time, so if the new NAFTA didn't pass it would revert back to the old one... If no other serious proposal was on the table, wouldn't it make more sense to support an improvement to labor standards then to leave the status quo that was worse? What was he accomplishing by voting no?

 

I guess what I'm saying is, he's gonna have ideas much if the government won't support, and if he's not willing to moderate some of them, would he manage to actually pass anything?

 

I wasn't thinking of this before, but now that his chances of winning have seemed to increase, I find myself thinking about the technicalities of a Bernie Presidency rather than just generic across the board ideals  

He said he wasn't voting for that proposal not only because of the labor standards, but more so because it had absolutely no mention of Climate Change or environmental standards in the wording.

[LibraLove 1,282]

We love to see it. And still two weeks before Iowa, so lots of time for more improvement!

[Economy 53,112]

28 minutes ago, LibraLove said:

He said he wasn't voting for that proposal not only because of the labor standards, but more so because it had absolutely no mention of Climate Change or environmental standards in the wording.

I guess I'm talking more about the fact that it was still a step up in Standards in certain things but because it wasn't sufficient he didn't vote in favour of it

 

If there was another proposal with MORE standards that may have made sense to do it... But there wasn't. If the new NAFTA didn't pass it would automatically remain in the old one (or worse if the US did pull out of the old one, then there's no Standards at all from that agreement the 3 Nations would have to be held to in trading)

 

So what im saying is what was the point? Because if it didn't pass it would be even worse. Was it a protest just to send a message?

 

Cuz if so, holding out on compromise based on principal and integrity might sound good as a senator but as a President it could work against him completely in actuality passing anything

 

Or do u think as President he'd recognize that he'd have no choice but to work with the Government to get some of his agendas done?

 

I just can't help it but to get the impression that he's the type that wouldn't want to yield to pressure because he wants to fight for his vision but then it backfires because it results in nothing actually getting passed

 

The only politician I'm aware of (at least among the more known ones anyway) that agree with how far left he goes and would probably vote in favour of his proposals as he made them would probably be Ocasio Cortez

[Buddy 5,686]

14 hours ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

Bernie 2020 😌😌

Your avi 

[Shaney 5,515]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

There's a lot he can change and him bearing Biden increasingly seems like a very real possibility

 

Now what I'm starting to wonder is what can he pass? I'm gonna tag @ItsTommyBitch for your perspective cuz I know ur such a strong supporter

 

I know in Government in order to pass anything you often have to compromise and stuff and even then it can be hard. Obama for example had such a hard time passing any of his agendas

 

And Bernie I get the sense is a bit stubborn and doesn't want to compromise on anything. Like on the new NAFTA (USMCA) he said the labor standards still weren't good enough and so he didn't vote for it...

 

But I'm thinking, there was literally no other serious proposal at the time, so if the new NAFTA didn't pass it would revert back to the old one... If no other serious proposal was on the table, wouldn't it make more sense to support an improvement to labor standards then to leave the status quo that was worse? What was he accomplishing by voting no?

 

I guess what I'm saying is, he's gonna have ideas much if the government won't support, and if he's not willing to moderate some of them, would he manage to actually pass anything?

 

I wasn't thinking of this before, but now that his chances of winning have seemed to increase, I find myself thinking about the technicalities of a Bernie Presidency rather than just generic across the board ideals  

The thing with Bernie that is different from past President’s is that Bernie will not stop rallying people for his policies once he is President. 

That is how he’ll create pressure to get these things passed.

[Economy 53,112]

1 minute ago, Bae said:

The thing with Bernie that is different from past President’s is that Bernie will not stop rallying people for his policies once he is President. 

That is how he’ll create pressure to get these things passed.

That will certainly help. We'll see if that's enough tho

 

I keep getting this nagging feeling he's not going to manage to get half as much done as his supporters are hoping for

 

And it's not because I'm doubting his determination, it's just because of how politics work

 

I don't agree with all of his ideas and proposals. But Healthcare coverage and cheaper education would be nice to see

[LibraLove 1,282]

46 minutes ago, Economy said:

I guess I'm talking more about the fact that it was still a step up in Standards in certain things but because it wasn't sufficient he didn't vote in favour of it

 

If there was another proposal with MORE standards that may have made sense to do it... But there wasn't. If the new NAFTA didn't pass it would automatically remain in the old one (or worse if the US did pull out of the old one, then there's no Standards at all from that agreement the 3 Nations would have to be held to in trading)

 

So what im saying is what was the point? Because if it didn't pass it would be even worse. Was it a protest just to send a message?

