Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
BigSteelThrill

Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being.

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Sweet J said:

I say this as a person who moderately likes Bernie and will happily vote for him in the general election:

 

The slapfighting on the internets between the rabidly pro-Bernie folks and the rabidly anti-Bernie folks reminds me of the idiots who worked themselves into a froth arguing over whether the 8th installment of Star Wars was better than the 9th installment of Star Wars (I may have been the only person on the planet that liked both movies). 

 

IMPORTANT EDIT:  I'm not saying either pro-Bernie or anti-Bernie folks are idiots.  I guess I'm saying that people who argue on the internet about Star Wars are generally idiots, but I probably don't really mean that, either.  It's just sounds fun to say. 

I haven’t seen 9 yet, but it’s my understanding that liking both movies guarantees that you are either a replicant or a Cylon.  Sorry, man. 

Share this post


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

I haven’t seen 9 yet, but it’s my understanding that liking both movies guarantees that you are either a replicant or a Cylon.  Sorry, man. 

hmmmm.  You have to see the last one, man!  I'm convinced you will be with me on this one.  I think I like the 9th better than the 8th.  But still liked the 8th well enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sweet J said:

hmmmm.  You have to see the last one, man!  I'm convinced you will be with me on this one.  I think I like the 9th better than the 8th.  But still liked the 8th well enough. 

I’m in love with Carrie Fisher, so probably, but there’s a very good chance I am either a replicant or Cylon. So that doesn’t help you. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Mora kinda in the hot seat tonight. Tough day for Bernie’s regional field director, given the whole “anyone who does this is not part of our movement” thing. 
 

https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1232123644765261825?s=21

Edit: there’s a daily beast article, but it appears to be behind a paywall. 
https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-staffer-mocked-elizabeth-warrens-looks-pete-buttigiegs-sexuality-on-private-twitter-account

Edited by Henry Ford

Share this post


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

Ben Mora kinda in the hot seat tonight. Tough day for Bernie’s regional field director, given the whole “anyone who does this is not part of our movement” thing. 
 

https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1232123644765261825?s=21

Edit: there’s a daily beast article, but it appears to be behind a paywall. 
https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-staffer-mocked-elizabeth-warrens-looks-pete-buttigiegs-sexuality-on-private-twitter-account

 

"Amy Klobuchars face looks like that optical illusion where it's an old lady but also a young woman depending on how you look at it, but with her it's just two different old ladies"

 

That is horrible. I laughed.

Share this post


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

 

"Amy Klobuchars face looks like that optical illusion where it's an old lady but also a young woman depending on how you look at it, but with her it's just two different old ladies"

 

That is horrible. I laughed.

He was apparently fired within the hour. 

Share this post


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

He was apparently fired within the hour. 

Probably never should have been hired to begin with. Bernies camp hasn't been great at vetting. They need some Yang Gang in there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

1 hour ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

 

"Amy Klobuchars face looks like that optical illusion where it's an old lady but also a young woman depending on how you look at it, but with her it's just two different old ladies"

 

That is horrible. I laughed.

He was apparently fired within the hour. 

 

So basically the opposite of what Trump would have done.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


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

So basically the opposite of what Trump would have done.

I actually recall The Mooch being fired for his name calling and unprofessionalism before he technically was supposed to start. 

Share this post


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

I actually recall The Mooch being fired for his name calling and unprofessionalism before he technically was supposed to start. 

It wasn't because he had contacts with the NYTimes?

Share this post


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

I actually recall The Mooch being fired for his name calling and unprofessionalism before he technically was supposed to start. 

That was then, today he would be promoted to head of the Joint Chiefs.

Share this post


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

He was apparently fired within the hour. 

Seduced by his own flair for turning a phrase.  He had some descriptors he was just dying to use and it ended up killing his career.  Some thoughts are best kept to oneself.  A lesson I occasionally ignore.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie may be a decent human being but Fidel Castro wasn’t one, and it’s depressing that older leftists of Bernie’s stripe never seem to get this. His explanation, “all I’m saying is that Fidel put in a high literacy campaign and that deserves praise” leaves a lot to be desired: 

“All I’m saying is that Mussolini got the trains to run on time and that deserves praise.” 

