Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
BigSteelThrill

Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being.

Recommended Posts

 

8 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

How much do you suppose that cutting taxes, "rebuilding our military", and starting a new ground war overseas is going to cost?

 

Some of Bernie's tax policies listed from more reliable sources below. I'm sure most Bernie fans hate these MSM sites, but I find them in conjunction with one and another to be helpful, a few links below. The guy has a great agenda and seems genuine, but just like I want a Penthouse over Central Park, it won't happen bc I can't afford it, similar principle here, unless taxes skyrocket.

To answer your question, I hate Trump/Cruz - I wouldn't vote for any of them. They'd prob just drive the debt up to finance a war anyways which is just as bad. They all suck. It's pointless to debate at this point bc Bernie is all but done. It looks likely that Hillary will be the next POTUS, she sucks too FTR.

http://time.com/4194179/bernie-sanders-tax-plan/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/study-sanders-15.3t-tax-hike-would-hit-middle-class-rich/article/2584970

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/01/19/bernie-sanders-is-proposing-really-big-tax-increases/#3e7d1bd1617c

the largest proposed tax increase in modern history, according to Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gr00vus said:

So did his message just not strike home with enough people? Maybe it's not what the U.S. wants?

Tough to make up campaigning ground over 6 months against someone who's been running for President for 12 years or so. I'm thinking just not being enough of a known quantity on the national level has been the downfall. Maybe not.

You know, America loves a chain restaurant, loves a brand.  We go into a town we haven't been to, the vast majority of people will stick with what they know. 

To a man, you ask almost any person, they will KNOW the best food experience is not coming at Chili's.  But Chili's, by design, is going to be roughly the same in Spokane Washington, as it will be in Erie Pennsylvania as it will be in Destin Florida.  Mediocre, which, by definition, is sometimes just what you want. 

Most people DON'T want to go for the transcendent dining experience, because the flipside of that is, you are more likely to get burned with a bad meal at an unknown restaurant than you are at Chili's.  They aren't informed or inclined to seek out the great meal, they'll take the name they know.   Low ceiling but a high floor. 

Instead of chasing greatness that they don't know, that could go wrong, American people will choose the mediocre they know. 

Hillary: Feelin Good in the neighborhood. 

Edited by Smack Tripper
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Smack Tripper said:

You know, America loves a chain restaurant, loves a brand.  We go into a town we haven't been to, the vast majority of people will stick with what they know. 

To a man, you ask almost any person, they will KNOW the best food experience is not coming at Chili's.  But Chili's, by design, is going to be roughly the same in Spokane Washington, as it will be in Erie Pennsylvania as it will be in Destin Florida.  Mediocre, which, by definition, is sometimes just what you want. 

Most people DON'T want to go for the transcendent dining experience, because the flipside of that is, you are more likely to get burned with a bad meal at an unknown restaurant than you are at Chili's.  They aren't informed or inclined to seek out the great meal, they'll take the name they know.   Low ceiling but a high floor. 

Instead of chasing greatness that they don't know, that could go wrong, American people will choose the mediocre they know. 

Hillary: Feelin Good in the neighborhood. 

For uniformed, low-tech people this is true.

For people that have learned the power of the internet, you can know what you are walking into well before you go there.  Same is true of the candidates.  The truth is out there and it is at our fingertips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NCCommish said:

Dude is a standard GOPer running on the same failed policies. There are no good alternatives on the right.

I pretty much feel the same of the left. I lean right and if there was anyone decent on the left I'd be voting for them this year. The whole lot of em is a steaming pile of crapola.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chet said:

It's ironic to me that Bernie was the most trustworthy candidate but I was viscerally opposed to most of his platform.  I take major issue with redistribution of wealth.

I understand this position, I really do.  But I take major issue with poverty and crime, and in particular our incarceration system.

