Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
BigSteelThrill

Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being.

Recommended Posts

When you vote for someone you are rewarding their behavior. In this case the way they are or will govern. If you continue to vote for people who don't govern the way you would like why should they change? Oh silly liberals I can do anything and you'll still vote for me because Trump is scary. See him acting stupid? Scary right? So you know screw you I will continue to bathe myself in the system I say I detest and dare you to not vote for me 

It's like going everyday to the same place and eating food you hate. You pay for it every day and you tip every day all while hoping that one day they'll change. Why would they?

So I'm not eating at that diner anymore. I hope it doesn't take a lot of us not eating there to get someone's legitimate attention but it's on them if it does.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and it's always the people who have been recipients of wealth redistribution over the last 30 years that are the ones most worried about an little going the other way.

There is class warfare in this country and the rich kicked our asses.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie supporters...what percent are angry enough to vote trump/or not at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GROOT said:

Bernie supporters...what percent are angry enough to vote trump/or not at all?

I won't vote Trump and I will not vote Clinton . I will vote though. Offices from local to state and federal up for grabs. I just won't vote the top of the ticket.

 

Thought I should add I won't vote any Republican and none of the 3rd party people excite me.

Edited by NCCommish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2016 at 0:31 AM, renesauz said:

It's been impossible to fix mostly because big business owns Washington. Much of the support Bernie gets is because he's willing to fight that. It seems likely he'll fail, but at least the discussion will have been started.

I have never seen winning the nomination as the measure of success or failure.  I think the number of people talking about and/or seriously considering liberal positions is still too low, but I think Sanders has certainly moved the needle.  Though it would be a mistake to reset the ceiling for liberal position candidates from the historic 20s to whatever percentage of votes Sanders ends up with after June as we have seen that a certain percentage of those votes are not for his positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2016 at 9:48 PM, Shula-holic said:

Hillary also gets votes of more moderate voters.  She may have moved left on some issues to combat Bernie, but most voters don't believe she's that far left in her true beliefs.

I think Hillary will pursue liberal policies where ever the polls allow which will usually mean badly compromised centrists positions.  I don't think that this is really indicative of what "tyrant for a day" Hillary would pursue.  And while I hate it, I'm not sure I can argue that ultimately that this is not more successful.  Kind of like how Bernie has a pretty terrible voting record with voting for terrible bills with inevitable passage  where he was able to add some small, incremental step amendment.  

I don't think Hillary is pivoting as much back to the center as many keep thinking.  In part because Sanders will "keep her honest" at least until the convention, and also because Sanders has pushed those polls just a little bit further to the left..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:
22 hours ago, tommyGunZ said:

So when Bernie endorses Hillary, that's when you decide he's not trustworthy?

I want him to keep running, if he endores her it will be a kick in the balls.  

But still...

23 hours ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

And in hindsight I like that Bernie stuck to his guns even when not popular.  Years later, more often than not he was right.  

He has good judgement and integrity.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, The Commish said:

Well yeah...they have a good thing going in their party right now.  They're winning a lot.  The short term is to "keep doing what you're doing" not seeing that it won't last and change is beginning to happen anyway.

Democrats are winning? A lot?  Maybe the White House, but not much else,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

Your point?

That maybe you should value the judgment and integrity of the person who sticks to their guns with an unpopular position but is usually proven correct come November. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

I won't vote Trump and I will not vote Clinton . I will vote though. Offices from local to state and federal up for grabs. I just won't vote the top of the ticket.

 

Thought I should add I won't vote any Republican and none of the 3rd party people excite me.

You might as well be voting for Trump.

Share this post


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

When you vote for someone you are rewarding their behavior. In this case the way they are or will govern. If you continue to vote for people who don't govern the way you would like why should they change? Oh silly liberals I can do anything and you'll still vote for me because Trump is scary. See him acting stupid? Scary right? So you know screw you I will continue to bathe myself in the system I say I detest and dare you to not vote for me 

It's like going everyday to the same place and eating food you hate. You pay for it every day and you tip every day all while hoping that one day they'll change. Why would they?