Share this post


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

Bernie may be a decent human being but Fidel Castro wasn’t one, and it’s depressing that older leftists of Bernie’s stripe never seem to get this. His explanation, “all I’m saying is that Fidel put in a high literacy campaign and that deserves praise” leaves a lot to be desired: 

“All I’m saying is that Mussolini got the trains to run on time and that deserves praise.” 

I understand that the Mussolini thing is a myth.  Not to take away from your point, hell I use the Mussolini saying myself for what it illustrates, factual basis be damned.

Share this post


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

Bernie may be a decent human being but Fidel Castro wasn’t one, and it’s depressing that older leftists of Bernie’s stripe never seem to get this. His explanation, “all I’m saying is that Fidel put in a high literacy campaign and that deserves praise” leaves a lot to be desired: 

“All I’m saying is that Mussolini got the trains to run on time and that deserves praise.” 

I've seen you praise Trump for stuff plenty of times.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


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

Bernie may be a decent human being but Fidel Castro wasn’t one, and it’s depressing that older leftists of Bernie’s stripe never seem to get this. His explanation, “all I’m saying is that Fidel put in a high literacy campaign and that deserves praise” leaves a lot to be desired: 

“All I’m saying is that Mussolini got the trains to run on time and that deserves praise.” 

How'd you feel about Obama saying nearly the exact same thing Tim? (ps. this was discussed extensively yesterday in one of the other innumerable Bernie/election threads)

Share this post


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

I've seen you praise Trump for stuff plenty of times.

Or so many of our leaders (from either party) praising Saudi Arabia over the years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I've seen you praise Trump for stuff plenty of times.

Fidel Castro was an evil man, a mass murderer, a criminal, a ruthless dictator. I don’t put Donald Trump in the same category. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mcintyre1 said:

How'd you feel about Obama saying nearly the exact same thing Tim? (ps. this was discussed extensively yesterday in one of the other innumerable Bernie/election threads)

I wasn’t aware of it. If he said it that deserves condemnation IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mcintyre1 said:

Or so many of our leaders (from either party) praising Saudi Arabia over the years.

I’ve condemned this many times. It’s reprehensible. There is a difference (not a moral one): they praise the Saudis because it serves our self-interests to do so. But they know better.  Bernie’s praise represents, IMO, an ideological blind spot in which all leftist leaders, no matter how corrupt they become, start out with good intentions. 

Share this post


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

I’ve condemned this many times. It’s reprehensible. There is a difference (not a moral one): they praise the Saudis because it serves our self-interests to do so. But they know better.  Bernie’s praise represents, IMO, an ideological blind spot in which all leftist leaders, no matter how corrupt they become, start out with good intentions. 

So you think Bernie is going to slide down the dangerous slope to becoming Castro?

Share this post


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

Fidel Castro was an evil man, a mass murderer, a criminal, a ruthless dictator. I don’t put Donald Trump in the same category. 

Can you provide some guidance so that I can determine if someone is bad enough so I'm not allowed to say anything positive about them?  So far we have 

Fidel Castro -- too bad to say anything nice about

Donald Trump -- bad, but still within the range where we're allowed to say nice stuff

 

Can you let me know which of these leaders currently in power fall into the "too bad to say anything positive about" category?

Kim Jung Un?  

Duterte?

Putin?

Erdowan?

MSB from Saudi Arabia?

  • Like 3
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


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

Fidel Castro was an evil man, a mass murderer, a criminal, a ruthless dictator. I don’t put Donald Trump in the same category. 

How many of those things are Trump stopping himself or circumstances? In other words, if Trump had the opportunity to be a ruthless dictator, would he choose to be?

Share this post


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

So you think Bernie is going to slide down the dangerous slope to becoming Castro?

No. 

