What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being. (8 Viewers)

A close-minded, intellectually dishonest assessment that fits ones views on how Hillary supporters are close-minded, intellectually dishonest and only accept data that supports their views. That's irony.

 
pantagrapher said:
A close-minded, intellectually dishonest assessment that fits ones views on how Hillary supporters are close-minded, intellectually dishonest and only accept data that supports their views. That's irony.
Click to expand...
so its more like like having 10K spoons when all you need is a knife, right?

 
Washington (CNN)Both of the remaining Democratic candidates for president easily top Republican front-runner Donald Trump in hypothetical general election match-ups,according to a new CNN/ORC Poll.
But Hillary Clinton, who is well ahead in the Democratic race for the presidency, would likely face a stronger challenge should Florida Sen. Marco Rubio or Texas Sen. Ted Cruz capture the Republican nomination for president.

READ: The complete CNN/ORC poll results

In the scenario that appears most likely to emerge from the primary contests, Clinton tops Trump 52% to 44% among registered voters. That result has tilted in Clinton's favor since the last CNN/ORC Poll on the match-up in January.

But when the former secretary of state faces off with either of the other two top Republicans, things are much tighter and roughly the same as they were in January. Clinton trails against Rubio, with 50% choosing the Florida senator compared to 47% for Clinton, identical to the results in January. Against Cruz, Clinton holds 48% to his 49%, a slight tightening from a 3-point race in January to a 1-point match-up now.

Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents.
Click to expand...
Gah, so frustrating that it may go down like this all the way through the nomination process.

WE CAN DO IT! If you're in a Super Tuesday state, you best be fn voting today.  :gang1:

 
The Commish said:
humpback said:
My fear is that most of his impact is going to be negated when he drops out and throws his support behind Hillary.
Click to expand...
My fear as well.  No question.  Winning hides (allows us to ignore) a lot of warts.  If we want something better than Trump vs Hillary we can't focus on the "victories" and ignore the obvious warts.
Click to expand...
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X

 
humpback said:
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X
Click to expand...
It would be more bizarre for him to support a different general election candidate.

 
What will be kind of frustrating is if Hillary's nomination is secured by winning primaries in a passel of states that she will lose by huge margins in the general election. Democratic voters in states like South Carolina and Texas and Alabama and Georgia mean nothing in the general election. But they will go a large way toward determining who Democrats in reliably blue states get to cast their vote for in November.

When it's all said and done, it will be interesting - though entirely meaningless - to see how Bernie fared vs. Hillary in blue state and swing state primaries, compared to red states.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I don't know what you're saying.  Of course he will endorse Hillary.  Sanders' whole shtick is that he cares about the issues, and Hillary is way closer to him on the issues he deems important than Trump or anyone else running.  
Click to expand...
I don't know if you mean that to minimize his platform. But even though I do not agree with his fiscal policies and desires the guy is genuine. I don't see anything that amounts to Shtick. I see a guy who wants to change Washington.

I just don't agree with his views on a lot of things that to me scream anti capitalism. But he is the real Mccoy and I commend him for being a real person and not like his counterpart used car salesman traditional politicians.

This country needs a real deal moderate candidate again. Where the hell have they gone? We are so damn separated right now. It's one extreme or the other.

Such a shame.

 
bananafish said:
One thing that may be hurting him, especially among African Americans, is his lack of religiosity. Of course this is a positive for me, but it may be hurting his ceiling, especially in the south.

I haven't heard anything, just occurred to me. Hopefully the atheist heathens come out in Massachusetts.
Click to expand...
It's absolutely slaughtering him in the South.  In a lot of demographics.  Plus, his best case scenario for being religious is to come out as an observant Jew.  Which will absolutely slaughter him in the South.  In a lot of demographics.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I don't know what you're saying.  Of course he will endorse Hillary.  Sanders' whole shtick is that he cares about the issues, and Hillary is way closer to him on the issues he deems important than Trump or anyone else running.  
Click to expand...
Lol.  His whole "shtick" is that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution against the status quo.  Hillary is the poster child for what he rails against.