So I'm not eating at that diner anymore. I hope it doesn't take a lot of us not eating there to get someone's legitimate attention but it's on them if it does.

You make change happen by voting for the person you want in primary, not giving your vote to a wannabe dictator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, cstu said:

You might as well be voting for Trump.

I don't think that's how math works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

North Carolina is a swing state, so NC's vote is much more important than mine is for example. I could refuse to vote for Hillary and it wouldn't make any difference. But if NC refuses to do so, it really is a vote for Trump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

North Carolina is a swing state, so NC's vote is much more important than mine is for example. I could refuse to vote for Hillary and it wouldn't make any difference. But if NC refuses to do so, it really is a vote for Trump. 

That's still not how math works.  Even in North Carolina.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

That's still not how math works.  Even in North Carolina.

Oh yeah?? Well suppose Trump wins North Carolina by ONE VOTE? And suppose he wins the election one ONE ELECTORAL VOTE? Can we blame NC then? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how I've never heard from a single Nader voter in Florida. They probably claim to have voted for Gore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Oh yeah?? Well suppose Trump wins North Carolina by ONE VOTE? And suppose he wins the election one ONE ELECTORAL VOTE? Can we blame NC then? 

 

No, you can blame the Democrats for relying on a state that's only gone blue once since Jimmy Carter won it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Herron and Lewis concluded that approximately 60% of Florida's Nader voters would have been Gore voters if the 2000 race hadn't included Nader. Clearly, Ralph Nader drew far more votes from Gore than he did from Bush, and on this account alone was an enormous Republican asset in 2000.

Furthermore, Karl Rove and the Republican Party knew this, and so they nurtured and crucially assisted Nader's campaigns, both in 2000 and in 2004. On 27 October 2000, the AP's Laura Meckler headlined "GOP Group To Air Pro-Nader TV Ads." She opened: "Hoping to boost Ralph Nader in states where he is threatening to hurt Al Gore, a Republican group is launching TV ads featuring Nader attacking the vice president [Mr. Gore]. ... 'Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of,' Nader says [in the commercial]. An announcer interjects: 'What's Al Gore's real record?' Nader says: 'Eight years of principles betrayed and promises broken.'" Meckler's report continued: "A spokeswoman for the Green Party nominee said that his campaign had no control over what other organizations do with Nader's speeches." Bush's people - the group sponsoring this particular ad happened to be the Republican Leadership Council - knew exactly what they were doing, even though the liberal suckers who voted so carelessly for Ralph Nader obviously did not. Anyone who drives a car the way those liberal fools voted, faces charges of criminal negligence, at the very least. But this time, the entire nation crashed as a result; not merely a single car.

Furthermore, it seems that during the closing days of the 2000 political contest, Ralph Nader was choosing to campaign not in states where polls showed that he had a chance to win (of which states there were none), but instead in states where Gore and Bush were virtually tied and Nader's constant appeals to "the left" would be the likeliest to throw those states into Bush's column. One political columnist noted this fact: On 26 October 2000, Eric Alterman posted online for the Nation, "Not One Vote!" in which he observed with trepidation, that during the crucial final days of the campaign, "Nader has been campaigning aggressively in Florida [get that - in Florida!], Minnesota, Michigan, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin. If Gore loses even a few of those states, then Hello, President Bush." This was prophetic - but also knowable in advance. Nader wasn't stupid; his voters were, but he certainly was not.

 

Edited by cstu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a voter doesn't believe a candidate represents them as they'd like and that candidate ends up losing it's not on the voter. If the candidate needs that vote they should appeal to that voter. 

I don't have any issue with Hillary running to the middle if she believes that's going to garner her more votes overall. If she ends up losing because some don't vote for her? That's on her for not appealing to progressives and/or other voters.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bottomfeeder Sports said:

Democrats are winning? A lot?  Maybe the White House, but not much else,

That's all that matters to the simple minded :shrug:  And they've done just fine for themselves in the Senate.