Share this post


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

Can you provide some guidance so that I can determine if someone is bad enough so I'm not allowed to say anything positive about them?  So far we have 

Fidel Castro -- too bad to say anything nice about

Donald Trump -- bad, but still within the range where we're allowed to say nice stuff

 

Can you let me know which of these leaders currently in power fall into the "too bad to say anything positive about" category?

Kim Jung Un?  

Duterte?

Putin?

Erdowan?

MSB from Saudi Arabia?

I don’t think any of the people you mentioned should be singled out for praise.

Share this post


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

How many of those things are Trump stopping himself or circumstances? In other words, if Trump had the opportunity to be a ruthless dictator, would he choose to be?

Dictator? Probably. Ruthless? Which means in Fidel terms, willing to murder, torture, imprison large numbers of innocent people in order to stay in power? I have no idea but I won’t condemn somebody for this unless they actually do it. 

Share this post


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

I don’t think any of the people you mentioned should be singled out for praise.

So I'm not allowed to say "MSB is awful but I do think it's good that he's allowed women to drive and participate more fully in public life than had been permitted before?"  Because if that's true you should probably get your message out.  Everybody says that.

Share this post


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

So I'm not allowed to say "MSB is awful but I do think it's good that he's allowed women to drive and participate more fully in public life than had been permitted before?"  Because if that's true you should probably get your message out.  Everybody says that.

You’re allowed to say anything you want. I don’t think major Presidential candidates should be in the habit of complimenting MSB. 

Share this post


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

I wasn’t aware of it. If he said it that deserves condemnation IMO. 

Oh, he definitely did, and recently!

Here's an article covering the absurdity of people suddenly freaking out about an American politician praising something a bad regime has done (the examples of hypocrisy on this are practically too numerous to count).

But here's the direct quote from Obama (with a full context that sounds shockingly like an endorsement for younger generations to embrace someone like a Sanders -- of course, he wasn't speaking to American youth at the time):

Quote

I guess to make a broader point, so often in the past there's been a sharp division between left and right, between capitalist and communist or socialist. And especially in the Americas, that's been a big debate, right? Oh, you know, you're a capitalist Yankee dog, and oh, you know, you're some crazy communist that's going to take away everybody's property. And I mean, those are interesting intellectual arguments, but I think for your generation, you should be practical and just choose from what works. You don't have to worry about whether it neatly fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory -- you should just decide what works.

And I said this to President Castro in Cuba. I said, look, you've made great progress in educating young people. Every child in Cuba gets a basic education -- that's a huge improvement from where it was. Medical care -- the life expectancy of Cubans is equivalent to the United States, despite it being a very poor country, because they have access to health care. That's a huge achievement. They should be congratulated. But you drive around Havana and you say this economy is not working. It looks like it did in the 1950s. And so you have to be practical in asking yourself how can you achieve the goals of equality and inclusion, but also recognize that the market system produces a lot of wealth and goods and services. And it also gives individuals freedom because they have initiative.

And so you don't have to be rigid in saying it’s either this or that, you can say -- depending on the problem you're trying to solve, depending on the social issues that you're trying to address what works. And I think that what you’ll find is that the most successful societies, the most successful economies are ones that are rooted in a market-based system, but also recognize that a market does not work by itself. It has to have a social and moral and ethical and community basis, and there has to be inclusion. Otherwise it’s not stable.

And it’s up to you -- whether you're in business or in academia or the nonprofit sector, whatever you're doing -- to create new forms that are adapted to the new conditions that we live in today.

Also, I was wrong earlier -- this same discussion happened in this exact thread less than 24 hours ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this CNN clip from Bernie's SC town hall last night was pretty good. Covers three questions:

1) What do you say to people who think it is more important to beat Trump than to nominate someone who has 'extreme' policy ideas?

2) How are you going to pay for your proposals?