 
Sanders said he would endorse the nominee at the start of the race. To me, Sanders hasn't been playing to win, of course when he was creeping up in the national polls, I wanted to hedge that opinion with, "either that or he's a genius playing a game we can't comprehend." I think he got in because really no one else was, I really think he was called upon rather than any personal ambition. 

Ralph Nader has made a good point about how if he loses he will leave all these supporters with no where to go. He said he shouldn't have endorsed Hillary from the beginning but rather set up some concrete conditions in exchange for his endorsement.

I'll be jumping on the Jill Stein train if Bernie loses the nomination, our donations up to $250 get matched by the federal government!

 
crewmember said:
Sanders said he would endorse the nominee at the start of the race. To me, Sanders hasn't been playing to win, of course when he was creeping up in the national polls, I wanted to hedge that opinion with, "either that or he's a genius playing a game we can't comprehend." I think he got in because really no one else was, I really think he was called upon rather than any personal ambition. 

Ralph Nader has made a good point about how if he loses he will leave all these supporters with no where to go. He said he shouldn't have endorsed Hillary from the beginning but rather set up some concrete conditions in exchange for his endorsement.

I'll be jumping on the Jill Stein train if Bernie loses the nomination, our donations up to $250 get matched by the federal government!
Click to expand...
Sanders doesn't really play that game.  I understand Nader's thoughts, but they're why he never made serious headway as a legitimate candidate.  Sanders doesn't believe in holding things hostage, in my opinion.  It's also why he's voted for a bunch of bills he didn't necessarily endorse when they were going to pass anyway and he could get an amendment tacked on that might do some good. 

 
crewmember said:
Ralph Nader has made a good point about how if he loses he will leave all these supporters with no where to go. 
Click to expand...
Bernie's supporters should stick around and change the Democratic Party from the inside, so that maybe the next time somebody with Bernie's views runs in the Democratic primary we will see a different result.  That would have a much greater impact than Nader's quixotic attempts at the Presidency.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Bernie's supporters should stick around and change the Democratic Party from the inside, so that maybe the next time somebody with Bernie's views runs in the Democratic primary we will see a different result.  That would have a much greater impact than Nader's quixotic attempts at the Presidency.
Click to expand...
Tulsi Gabbard, for instance. 

 
Not all of Bernie's supporters, at least here Oklahoma, are democrats btw.  I know of several republicans that changed their parties just so they can vote for him (closed primaries).  I being one.  I will never support abortion, but his policies on other issues is enough for me to vote for him. 

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Bernie's supporters should stick around and change the Democratic Party from the inside, so that maybe the next time somebody with Bernie's views runs in the Democratic primary we will see a different result.  That would have a much greater impact than Nader's quixotic attempts at the Presidency.
Click to expand...
I don't think Naders point was unrealistic or stupid at all. And Bernie supporters are trying to fix the party by voting for him in the primary.

 
rascal said:
Not all of Bernie's supporters, at least here Oklahoma, are democrats btw.  I know of several republicans that changed their parties just so they can vote for him (closed primaries).  I being one.  I will never support abortion, but his policies on other issues is enough for me to vote for him. 
Click to expand...
What are the main ones that made you switch?

 
It is fascinating how Hillary has assembled Obama's coalition of the rich/educated and African-Americans, while replacing young voters with old. And Bernie has young voters and white working people.

 
rascal said:
Not all of Bernie's supporters, at least here Oklahoma, are democrats btw.  I know of several republicans that changed their parties just so they can vote for him (closed primaries).  I being one.  I will never support abortion, but his policies on other issues is enough for me to vote for him. 
Click to expand...
from article i just posted,  From Jan. 1 through Feb. 26, the state has registered 13,340 Democrats and 20,929 Republicans. During the same time period, the office saw just over 5,000 Democrats apply to change their registration to Republican, and nearly 1,500 switch from being registered Independents to the GOP.1 Shapard called the movement a “micro-trend,” likely of voters who see the Trump appeal or, at the very least, want in on the action of this year’s Republican race.

 
humpback said:
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X
Click to expand...
Sure...it's a rock and a hard spot politically.  Maybe he will say he's voting third party :lol:

 
The_Man said:
What will be kind of frustrating is if Hillary's nomination is secured by winning primaries in a passel of states that she will lose by huge margins in the general election. Democratic voters in states like South Carolina and Texas and Alabama and Georgia mean nothing in the general election. But they will go a large way toward determining who Democrats in reliably blue states get to cast their vote for in November.