The crime rate in this country is astronomical.  Especially the violent crime rate.  The best studies I've seen show a very close correlation between a reasonable minimum standard of living and a massive drop in violent crime, especially armed burglaries and robberies.  Something has to be done, and until we address crime at its root, the redistribution of wealth will be taken up by the poor at gunpoint instead of by the well off at the ballot box.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

Thought rubio had a great exit speech and love what he said but that made too much sense.

Link to that speech, for anyone who missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

It's against RNC rules for him to have the nomination without at least 8 state wins.

That rule was only put in to keep Ron Paul from being nominated on the first ballot.  Those rules can be amended at any time.  Politically I don't know if they could stand the heat to do so, but there is nothing stopping those from being altered from my understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

That rule was only put in to keep Ron Paul from being nominated on the first ballot.  Those rules can be amended at any time.  Politically I don't know if they could stand the heat to do so, but there is nothing stopping those from being altered from my understanding.

If they do that, they might as well make Romney the nominee and actually win the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smack Tripper said:

You know, America loves a chain restaurant, loves a brand.  We go into a town we haven't been to, the vast majority of people will stick with what they know. 

To a man, you ask almost any person, they will KNOW the best food experience is not coming at Chili's.  But Chili's, by design, is going to be roughly the same in Spokane Washington, as it will be in Erie Pennsylvania as it will be in Destin Florida.  Mediocre, which, by definition, is sometimes just what you want. 

Most people DON'T want to go for the transcendent dining experience, because the flipside of that is, you are more likely to get burned with a bad meal at an unknown restaurant than you are at Chili's.  They aren't informed or inclined to seek out the great meal, they'll take the name they know.   Low ceiling but a high floor. 

Instead of chasing greatness that they don't know, that could go wrong, American people will choose the mediocre they know. 

Hillary: Feelin Good in the neighborhood. 

https://media2.giphy.com/media/qC5VWY0keuqha/200.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

I understand this position, I really do.  But I take major issue with poverty and crime, and in particular our incarceration system.

The crime rate in this country is astronomical.  Especially the violent crime rate.  The best studies I've seen show a very close correlation between a reasonable minimum standard of living and a massive drop in violent crime, especially armed burglaries and robberies.  Something has to be done, and until we address crime at its root, the redistribution of wealth will be taken up by the poor at gunpoint instead of by the well off at the ballot box.

Doesn't matter to him, he'll just take his inflated income here and go across the border to a place with better social welfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

Interested to see how his campaign manager spins this in the latest email.

politico piece this morning had him talking about super delegates breaking to Bernie if he has momentum at the end which I found to be quite odd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still wish he would just run independent.  I am gonna hate voting for Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fantasycurse42 said:

 

 

Some of Bernie's tax policies listed from more reliable sources below. I'm sure most Bernie fans hate these MSM sites, but I find them in conjunction with one and another to be helpful, a few links below. The guy has a great agenda and seems genuine, but just like I want a Penthouse over Central Park, it won't happen bc I can't afford it, similar principle here, unless taxes skyrocket.

To answer your question, I hate Trump/Cruz - I wouldn't vote for any of them. They'd prob just drive the debt up to finance a war anyways which is just as bad. They all suck. It's pointless to debate at this point bc Bernie is all but done. It looks likely that Hillary will be the next POTUS, she sucks too FTR.

http://time.com/4194179/bernie-sanders-tax-plan/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/study-sanders-15.3t-tax-hike-would-hit-middle-class-rich/article/2584970

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/01/19/bernie-sanders-is-proposing-really-big-tax-increases/#3e7d1bd1617c

 

 

Part of the problem with the "sell" of Bernie's plans is that they can't be looked at in a vacuum. If everyone was covered under Medicare, of course that would mean huge tax increases to pay for it. It would also mean that the 10s of thousands of dollars spent per household annually by employers and employees in the current group insurance scheme, which covers the large majority of the country, would go away.

"Free" college tuition would require more taxes, but also alleviate billions in annual student loan costs. 