Share this post


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

North Carolina is a swing state, so NC's vote is much more important than mine is for example. I could refuse to vote for Hillary and it wouldn't make any difference. But if NC refuses to do so, it really is a vote for Trump. 

That's still not how math works.  Even in North Carolina.

This is a fruitless endeavor HF and the thought process is a significant part of the reason this country gets the candidates we get.  It's been an interesting meme that's grown strength as people bail on their side of the establishment.

Share this post


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

That's still not how math works.  Even in North Carolina.

Oh yeah?? Well suppose Trump wins North Carolina by ONE VOTE? And suppose he wins the election one ONE ELECTORAL VOTE? Can we blame NC then? 

 

Blame them for what Tim?  Participating in our voting process?  Yeah...how dare they!!!!!! :rolleyes:  You love doing the comparison politics thing all the time.  Why would you blame NC, after all they are voting between Hillary and Trump.  The choices you helped create.  If NC votes for Trump then it's on Hillary for not being able to convince them her goat rodeo wasn't better than Trumps.  If you want to blame anyone, blame your precious Hillary and the people who made it Hillary vs Trump in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If HRC wins we can run another progressive in 8 years.  If GOP wins we only have to wait 4.  The difference between HRC and what the GOP puts up is marginal at best.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

That's still not how math works.  Even in North Carolina.

Oh yeah?? Well suppose Trump wins North Carolina by ONE VOTE? And suppose he wins the election one ONE ELECTORAL VOTE? Can we blame NC then? 

 

Blame them for what Tim?  Participating in our voting process?  Yeah...how dare they!!!!!! :rolleyes:  You love doing the comparison politics thing all the time.  Why would you blame NC, after all they are voting between Hillary and Trump.  The choices you helped create.  If NC votes for Trump then it's on Hillary for not being able to convince them her goat rodeo wasn't better than Trumps.  If you want to blame anyone, blame your precious Hillary and the people who made it Hillary vs Trump in the first place.

Share this post


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

Blame them for what Tim?  Participating in our voting process?  Yeah...how dare they!!!!!! :rolleyes:  You love doing the comparison politics thing all the time.  Why would you blame NC, after all they are voting between Hillary and Trump.  The choices you helped create.  If NC votes for Trump then it's on Hillary for not being able to convince them her goat rodeo wasn't better than Trumps.  If you want to blame anyone, blame your precious Hillary and the people who made it Hillary vs Trump in the first place.

 

Yeah, don't blame us if 50% of us aren't crooks or morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best case scenario for me here. I get to support the best candidate and have a clear conscience, he loses, and I still get to keep all my money!  Thanks 'Hill!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've maintained for a while now that I will not vote for Hillary or Trump but it's an interesting topic I was discussing with my wife yesterday.  If I somehow magically knew that my single vote determined the entire outcome and it was all on my shoulders it would take a lot of soul searching but I think I come down on the side of not ever being able to vote for Trump. I think he's dangerous and will set race relations back.  I believe Hillary to be a liar and a phony but so are a lot of politicians - Trump is also a liar, a phony AND dangerous, IMO.

Thankfully that scenario could never happen to any of us - it's fantasy.  You might as well ask me if I would cheat on my wife with Jessica Alba, it's never happening.  It's even easier knowing that my state (Georgia) would almost assuredly vote Trump no matter what.

Share this post


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

Oh yeah?? Well suppose Trump wins North Carolina by ONE VOTE? And suppose he wins the election one ONE ELECTORAL VOTE? Can we blame NC then? 

 

You could probably blame me too in that scenario

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

I've maintained for a while now that I will not vote for Hillary or Trump but it's an interesting topic I was discussing with my wife yesterday.  If I somehow magically knew that my single vote determined the entire outcome and it was all on my shoulders it would take a lot of soul searching but I think I come down on the side of not ever being able to vote for Trump. I think he's dangerous and will set race relations back.  I believe Hillary to be a liar and a phony but so are a lot of politicians - Trump is also a liar, a phony AND dangerous, IMO.