When it's all said and done, it will be interesting - though entirely meaningless - to see how Bernie fared vs. Hillary in blue state and swing state primaries, compared to red states.

Iowa, New Hampshire, Wisconsin are all states that democrats will have to defend with Clinton as nominee that they really wouldn't have to with Sanders. Another frustrating thing is the party isn't registering people in the primaries like they usually do, because they are working for Clinton and Clinton needs low turnout the win the nomination.
Click to expand...

 
The_Man said:
It is fascinating how Hillary has assembled Obama's coalition of the rich/educated and African-Americans, while replacing young voters with old. And Bernie has young voters and white working people.
Click to expand...
At some point in the last 8 years, every demographic has rejected Hillary. :P

 
The_Man said:
What will be kind of frustrating is if Hillary's nomination is secured by winning primaries in a passel of states that she will lose by huge margins in the general election. Democratic voters in states like South Carolina and Texas and Alabama and Georgia mean nothing in the general election. But they will go a large way toward determining who Democrats in reliably blue states get to cast their vote for in November.

When it's all said and done, it will be interesting - though entirely meaningless - to see how Bernie fared vs. Hillary in blue state and swing state primaries, compared to red states.
Click to expand...
I've been making this point for months now, and I'm a Hillary fan. It is a bizarre aspect of the Democratic primaries, and it is largely due to white people in the south abandoning the Democratic Party after the Civil Rights movement. 

But for Hillary what goes around comes around: she lost to Obama in 2008 in the same way, by losing the black vote in the south. 

 
rascal said:
Immigration, Tax and Political Reform, climate change (tired of earthquakes) and the fact is support is from typical Americans and not super rich.
Click to expand...
the earthquakes and fracking he mentioned in a press release or something but didn't mention in his speech while he was in Oklahoma. Guess he didn't want to criticize clinton on video tape.

 
crewmember said:
the earthquakes and fracking he mentioned in a press release or something but didn't mention in his speech while he was in Oklahoma. Guess he didn't want to criticize clinton on video tape.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't get that at all.  The fact Oklahomans are rioting against the oil/gas industry due to the earthquakes is unprecedented.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
humpback said:
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X
Click to expand...
Sure...it's a rock and a hard spot politically.  Maybe he will say he's voting third party :lol:
Click to expand...
Better yet, he should run third party.  You certainly aren't going to get a political revolution by backing down and supporting the establishment.

 
538's final "polls +" forecast for each state now shows OK a tossup and Clinton 90%+ to win every other primary state.  Could be a clean sweep outside the caucus states.

 
humpback said:
The Commish said:
humpback said:
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X
Click to expand...
Sure...it's a rock and a hard spot politically.  Maybe he will say he's voting third party :lol:
Click to expand...
Better yet, he should run third party.  You certainly aren't going to get a political revolution by backing down and supporting the establishment
Click to expand...
I wasn't a big fan of him going the route he did, but if we're being honest, the way the system is set up, he didn't have much of a shot if he didn't run on one of the two major party tickets.  We know that his message would have been curb stomped.  He chose to go this route so he could reach more people.  Hopefully, his message is picked up by someone else and they can run with it via a third party channel.

 
Bernie said during a debate that Clinton was much better than any of the candidates the GOP was offering. He'll have no problem at all saying Clinton is best available choice once he drops out.

 
hagmania said:
Much as we compare Sanders' views to those of Europe, he'd never have a chance if the US had a similar nomination process. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding the parties just pick their candidate and the people only participate in the general.
Click to expand...
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
That's sort of the way they do it in a parliamentary system, but there also are generally more than two parties.
Click to expand...
Sorry to double back on this post on everyone's SuperDuper Tuesday, but Bernie would probably be part of (and maybe the leader of) a sizable minority party in a parliamentary system while Trumpf might have trouble finding a spot suitable for him. First, he'd have to win a seat somewhere. And then he'd have to have a political party of some heft elect him as the party leader. Good luck with that.

