Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
BigSteelThrill

Bernie Sanders HQ! Suffered heart attack.

Recommended Posts

Update: "Four years is a long time from now," said the 75-year-old Vermont independent, noting that he faces re-election to the Senate in 2018. But he added: "We'll take one thing at a time, but I'm not ruling out anything."  11/10/2016

 

Before he always said he wouldn't run. But today he said he is giving some thought to challenge Obama in the primaries. Maybe the Conservatives can help him get "over" like they did for Obama against Hillary.

Edited by BigSteelThrill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be excellent, if only to show the difference between Obama & a genuine leftist agenda. He's actually quite a guy - my Dad has worked with him a lot thru his involvement with VT's Council on Aging and respects him enormously. That's saying something, cuz my father comes down politically somewhere between Genghis Khan & Magilla Gorilla. Perfect foil for the Obamanator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That actually would be pretty awesome becuase in a way i think it would open the door for a 4th party. this guy siphons off votes from Obama... so why not have a tea party or libertarian candidate siphon votes off of the R candidate.

It would be cool to have like 5 party candidates. Or 4. Or 3. Just not 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That actually would be pretty awesome becuase in a way i think it would open the door for a 4th party. this guy siphons off votes from Obama... so why not have a tea party or libertarian candidate siphon votes off of the R candidate. It would be cool to have like 5 party candidates. Or 4. Or 3. Just not 2.

Primary. Not general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Conservatives can help him get "over" like they did for Obama against Hillary.

If so, then the Tea Party is dumber than we all think that they are. This is like having someone crazier than Palin run against Romney. It will just make Obama look not as bad.The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position. You don't get to the top without being a moderate and virtually all of your decisions are whitewashed by congressman or bureaucrats. The Republicans can grab power because they've convinced everyone that Obama is a commie just like the left convinced us that GWB was a fascist.The economy is cyclical and whoever is in charge when its bad = bad president, whoever is in charge when it's good = good president. Unless the other side can convince us that he likes gay people, doesn't believe in god, there's a war on, or you otherwise hate America the "good" president will win and the "bad" one will lose. The moose out front shoulda told ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

:goodposting:
So finally you guys admit that progressive means socialist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

:goodposting:
So finally you guys admit that progressive means socialist.
I am fine with that characterization. Although Bernie hasn't been a socialist in quite a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
This makes no sense. You are confusing political parties with political ideology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is he going to quit like he did with football?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.
If I don't believe you are human, are you okay with me killing you? (Just trying to show how ridiculous your statement is.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.
If I don't believe you are human, are you okay with me killing you? (Just trying to show how ridiculous your statement is.)
Say wat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.
If I don't believe you are human, are you okay with me killing you? (Just trying to show how ridiculous your statement is.)
Say wat
Another example: Certain Fundamentalist Muslim Radicals do not share your beliefs regarding whether non-Muslims should live. Do you hate your beliefs imposed on them? (I am assuming that you do not believe infidels should be killed.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.
If I don't believe you are human, are you okay with me killing you? (Just trying to show how ridiculous your statement is.)
Say wat
Another example: Certain Fundamentalist Muslim Radicals do not share your beliefs regarding whether non-Muslims should live. Do you hate your beliefs imposed on them? (I am assuming that you do not believe infidels should be killed.)
OK then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing the Rs need is for the country to realize that there isn't much difference between Romney/Huntsman/GWB and Obama. Sure the rhetoric is different. One side hates brown people and gays. The other side hates babies and wants to take your guns away from you while it does your wife in someway other than the missionary position.

To be fair, the left hates fetuses, not babies. That's one of the reasons I remain fiercely independent.
The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.
If I don't believe you are human, are you okay with me killing you? (Just trying to show how ridiculous your statement is.)
Say wat
Another example: Certain Fundamentalist Muslim Radicals do not share your beliefs regarding whether non-Muslims should live. Do you hate your beliefs imposed on them? (I am assuming that you do not believe infidels should be killed.)
OK then.
Then you see how silly your statement was.Helps to walk a mile in someone else's shoes. Edited by bueno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That actually would be pretty awesome becuase in a way i think it would open the door for a 4th party. this guy siphons off votes from Obama... so why not have a tea party or libertarian candidate siphon votes off of the R candidate. It would be cool to have like 5 party candidates. Or 4. Or 3. Just not 2.

that would be great then we can throw the election to the house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be excellent, if only to show the difference between Obama & a genuine leftist agenda. He's actually quite a guy - my Dad has worked with him a lot thru his involvement with VT's Council on Aging and respects him enormously. That's saying something, cuz my father comes down politically somewhere between Genghis Khan & Magilla Gorilla. Perfect foil for the Obamanator.