3) (From Cuomo, paraphrasing) "Defend your praise of Castro"

Share this post


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

Bernie may be a decent human being but Fidel Castro wasn’t one, and it’s depressing that older leftists of Bernie’s stripe never seem to get this. His explanation, “all I’m saying is that Fidel put in a high literacy campaign and that deserves praise” leaves a lot to be desired: 

“All I’m saying is that Mussolini got the trains to run on time and that deserves praise.” 

Now do Batista. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@rossbarkan
These next few months will test Bernie Sanders because his toughest task will not be running through Donald Trump. It will be beating back a potential $1 billion campaign solely against him. It will mean getting a message out against a hostile, powerful cable TV network

It's remarkable. One of the ten richest men in the world will probably spend $1 billion on his own campaign before the baseball season even starts and the main threat to democracy is Bernie Sanders supporters being mean online

Online bullying is bad. But a candidate with a massive online following can't corrall millions of followers on Facebook and Twitter. Not how the internet works. Bernie Sanders will keep facing this story because it has no realistic resolution //

Hard to imagine a more manufactured/recycled narrative than the ‘Bernie Bro’ myth.  That this would register more magnitude among mainstream pundits than a 50-billionaire wading in to subvert the democratic process.  But here we are.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mtracey

Does the Bernie campaign really believe, as this column shared by a top advisor asserts, that Trump has been a “stooge” for Russia? Because in the real world, Trump has been dangerously aggressive toward Russia. Disturbing to see Bernie officials traffic in New Cold War nonsense // 

Sad to see the Sanders camp validating this trash.  This is a weak spot for Sanders.  The neoconservative Trump administration has ratcheted up Cold War tensions with Russia, not the other way around.  If Sanders doubles down on Dem establishment’s braindead TrumpRussia fantasies this thing is a wrap.  

Share this post


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

I wasn’t aware of it. If he said it that deserves condemnation IMO. 

Condemning people for statements you haven't even read or heard doesn't seem like a very wise course of action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this in another thread, but am shamelessly reposting it here.

 

Four years ago I was vehemently anti-Sanders. I mean, I disliked and feared a Trump presidency more, but Sanders was anathema to me. But I hadn't really listened to him. I had my views on some things (many of which I now think were misguided) and I was dismissive of Sanders based on the fact the soundbites I heard confirmed to me that he was a lunatic Leftist ideologue.

I can see now that even though I have never been a consumer of things like Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, my belief system was still being shaped by them (and others) because the GOP and Far Right conservatives have shifted the Overton Window so far to the right over the past few generations. I am not the first one to observe that where Sanders stands on many issues are not markedly extreme compared to people like Dwight Eisenhower, never mind Harry Truman or FDR. 

The thing that the GOP does exceptionally well and that the Democratic Party does exceptionally poorly is frame the issues in such a way that they get to define the space in that Overton Window. That has been consistently true for a long time. When mainstream "moderate" Democrats choose to play the game in the space the GOP defines, is it any surprise that they are bested time and again? It shouldn't be. 

Sanders candidacy in 2016 began to expand the Overton Window to cover more progressive policies. Continued exposure to ideas that might have seemed radical at first makes them seem less radical over time. That's just true, regardless of the quality of the idea on its merits. I happen to think a lot of Sanders' policy positions have merits. That isn't an out of consensus view either. Some of his policies that would have been considered extreme 10 years ago or only the province of committed Progressives five years ago are now fairly mainstream in terms of public opinion. So I think the expansion of the Overton Window is continuing to happen.

My friend who has PhD in Psychology and teaches Marketing at a large university talks about support for Sanders in terms of what he calls a "heat model". Sanders has a core of very committed supporters (some of whom are obnoxious, no doubt) who generate that "heat" at the center of his support. When the core of heat gets hot enough, it "warms" adjacent people over time. This goes hand in hand with the idea of the Overton Window. When people see others whom they have positive non-political interactions with embracing ideas that seem foreign to them and a bit scary at first, it makes it safer for them to even listen to the idea.