Thankfully that scenario could never happen to any of us - it's fantasy.  You might as well ask me if I would cheat on my wife with Jessica Alba, it's never happening.  It's even easier knowing that my state (Georgia) would almost assuredly vote Trump no matter what.

 

Trump may set back race relations, let's say 95% likely.

Clinton will continue down Obama's path of setting back black job opportunities, let's say 99.99%.

 

Who really is more dangerous for this country?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, NC went Obama in 2008 and Romney in 2012.  It goes the direction I vote so you don't have to worry about the one vote scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours 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.

Just catching up here, but I don't know how you got the idea that was a shot at Bernie's age. I was responding to the tone of the previous post: a stern look and the phrase "Don't you dare give up on me."

Share this post


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

 

Trump may set back race relations, let's say 95% likely.

Clinton will continue down Obama's path of setting back black job opportunities, let's say 99.99%.

 

Who really is more dangerous for this country?

Even if I take your % at face value I don't equate race relations and job opportunities as being equally important.  You may disagree.

Additionally, when I say dangerous I mean dropping nukes on North Korea dangerous or further expanding the power of the POTUS dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Even if I take your % at face value I don't equate race relations and job opportunities as being equally important.  You may disagree.

Additionally, when I say dangerous I mean dropping nukes on North Korea dangerous or further expanding the power of the POTUS dangerous.

I think that Congress will fight tooth and nail against the POTUS expanding powers under Trump.  Not so much under a HRC, or even GOP, presidency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Short Corner said:

I think that Congress will fight tooth and nail against the POTUS expanding powers under Trump.  Not so much under a HRC, or even GOP, presidency.

Just maybe they will see what many are saying - Trump has no business being POTUS. Let me be clear, this is just a discussion about the merits of Trump vs. Hillary.  I voted for Bernie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AAABatteries said:

Just maybe they will see what many are saying - Trump has no business being POTUS. Let me be clear, this is just a discussion about the merits of Trump vs. Hillary.  I voted for Bernie.

I voted Bernie as well.  I think Trump actually does less damage than any other candidate because of the opposition he will face from both parties.  I really don't think it matters.  He won't get the nomination in a brokered convention and is well off the pace from getting a majority of the pledged delegates.  Voting GOP either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes the Nader vote. It's funny really. Gore lost a lot of groups. Including Muslims. Who voted for Bush in heavy numbers, especially in Florida. Probably had a lot more to do with the loss than Nader votes did.

Share this post


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

Ah yes the Nader vote. It's funny really. Gore lost a lot of groups. Including Muslims. Who voted for Bush in heavy numbers, especially in Florida. Probably had a lot more to do with the loss than Nader votes did.

Including Tennesseans.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wdcrob said:

You know how you can tell someone knows they're wrong?  They use bull#### arguments.

Or they use vague arguments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Trump may set back race relations, let's say 95% likely.

Clinton will continue down Obama's path of setting back black job opportunities, let's say 99.99%.

 

Who really is more dangerous for this country?

 

Name the progressive policies you expect from Trump.

Look - I totally get that Clinton is not what we want on important issues like finance reform, corporate tax loopholes, civil rights issues, etc. Trump is also not what we want on those issues, but he has the added wart of authoritarianism and will be a complete foreign relations nightmare.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie

I really don't know what the middle class right finds to argue with up in there. :wall:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Clayton Gray said:

Name the progressive policies you expect from Trump.

Look - I totally get that Clinton is not what we want on important issues like finance reform, corporate tax loopholes, civil rights issues, etc. Trump is also not what we want on those issues, but he has the added wart of authoritarianism and will be a complete foreign relations nightmare.