If Bernie jumps in I'd be thrilled and supportive. At this point Obama is way right of where I thought the guy I was electing would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be excellent, if only to show the difference between Obama & a genuine leftist agenda. He's actually quite a guy - my Dad has worked with him a lot thru his involvement with VT's Council on Aging and respects him enormously. That's saying something, cuz my father comes down politically somewhere between Genghis Khan & Magilla Gorilla. Perfect foil for the Obamanator.

If Bernie jumps in I'd be thrilled and supportive. At this point Obama is way right of where I thought the guy I was electing would be.
Which specific policies do you consider too right-leaning?I would vote for Bernie too BTW. But for different reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is he going to quit like he did with football?

:hophead:

I can't see Sanders "spiking the football" should he improbably win.

The left doesn't hate fetuses. They hate having beliefs imposed on people who may not share those beliefs.

Like all humans, including the right, they hate having beliefs imposed on them that they do not share. But like many humans, including the right, they do their fair share of imposing beliefs on others who don't share them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be excellent, if only to show the difference between Obama & a genuine leftist agenda. He's actually quite a guy - my Dad has worked with him a lot thru his involvement with VT's Council on Aging and respects him enormously. That's saying something, cuz my father comes down politically somewhere between Genghis Khan & Magilla Gorilla. Perfect foil for the Obamanator.

If Bernie jumps in I'd be thrilled and supportive. At this point Obama is way right of where I thought the guy I was electing would be.
Which specific policies do you consider too right-leaning?I would vote for Bernie too BTW. But for different reasons.
Right now his complete cave to the Republicans on this deficit deal is a good start. There are cuts I will support. For example I will even listen to calls for means testing which I really hate but I could support if certain other things happen. But I will not support cuts that really put this on the backs of the poor and the elderly. He is to far right on cuts to federal aid for poor people who can't pay their electric bill. How many have to die in this heat wave for us to stop screwing them? He is to far right on his support for chained CPI which is a benefit cut for SS recipients. He is to far right on his insistence in helping the GOP keep their promise to Grover. Screw that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reports: Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders to run for president

Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders will run for president and seek the Democratic nomination, The Associated Press and NBC News reported Tuesday.

Sanders is expected to release a statement Thursday, NBC News reported. He'll also hold a kickoff event in Vermont next month, Vermont Public Radio reported.

Sanders, an independent senator who caucuses with Democrats, has been inching towards a presidential run for months by traveling the country and speaking to liberals groups in critical presidential states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Sanders' Senate office would not comment on his 2016 plans, but the source close to the senator said Sanders' Thursday announcement will likely be a subdued.

The news of Sander's Thursday announcement was first reported on Vermont Public Radio.

Sanders is expected to run to the left of Hillary Clinton, the prohibitive Democratic favorite. The senator is a vocal proponent of getting unaccounted money out of politics and government-provided universal health care. He has also advocated breaking up the Wall Street banks and investing billion in infrastructure.

Earlier this month, Sanders told CNN that he was "reasonably close" to a decision on 2016.

"The clock is ticking," he said at an event in New Hampshire. "If we do it, I've got to get out there. So I think we are looking at an announcement in the pretty near future."

For much of the last six months, the senator has been teasing a run, while also acknowledging that his bid would be primarily uphill. When asked about 2016 in the past, Sanders has been quick to detail all the reasons a run would be difficult -- money, organization, name identification -- before discussing why he could do it.

Clinton leads the Democratic field in every poll. In March's CNN/ORC poll, Clinton garnered 62% support, compared to Sanders' 3%.

http://www.kcci.com/politics/reports-vermont-sen-bernie-sanders-to-run-for-president/32623484

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

:coffee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm voting for him. I think people might be surprised with how much support he gets if he can get his message out widely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good news for Hillary.

Yeah I agree, she needs a foil and she likely wants one. - I like Bernie though because he's a purist, he believes in his ideas, or he seems like one. - He could pull a Rocky I, surprise the favorite and survive the early rounds. He's gotta get in there and punch away though.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Then Stat and the other disillusioned conservatives would see how a real progressive would run this country. Instead of the fake one that currently holds the office.