Our constitution is getting some rust on it. Parts of it aren't so great for modern elections and governance.

 
roadkill1292 said:
Sorry to double back on this post on everyone's SuperDuper Tuesday, but Bernie would probably be part of (and maybe the leader of) a sizable minority party in a parliamentary system while Trumpf might have trouble finding a spot suitable for him. First, he'd have to win a seat somewhere. And then he'd have to have a political party of some heft elect him as the party leader. Good luck with that.

Our constitution is getting some rust on it. Parts of it aren't so great for modern elections and governance.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of racist, anti-establishment parties in Europe. Drumpf would just start his own, like Geert Wilders or Jean Marie Le Pen

 
msommer said:
There are plenty of racist, anti-establishment parties in Europe. Drumpf would just start his own, like Geert Wilders or Jean Marie Le Pen
Click to expand...
Well, let's say that we had a Christian Freedom Party winning some percentage of seats in the new U.S. Parliament. Would running Trump for PM be enough for the CFP to pick up enough seats to form a government? I don't know about that. Also, a three week election cycle would make it a lot harder to get the old Trumpf-for-PM momentum going.

 
The Commish said:
humpback said:
The Commish said:
humpback said:
But he'd be enabling that by supporting her.  

How can he say with a straight face that the system is corrupt and we need a political revolution, and then tell people to vote for Hillary Clinton?  :X
Click to expand...
Sure...it's a rock and a hard spot politically.  Maybe he will say he's voting third party :lol:
Click to expand...
Better yet, he should run third party.  You certainly aren't going to get a political revolution by backing down and supporting the establishment
Click to expand...
I wasn't a big fan of him going the route he did, but if we're being honest, the way the system is set up, he didn't have much of a shot if he didn't run on one of the two major party tickets.  We know that his message would have been curb stomped.  He chose to go this route so he could reach more people.  Hopefully, his message is picked up by someone else and they can run with it via a third party channel.
Click to expand...
I actually don't have a problem at all with him going the route he did- he really had no choice if he wanted his message to be heard.  My issue is, why support someone who is the epitome of the broken system that you are trying to fix (assuming he does)?

 
humpback said:
I actually don't have a problem at all with him going the route he did- he really had no choice if he wanted his message to be heard.  My issue is, why support someone who is the epitome of the broken system that you are trying to fix (assuming he does)?
Click to expand...
Because she's not the epitome of the broken system. That's just a lazy narrative. They agree on a lot of things.

 
roadkill1292 said:
Well, let's say that we had a Christian Freedom Party winning some percentage of seats in the new U.S. Parliament. Would running Trump for PM be enough for the CFP to pick up enough seats to form a government? I don't know about that. Also, a three week election cycle would make it a lot harder to get the old Trumpf-for-PM momentum going.
Click to expand...
Sure, but campaigning in Europe isn't only done in the election cycle, which is how Wilders and Le Pen have arrive at prominence. They take every opportunity to stir up ugly feelings by saying provocative things that the media reports. Sound familiar? It would be up to 4 years of non stop Drumpf campaigning from the moment he decided to open his own party/platform

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Did Barack Obama Destroy Abortion Rights By Lying About Codifying Roe v. Wade? (6/26/22 7:24 PST)
Replies
4
Views
538
squistion
squistion
GordonGekko
Revisiting The Young Turks 2016 Election Meltdown Over Trump's Stunning Victory (7/7/2022 9:35 PST)
Replies
16
Views
465
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
How Hillary Clinton's Toxic "Rape Narrative" Helped To Destroy Roe Vs Wade (5/9/22 5:07 PST)
Replies
22
Views
817
jm192
jm192

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)
Top