And, of course, there would be downstream consequences of all these plans that would likely be a mix of positive and negative depending on your POV. 

As MT pointed out in one of the Trump threads yesterday, all this stuff is difficult to understand even if you are smart and pay attention. Trying to sort it out and make a case through all the noise is a huge challenge. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gr00vus said:

So did his message just not strike home with enough people? Maybe it's not what the U.S. wants?

Tough to make up campaigning ground over 6 months against someone who's been running for President for 12 years or so. I'm thinking just not being enough of a known quantity on the national level has been the downfall. Maybe not.

I said this earlier, but I think the U.S. wants someone like him but with more centrist views/policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, humpback said:

I said this earlier, but I think the U.S. wants someone like him but with more centrist views/policies.

In terms of just fiscal policy?  I think he is a lot closer to the median voter on foreign/social policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chet said:

It's ironic to me that Bernie was the most trustworthy candidate but I was viscerally opposed to most of his platform.  I take major issue with redistribution of wealth.

It's going to happen eventually. Things can't keep going the way they're going and remain stable. Bernie's policies weren't a major redistribution of wealth by a long shot, more drastic measures will have to be taken down the road the longer we keep putting this off. Unmitigated greed, self interest and myopic focus on short term gains are going to bring this country down.

Edited by Gr00vus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The free college plan will never make it through. Those who are far enough removed and have paid their loans have no interest in paying for others, since nobody paid for them.

Just my .02, but this type of platform will only be embraced across the board by a younger generation, today and in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fantasycurse42 said:

 

 

Some of Bernie's tax policies listed from more reliable sources below. I'm sure most Bernie fans hate these MSM sites, but I find them in conjunction with one and another to be helpful, a few links below. The guy has a great agenda and seems genuine, but just like I want a Penthouse over Central Park, it won't happen bc I can't afford it, similar principle here, unless taxes skyrocket.

To answer your question, I hate Trump/Cruz - I wouldn't vote for any of them. They'd prob just drive the debt up to finance a war anyways which is just as bad. They all suck. It's pointless to debate at this point bc Bernie is all but done. It looks likely that Hillary will be the next POTUS, she sucks too FTR.

http://time.com/4194179/bernie-sanders-tax-plan/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/study-sanders-15.3t-tax-hike-would-hit-middle-class-rich/article/2584970

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/01/19/bernie-sanders-is-proposing-really-big-tax-increases/#3e7d1bd1617c

 

 

Would you have been impacted (personally - literally) by Bernie's tax plan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a conservative most of my life, but have found myself disgusted with what the GOP has become and consequently became more independent.  I viewed Sanders has someone I could support despite him being left of left.  You knew he would do what he thought was best for the poor/middle class.  Can't say I believe that with any other candidate and consequently will probably not vote.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

It's against RNC rules for him to have the nomination without at least 8 state wins.

If the minimum isn't zero, how are Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney in the conversation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

If the minimum isn't zero, how are Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney in the conversation?

I think those conversations presume the rules will be changed ahead of/at the convention. There don't seem to be any rules against changing the rules in such fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You remember the stories John use to tell us about the the three chinamen playing Fantan?

This guy runs up to them and says, "Hey, the world's coming to an end!" and the first one says, "Well, I best go to the mission and pray,"

and the second one says, "Well, hell, I'm gonna go and buy me a case of Mezcal and six whores,"

and the third one says "Well, I'm gonna finish the game."

I shall finish the game, Doc.

 

Lamenting over.  I think we should print "Regulators for Bernie" t-shirts.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you will not hear from the political and media establishment is that, based on the primary and caucus schedule for the rest of the race, this is the high water mark for the Clinton campaign. Starting today, the map now shifts dramatically in our favor.

Arizona, Idaho, and Utah are up next Tuesday. Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington State caucus the Saturdayafter. Then it's Wisconsin's turn to vote.