:coffee:

If he was to have done that with Obama imagine what he will do with Hillary.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he should be compared to Ron Paul. Sanders is a good and honest man; Paul is a lying old crank who has passed his worst qualities onto his son.

I think it's great that Sanders will get exposure for his ideas in the debates. Much of what he says is quite thought provoking to anyone who is willing to listen with an open mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Traditionally, I think Sanders is far too "out there" and radical to be a candidate that would see much success. People might agree with some (or a lot) of his ideas, but things weren't "bad enough" to try for such radical change that Bernie represents. I think we might be nearing a political climate where that is no longer true, however. The last time a man with policy beliefs ideologically similar to Sanders saw electoral success was FDR and his New Deal Coalition that united a bunch of groups that you would normally never lump together. We've certainly got a long way to go before a modern version of that might happen, but the general loss of confidence in our federal government and the social contract that we have been and continue to experience might push us in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way in the current SuperPac / Dark Money era that he is going to get anything he needs. No corporate or special interests dollars. It sucks, but he has no chance.

Obviously, he doesn't have the charisma to create any momentum like Obama did with individual donors back in 08.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FDR did not run as any kind of radical though/ his 1932 campaign included a balanced budget, lowering taxes, no large government projects. It was only after he was elected and the bank runs began that he instituted most of the New Deal legislation. He ran as a moderate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way in the current SuperPac / Dark Money era that he is going to get anything he needs. No corporate or special interests dollars. It sucks, but he has no chance.

Obviously, he doesn't have the charisma to create any momentum like Obama did with individual donors back in 08.

thanks to CU, a couple of billionaires (Sheldon Adelson and Foster Friez) kept Gingrich and Santorum afloat in 2012 long after they should have been forced to leave the race. Why couldn't the same thing happen here? There are a few progressive billionaires out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FDR did not run as any kind of radical though/ his 1932 campaign included a balanced budget, lowering taxes, no large government projects. It was only after he was elected and the bank runs began that he instituted most of the New Deal legislation. He ran as a moderate.

He may not have run as a radical, but his actions as Governor of New York immediate prior gave plenty of insight into how he would govern and, while he didn't have any specific proposals as to what it meant, he did campaign on the New Deal.

Heck, this line from his acceptance of the Democratic nomination sounds fairly radical: "I pledge you, I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people... This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms." It is also somewhat similar in tone to what Bernie was saying last year: "For me to win, it would require a grassroots effort on the part of literally millions of people. Unprecedented. What we need now is a political revolution.”

Once the banks failed around the time he was inaugurated, FDR adopted rhetoric that would sound perfectly at home coming from Bernie's mouth in 2015, and he rode that rhetoric and support to four terms.

Surely this isn't a case of history repeating itself exactly, but there are definitely similar political threads at work here.

Edited by mcintyre1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way in the current SuperPac / Dark Money era that he is going to get anything he needs. No corporate or special interests dollars. It sucks, but he has no chance.

Obviously, he doesn't have the charisma to create any momentum like Obama did with individual donors back in 08.

He is also a schmuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't mean much aside from a general indication of interest/support, but Bernie's announcement of an announcement to run for President shot to the #1 link on Reddit in under 3 hours and the /r/SandersForPresident sub-reddit has added a few thousand subscribers in that same time period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point is an insurgency in Iowa a problem for Hillary?

If she wins 60-40? 70-30?

I guess a win with under 50 percent would be a total disaster. Or no?

I could see Bernie get a serious uptick (like +10%) in the next Iowa poll, but we shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point is an insurgency in Iowa a problem for Hillary?

If she wins 60-40? 70-30?

I guess a win with under 50 percent would be a total disaster. Or no?

I could see Bernie get a serious uptick (like +10%) in the next Iowa poll, but we shall see.

the answer is never.

The key to Obama's victory over Clinton in 2008 was black control of the caucuses in the Southern states. This time they will support her. She could lose Iowa (though I doubt she will) and it won't affect the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point is an insurgency in Iowa a problem for Hillary?

If she wins 60-40? 70-30?

I guess a win with under 50 percent would be a total disaster. Or no?

I could see Bernie get a serious uptick (like +10%) in the next Iowa poll, but we shall see.

the answer is never.

The key to Obama's victory over Clinton in 2008 was black control of the caucuses in the Southern states. This time they will support her. She could lose Iowa (though I doubt she will) and it won't affect the outcome.

I think Obama had some other reasons for winning in 2008. That aside though, I'm talking about for the general, not the party nom.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

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.