I think everything you're saying is a valid viewpoint, but there are additional pieces to the puzzle.  Such as the establishment Democratic Party attempt to sandbag Sanders in this election.  If all liberals just go ahead and toe the party line anyway, where is the accountability for that? What motivation does the party have for doing anything differently the next time? We have time and again seen candidates get elected this way and move right on past the true progressive agenda into centrism or Conservativism, while we stand aside and look.  "Oh, well, I guess it's impossible to get anything we want out of a candidate" is not a political position.  

A lot of people are sick of it, and refuse to vote for someone whose party and party-affiliated private groups just spent months tearing down an actual liberal candidate.  Or vote for a candidate who shouted at a rally that single payer "will never, ever come to pass."

I'm not sure I could be one of those people, but I understand them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I think everything you're saying is a valid viewpoint, but there are additional pieces to the puzzle.  Such as the establishment Democratic Party attempt to sandbag Sanders in this election.  If all liberals just go ahead and toe the party line anyway, where is the accountability for that? What motivation does the party have for doing anything differently the next time? We have time and again seen candidates get elected this way and move right on past the true progressive agenda into centrism or Conservativism, while we stand aside and look.  "Oh, well, I guess it's impossible to get anything we want out of a candidate" is not a political position.  

A lot of people are sick of it, and refuse to vote for someone whose party and party-affiliated private groups just spent months tearing down an actual liberal candidate.  Or vote for a candidate who shouted at a rally that single payer "will never, ever come to pass."

I'm not sure I could be one of those people, but I understand them.

That makes complete sense. I'm not saying everyone should vote for Clinton. I'm just questioning why people would vote for Trump. Seems to me that not voting or voting for a candidate that more closely matches our desires is a more sensible option.

Share this post


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

I think everything you're saying is a valid viewpoint, but there are additional pieces to the puzzle.  Such as the establishment Democratic Party attempt to sandbag Sanders in this election.  If all liberals just go ahead and toe the party line anyway, where is the accountability for that? What motivation does the party have for doing anything differently the next time? We have time and again seen candidates get elected this way and move right on past the true progressive agenda into centrism or Conservativism, while we stand aside and look.  "Oh, well, I guess it's impossible to get anything we want out of a candidate" is not a political position.  

A lot of people are sick of it, and refuse to vote for someone whose party and party-affiliated private groups just spent months tearing down an actual liberal candidate.  Or vote for a candidate who shouted at a rally that single payer "will never, ever come to pass."

I'm not sure I could be one of those people, but I understand them.

I'm a liberal and I supported Hillary. Maybe Bernie supporters should step back and consider the possibility that they did not have the best candidate to represent the democratic party and that's why they did not win the nomination.

Edited by pantagrapher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah -- don't get the Sanders to Trump thing at all.

Throwing the pacifier out of the crib probably feels AWESOME for a minute or two.  But then you're stuck in the crib crying for the next four years without anything to comfort you.

Sanders would struggle mightily to actually implement any of the things he's talking about, but he'd look like the love child of Tip O'Neil and Reagan compared to Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wdcrob said:

Yeah -- don't get the Sanders to Trump thing at all.

Throwing the pacifier out of the crib probably feels AWESOME for a minute or two.  But then you're stuck in the crib crying for the next four years without anything to comfort you.

Sanders would struggle mightily to actually implement any of the things he's talking about, but he'd look like the love child of Tip O'Neil and Reagan compared to Trump.

A movement is movement- it isn't about anyone snapping their fingers to make things happen. We need to create movement on many fronts.

Share this post


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

I'm a liberal. I don't consider my support for Hillary "toeing the party line." Maybe Bernie supporters should step back and consider the possibility that they did not have the best candidate to represent the democratic party and that's why they did not win the nomination.

I'm sure that's it.  No sense considering them to have a valid position on the issue.  They'll probably respect you and your candidate more for telling them that this candidate represents the party better so they should vote for her even if they don't agree with her policies, history, or tactics and don't think she is being honest.

  • Like 1

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.