 

Cuz if so, holding out on compromise based on principal and integrity might sound good as a senator but as a President it could work against him completely in actuality passing anything

 

Or do u think as President he'd recognize that he'd have no choice but to work with the Government to get some of his agendas done?

 

I just can't help it but to get the impression that he's the type that wouldn't want to yield to pressure because he wants to fight for his vision but then it backfires because it results in nothing actually getting passed

 

The only politician I'm aware of (at least among the more known ones anyway) that agree with how far left he goes and would probably vote in favour of his proposals as he made them would probably be Ocasio Cortez

Bernie is NOT uncomprimisable. He has compromised with moderate and conservatives in Congress many times before. But, I think when running for President, there's a difference. Republicans in Congress are hard to move period - that's why when Democrats lost both houses two years into Obama's first term, he wasn't able to get much done. Sanders recognizes that as President, he must use the bully pulpit to push the people to move their elected officials.

Now, if he won with massive turnout, Democrats could take both houses - replacing the Republican majority in the Senate with a Democratic one and expanding in the House. Some Democrats will be Left, some will be Moderate, and then there's the conservative Republicans. Since Sanders isn't pivoting to the center like the others, he has wiggle room. So, yeah, some of his policies probably won't end up like how he campaigned for them to be, but at least he shot high for us, and we can end up somewhere between Left and Center Left, where as with people like Biden, Buttigieg and Klobuchar starting from the center, we'd end up with more center right stuff like the Affordable Care Act and other baby step policies that don't move far enough with urgency.

[Economy 53,112]

13 minutes ago, LibraLove said:

Bernie is NOT uncomprimisable. He has compromised with moderate and conservatives in Congress many times before. But, I think when running for President, there's a difference. Republicans in Congress are hard to move period - that's why when Democrats lost both houses two years into Obama's first term, he wasn't able to get much done. Sanders recognizes that as President, he must use the bully pulpit to push the people to move their elected officials.

Now, if he won with massive turnout, Democrats could take both houses - replacing the Republican majority in the Senate with a Democratic one and expanding in the House. Some Democrats will be Left, some will be Moderate, and then there's the conservative Republicans. Since Sanders isn't pivoting to the center like the others, he has wiggle room. So, yeah, some of his policies probably won't end up like how he campaigned for them to be, but at least he shot high for us, and we can end up somewhere between Left and Center Left, where as with people like Biden, Buttigieg and Klobuchar starting from the center, we'd end up with more center right stuff like the Affordable Care Act and other baby step policies that don't move far enough with urgency.

Yeah I talked about this before how a presidents target ends up being more like a direction between the current status quo and where they want to go and then in reality you end up somewhere in between. It's also the same reason I'm not big on Biden cuz ending up somewhere in between the current status quo and Biden's ideals would still be too far right for my taste

 

I personally think going as far left as he proposes on certain things would backfire long term. Can't in my mind support an 8% wealth tax or 35% (with few loop holes) tax rates cuz I think that would hurt business competitiveness so much in this globalized economy that ud generate a lot less wealth to redistribute to begin with. 

 

However I still support him as a viable candidate cuz I don't think we'd ever go all the way to what he wants and the direction would be positive nevertheless

 

What i was questioning now was more just whether his personality would allow for any compromising or not to actually pass anything and go in a certain direction in the first place. The NAFTA thing and the way he talks made me wonder whether or not he would compromise if necessary

[LibraLove 1,282]

37 minutes ago, Economy said:

Yeah I talked about this before how a presidents target ends up being more like a direction between the current status quo and where they want to go and then in reality you end up somewhere in between. It's also the same reason I'm not big on Biden cuz ending up somewhere in between the current status quo and Biden's ideals would still be too far right for my taste

 

I personally think going as far left as he proposes on certain things would backfire long term. Can't in my mind support an 8% wealth tax or 35% (with few loop holes) tax rates cuz I think that would hurt business competitiveness so much in this globalized economy that ud generate a lot less wealth to redistribute to begin with. 

 

However I still support him as a viable candidate cuz I don't think we'd ever go all the way to what he wants and the direction would be positive nevertheless

 

What i was questioning now was more just whether his personality would allow for any compromising or not to actually pass anything and go in a certain direction in the first place. The NAFTA thing and the way he talks made me wonder whether or not he would compromise if necessary

I fully believe that he will, and he absolutely understands the power of the "bully pulpit" that the President possesses and he knows how to use it. Just look at him putting national social pressure on huge companies like Amazon and others who raised their wages. He can do it. I think just right now, in an appeal to his base and others who want a candidate that they believe will stand up for what the candidate and voters believe in, he can not start compromising or pivoting in the Primary before even getting to work with the moderate Dems/Republicans as President. Just look at what pivoting on Medicare for All did to Warren.