That means we have an extremely good chance to win nearly every state that votes in the next month. If we continue to stand together, we’re just getting started for our political revolution.

#BernBabyBern

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he fights as hard in the next eight States as he has in the last eight, there could be big delegate shifts.  That would be nice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This #### right here is what I want to challenge:

https://consumerist.com/2016/03/16/comcast-att-lobbyists-help-kill-community-broadband-expansion-in-tennessee/

Quote

When cable and telecom companies go through the effort of writing anti-consumer legislation for states, they can later be counted on to lobby to keep those laws in place when challenged. Case in point: Lobbyists for Comcast and AT&T recently helped kill a small piece of legislation in Tennessee that would have allowed a city-run utility to expand the reach of its broadband service.

Tennessee — one of around 20 states with laws that heavily restrict the availability of community-owned broadband — allows city-owned electric utilities to provide broadband services, but only within that utility’s electric service area. So if a neighboring community wants to pay for access to this service but is not within the electric service footprint, it can’t.

State representative Kevin Brooks recently introduced legislation [PDF] originally intended to revise these state regulations to allow utilities to allow muni broadband providers to expand beyond their existing utility area into communities that want the service.

But, reports the Times Free Press, the pushback from lobbyists for Comcast and AT&T — both of whom have recently launched gigabit broadband efforts in the state — was so harsh that even when Brooks tried to introduce an amendment that would only allow a single test demonstration program, it still couldn’t get the approval of the state house’s Business and Utilities Subcommittee.

Here’s a chilling image from the Times Free Press report:
“On Tuesday at the state Capitol in Nashville, a platoon of lobbyists and executives, including AT&T Tennessee President Joelle Phillips, were present in the House hearing room or watching on a video screen as Brooks presented the bill and the amendment.”

Additionally, one of the five committee members — Patsy Hazlewood — who voted against Brooks’ amendment is a retired AT&T executive. No potential conflict of interest there.

“It’s a testament to the power of lobbying against this bill and not listening to our electorate,” said Brooks, whose original bill was not even put up for a vote by the subcommittee. He and others who support muni broadband have vowed to try again to push through appropriate legislation.

However, that may not be needed, depending on the outcome of an issue pending in federal appeals court.

Last year, Chattanooga’s city-run EPB utility — which can provide data speeds of up to ten times that of Google Fiber to some customers  successfully petitioned the FCC to overturn Tennessee’s restrictive laws, but the state has petitioned the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down the FCC order, claiming the agency overstepped its authority. Oral arguments in that matter are slated for tomorrow.

Technically speaking, the FCC order is still in effect, meaning EPB and other muni broadband providers could expand to communities outside their electric service footprint. But it makes more sense for the utilities to await the outcome of the state’s appeal before they begin sinking time and resources into building out their networks.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, campaign finance reform was just the start. We really need to get things done to severely curtail, possibly eliminate, lobbying as it currently exists. Unfortunately they're putting Bernie, the one candidate who would actually try to do something about it, in a corner. Then there are the whole promises of cushy corporate jobs to congressmen, appointment of corporate representatives as government agents, etc. problems to address. Again, there's one candidate running who'll try to do something about that, but he's getting marginalized while the bulk of the citizens of this country get ####ed by insider shenanigans like that. And no, Trump won't do thing one to change any of that if he gets into office. He's been an insider his whole life, it's how he's made his fortune and fame.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be sending some money Bernie's way ahead of the next set of primaries. It's basically paying to get these messages out there so people get them in their heads even if they don't end up voting for him. If it happens enough, eventually they'll figure it out.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Slapdash said:
4 hours ago, humpback said:

I said this earlier, but I think the U.S. wants someone like him but with more centrist views/policies.

In terms of just fiscal policy?  I think he is a lot closer to the median voter on foreign/social policies.