On the topic of appeal to moderates, I am not sure it matters as much as the conventional wisdom suggests. Or, if it does, it really only matters in a small handful of battleground states. And when you weigh that against the leverage inherent of boosting voter participation, it is less important. We saw in the last election the power of energizing people who aren't reliable voters into supporting a candidate. That was a major component of how Trump was able to win.

It is a sad fact that voter participation in this country is really low, especially among younger people. Guess what cohort of voters are less put off by the word "socialism" and who feel especially abandoned by the status quo, as represented by not just the GOP but also traditional moderate Democrats? It is people under 35, of course. And that happens to be a large number of people in absolute terms. Motivating them to vote for the Democratic candidate is the X factor in this election. Is that more likely if the the Democratic nominee is Sanders, or if it is Biden/Bloomberg/Buttigieg?

ETA: Here is a pretty good article on how popular various "progressive" policy ideas are via two different polls. It might lead one to think that Sanders focusing on true Medicare For All, rather than simply providing a public option for everybody, is a mistake. Maybe it is. Or maybe focusing on it can shift opinion. I tend to lean towards the latter, since a lot of voters don't really understand what it means. We'll see.

Edited by RedmondLonghorn
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ren hoek said:

@mtracey

Does the Bernie campaign really believe, as this column shared by a top advisor asserts, that Trump has been a “stooge” for Russia? Because in the real world, Trump has been dangerously aggressive toward Russia. Disturbing to see Bernie officials traffic in New Cold War nonsense // 

Sad to see the Sanders camp validating this trash.  This is a weak spot for Sanders.  The neoconservative Trump administration has ratcheted up Cold War tensions with Russia, not the other way around.  If Sanders doubles down on Dem establishment’s braindead TrumpRussia fantasies this thing is a wrap.  

In what way is this even remotely true?

Syria?

Ukraine?

Refusing to impose Russian sanctions?

Siding with Putin over his own IC, on foreign soil no less?

Lobbying for them to be back in the G7?

Attacking our NATO allies?

 

I just don't know how anyone could say that with a straight face. I mean maybe you don't think he's a Russian "stooge", but he's been objectively easy on Russia.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Skoo said:

In what way is this even remotely true?

Syria?

Ukraine?

Refusing to impose Russian sanctions?

Siding with Putin over his own IC, on foreign soil no less?

Lobbying for them to be back in the G7?

Attacking our NATO allies?

 

I just don't know how anyone could say that with a straight face. I mean maybe you don't think he's a Russian "stooge", but he's been objectively easy on Russia.

It isn’t remotely true. If Michael Tracey doesn’t have zero credibility it’s because his coefficient has actually somehow taken on a sharply negative value.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

In what way is this even remotely true?

Syria?

Ukraine?

Refusing to impose Russian sanctions?

Siding with Putin over his own IC, on foreign soil no less?

Lobbying for them to be back in the G7?

Attacking our NATO allies?

 

I just don't know how anyone could say that with a straight face. I mean maybe you don't think he's a Russian "stooge", but he's been objectively easy on Russia.

 

31 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

It isn’t remotely true. If Michael Tracey doesn’t have zero credibility it’s because his coefficient has actually somehow taken on a sharply negative value.

Just look at how US foreign policy has evolved under Trump.  We scrapped the INF treaty, bombed Syria, backed an attempted coup in Venezuela, sold weapons to the Ukrainians.  While he may have been inclined initially to avoid it, he's sanctioned the crap out of Russia.  You could say we are engaged in multiple proxy wars that put us directly at odds with Russia.  Barack Obama didn't do that.  Neoconservatives like Robert Kagan, who guided Hillary Clinton's state dept. and have since migrated to Trump, have been pushing for a new Cold War since the end of the last one.  Trump is ratcheting up a nuclear arms race, and further militarizing the world with his "space force."  NATO has actually strengthened overall under Trump.  