[lego 44,165]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Evan Peters 10,796]

gughj those few members who cry about bernie always in threads about him huh

[HorusRa2 5,005]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

Yeah I talked about this before how a presidents target ends up being more like a direction between the current status quo and where they want to go and then in reality you end up somewhere in between. It's also the same reason I'm not big on Biden cuz ending up somewhere in between the current status quo and Biden's ideals would still be too far right for my taste

 

I personally think going as far left as he proposes on certain things would backfire long term. Can't in my mind support an 8% wealth tax or 35% (with few loop holes) tax rates cuz I think that would hurt business competitiveness so much in this globalized economy that ud generate a lot less wealth to redistribute to begin with. 

 

However I still support him as a viable candidate cuz I don't think we'd ever go all the way to what he wants and the direction would be positive nevertheless

 

What i was questioning now was more just whether his personality would allow for any compromising or not to actually pass anything and go in a certain direction in the first place. The NAFTA thing and the way he talks made me wonder whether or not he would compromise if necessary

Why do you have such a strong opposition to Bernie's tax rates? Bernie isn't trying to restore the much higher taxes that existed back in the 1950's which represented some of the best years of the america's economy? I am not trying to make this a loaded question and I'm certainly not advocating for a 90% marginal tax rate but to see your consistent (which I can appreciate) point about bernie's taxation being too much perplexes me. 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

That will certainly help. We'll see if that's enough tho

 

I keep getting this nagging feeling he's not going to manage to get half as much done as his supporters are hoping for

 

And it's not because I'm doubting his determination, it's just because of how politics work

 

I don't agree with all of his ideas and proposals. But Healthcare coverage and cheaper education would be nice to see

The point I'm going to drive on this comment is this. 

1. That's a feeling and you're entirely entitled to it but that's just a feeling. Feelings aren't always based in fact. 

2. When was the last time that someone tried making real change in the way that Bernie argues? 

3. Why are you so opposed to trying something different? (This is a loaded question because Warren as an example does not have a theory of change that requires doing anything that's all that different than the way things are right now, maybe eliminating the filibuster is the only big change to how things get done that I've seen). 

4. I know there are some people who think that the world will be fixed when Bernie wins, but that's not the case; however, just because he doesn't get everything he's advocating for done doesn't mean that is a net negative towards him. Besides, when Obama had a super majority in both  house and senate and what did he accomplish? A right wing healthcare plan, destabilized Libya, bombed more countries than any president I'm aware of, bailed out wall street and increased wealth inequality. Doesn't really sound like he accomplished everything he set out for. 

 

 

[Economy 53,112]

56 minutes ago, HorusRa2 said:

The point I'm going to drive on this comment is this. 

1. That's a feeling and you're entirely entitled to it but that's just a feeling. Feelings aren't always based in fact. 

2. When was the last time that someone tried making real change in the way that Bernie argues? 

3. Why are you so opposed to trying something different? (This is a loaded question because Warren as an example does not have a theory of change that requires doing anything that's all that different than the way things are right now, maybe eliminating the filibuster is the only big change to how things get done that I've seen). 

4. I know there are some people who think that the world will be fixed when Bernie wins, but that's not the case; however, just because he doesn't get everything he's advocating for done doesn't mean that is a net negative towards him. Besides, when Obama had a super majority in both  house and senate and what did he accomplish? A right wing healthcare plan, destabilized Libya, bombed more countries than any president I'm aware of, bailed out wall street and increased wealth inequality. Doesn't really sound like he accomplished everything he set out for. 

 

 

I'll try to answer as best as I can

 

1. I know it's just a feeling. I never stated it as some fact. I literally just brought it up to discuss it based on what I've seen if his style of talking or examples like NAFTA.

 

2. I have no idea tbh. That wasn't what I was putting at issue. Whether changes are small in scale or bigger in scale like Bernie's propositions... Them needing to be passed still goes thru the exact same government process. So the issue of getting stuff passed or not is still there

 

3. I never said I was opposed to trying something different? I'm not 100% sure what ur refering to in that question

 

4. Yeah that's politics in general. We are in a democracy. The downside of it is that it's often disfunctional, everything often takes a long time to get done etc. No politician is ever free of those difficulties unless they are lucky to both have a super majority in Government and have their party support most of their ideas

 

That's why minority Governments like we have in Canada right now is a nightmare. Things mostly just stay as they are cuz nothing can ever pass