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, pantagrapher said:

ok dad

Though I'm not going to engage in comments on physical appearance or age, I'd figure an HRC supporter would probably want to avoid throwing stones in that particular glass house. Similarly with Trump supporters.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Gr00vus said:

Though I'm not going to engage in comments on physical appearance or age, I'd figure an HRC supporter would probably want to avoid throwing stones in that particular glass house. Similarly with Trump supporters.

Yeah, those three are - if memory serves - six years apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, chet said:

It's ironic to me that Bernie was the most trustworthy candidate but I was viscerally opposed to most of his platform.  I take major issue with redistribution of wealth.

How about the redistribution from the middle class to the top 1% over the last 35 years?

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Homer J Simpson said:
9 hours ago, chet said:

It's ironic to me that Bernie was the most trustworthy candidate but I was viscerally opposed to most of his platform.  I take major issue with redistribution of wealth.

How about the redistribution from the middle class to the top 1% over the last 35 years?

Not THAT kind of redistribution....THAT kind is ok.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

30 minutes ago, Homer J Simpson said:

How about the redistribution from the middle class to the top 1% over the last 35 years?

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said early on in this thread that greed is killing our country.  Nothing is ever enough.  And as some have pointed out its only going to get worse as people lose their jobs to automation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AAABatteries said:

I've said early on in this thread that greed is killing our country.  Nothing is ever enough.  And as some have pointed out its only going to get worse as people lose their jobs to automation.

For a guy named after batteries, you sure seem to have it in for robots.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In tribute to Sinn Fein, who could have written this word for word, here is Bernie fan H. A. Goodman from the Huffington Post: scorched earth. Hillary could be indicted any day. Never a vote for Hillary, never! Better to let the Republicans win if it comes to that, though it won't because Bernie is still the frontrunner. 

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/16/our_nominee_is_a_disaster_time_may_be_running_out_but_democrats_will_come_to_rue_clinton_over_sanders/#comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does John Goodman say? Is the DNC entering a world of pain?

Edited by Gr00vus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Gr00vus said:

What does John Goodman say? Is the DNC entering a world of pain?

You need a toe, Bernie can get you a toe.  With polish.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

In tribute to Sinn Fein, who could have written this word for word, here is Bernie fan H. A. Goodman from the Huffington Post: scorched earth. Hillary could be indicted any day. Never a vote for Hillary, never! Better to let the Republicans win if it comes to that, though it won't because Bernie is still the frontrunner. 

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/16/our_nominee_is_a_disaster_time_may_be_running_out_but_democrats_will_come_to_rue_clinton_over_sanders/#comments

If you think the two are analogous, you haven't been paying attention to what Sinn Finn's been saying.  I, for one, am not surprised in the least.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

Never a vote for Hillary, never! Better to let the Republicans win if it comes to that

Word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Slapdash said:

So....Jill Stein or Gary Johnson are the choices?

Was just watching a Jill Stein interview on The Young Turks. About 30 minutes in (32:50, if you find the same exact clip), she held up Al Sharpton as a man of integrity.

Adios, was all I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, The Commish said:

If you think the two are analogous, you haven't been paying attention to what Sinn Finn's been saying.  I, for one, am not surprised in the least.

Based on your recent posts, I think I have a much better understanding of Sinn Fein than you do of me. But I'm open to learning differently: what did Mr. Goodman write that Sinn Fein would take issue with? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Based on your recent posts, I think I have a much better understanding of Sinn Fein than you do of me. But I'm open to learning differently: what did Mr. Goodman write that Sinn Fein would take issue with? 

There's no question.  You SHOULD have a better understanding of Sinn Finn than any of us do of you.  You're all over the place as you've documented thoroughly.  I'm not in the business of speaking for others.  All I'd recommend you do is go back and read his posts and reevaluate.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Commish said:
  12 hours ago, chet said:

It's ironic to me that Bernie was the most trustworthy candidate but I was viscerally opposed to most of his platform.  I take major issue with redistribution of wealth.

:goodposting:

 

Share this post


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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.