Don't think because Trump likes to send mixed signals that the US/Russian relationship isn't in a dangerous place.  If you think he's a 'Putin puppet' or something you really haven't been paying attention.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie could have been better last night. I'm disappointed in how he handled the Castro thing. He knew it was coming yet still was off the mark in responding effectively. I did like the "that was a bad vote" moment - that's pure Bernie, and I love the honesty and the ability to admit being wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I did like the "that was a bad vote" moment - that's pure Bernie, and I love the honesty and the ability to admit being wrong.

I liked that as well. I was actually talking to my wife and my head cold have snapped off when I heard that answer as I turned my head so fast.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read this article (its five months old) that suggests student loan forgiveness could be done solely by the administrative branch.   I had no idea and assumed this was just something he'd want to do that would fail in the legislative branch.  Has Bernie mentioned that he'd do it this way?  If so, I've missed that.  Honestly, if this is true and he made that promise clear, that would REALLY motivate student loan debtors to vote for him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

I just read this article (its five months old) that suggests student loan forgiveness could be done solely by the administrative branch.   I had no idea and assumed this was just something he'd want to do that would fail in the legislative branch.  Has Bernie mentioned that he'd do it this way?  If so, I've missed that.  Honestly, if this is true and he made that promise clear, that would REALLY motivate student loan debtors to vote for him.

 

Just reading that piece it doesnt seem true. They lay out how it could fail. I also dont think it would be hard for somebody to prove that they were wronged by such a writeoff so the theory they put forward about gaining standing (using an f bomb to do so) seems weak at best. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://i.imgur.com/aHxJPZZ.jpg 

This was an interesting exchange between Buttigieg & Sanders.  I don’t agree with all of what Sanders is saying, but it’s pretty obnoxious how Mayor Pete has made attacks on Sanders his #1 priority.  You could say he’s just trying to win.  To me it looks like he just wants to undercut the most progressive candidate in the race. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Just reading that piece it doesnt seem true. They lay out how it could fail. I also dont think it would be hard for somebody to prove that they were wronged by such a writeoff so the theory they put forward about gaining standing (using an f bomb to do so) seems weak at best. 

Yes, good points. Personally I'm not in favor of blanket student loan debt cancellation but still thought the possibility was interesting from a political point of view.  Even if it would end up failing I was curious about the political ramifications of Bernie even stating during the campaign that he would do it (meaning attempt to do it) without congressional approval.  Certainly it would help pro-Bernie turnout from those who owe substantial amounts in student loans. 

Share this post


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

Just reading that piece it doesnt seem true. They lay out how it could fail. I also dont think it would be hard for somebody to prove that they were wronged by such a writeoff so the theory they put forward about gaining standing (using an f bomb to do so) seems weak at best. 

Particularized standing would be very difficult to prove.  What interest do you have in whether the government collects on a debt?  Or more precisely, what particularized interest that is distinguishable from every other taxpayer's interest do you have?

The article mentions that possibility that the servicing industry could challenge, but they don't typically have the right to keep the obligee from cancelling a debt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reading up on Bernie's student loan debt forgiveness program - I didn't realize he was canceling ALL student debt - even graduate student debt?  For some reason I thought it was just undergrad.  

Can those in the know confirm?  Doctors and lawyers will get their law school loans erased?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

Just reading up on Bernie's student loan debt forgiveness program - I didn't realize he was canceling ALL student debt - even graduate student debt?  For some reason I thought it was just undergrad.  

Can those in the know confirm?  Doctors and lawyers will get their law school loans erased?

Neither Bernie nor Warren differentiate between undergrad and graduate student debt as far as I know. Bernie's plan is to cancel it all while Warren's plan is lightly means tested. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got a merit bonus from my M4A-fearmongering healthcare employer. Hundred buckos straight to Bernie.

 

Not me. Us.

  • Like 7
  • Love 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, hagmania said:

Just got a merit bonus from my M4A-fearmongering healthcare employer. Hundred buckos straight to Bernie.

 

Not me. Us.

Bernie will get it back 10x with new taxes on everyone 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Gopher State said:

Bernie will get it back 10x with new taxes on everyone 

I know! The amount given back to the people in quality of life is going to be amazing.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

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.