Bernie Sanders HQ! *A decent human being.

[NCCommish 7,522]

9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I doubt she was either hard on them or complimentary either, beyond "Thank you for inviting me, Goldman Sachs does fine work for charity, etc." 

if I had to guess the bulk of the speech was about the state of world affairs and her time as Secretary of State. It probably didn't touch on Wall Street on banking at all. 

Then why not release them? Kill the talking point. Make everyone who doubted her look bad. You know why they haven't? Because that isn't the case.

[Slapdash 16,240]

8 minutes ago, Baloney Sandwich said:

Don't be obtuse

Why would he stop being obtuse now?

[timschochet 35,072]

1 minute ago, NCCommish said:

Then why not release them? Kill the talking point. Make everyone who doubted her look bad. You know why they haven't? Because that isn't the case.

Because there's probably a comment or two that somebody can take out of context and twist the wrong way. 

[pantagrapher 1,029]

Nobody would be talking about the birth certificate if Obama would just release it.

[Willie Neslon 4,489]

Just now, pantagrapher said:

Nobody would be talking about the birth certificate if Obama would just release it.

Oh come on.

[pantagrapher 1,029]

I've explained already why I think she's waiting. In short: 1. she's going to win the nomination without releasing them. 2. if there's pressure for her to release them during the general, she can actually get something back for doing so ("I'll release the transcripts when Trump releases...").

And the actual release will be, as I've said, the most anti-climactic story since Geraldo opened Al Capone's vault. Boring speeches touching on general topics.

[Gr00vus 12,004]

Pantagrapher's right. We don't need to see the speeches. Looking at who's been funding her is enough to know she's beholden to the finance industry. Her top contribution industry category? Securities & Investment. At $18.7M, it's far and away the largest contribution sector for her campaign, accounting for 17% of the contributions given by the top 20 industries. The number 2 industry (Retired) is over $5M less than that.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Gr00vus

[The Commish 14,001]

1 minute ago, Gr00vus said:

Pantagrapher's right. We don't need to see the speeches. Looking at who's been funding her is enough to know she's beholden to the finance industry. Her top contribution industry category? Securities & Investment. At $18.7M, it's far and away the largest contribution sector for her campaign, accounting for 17% of the contributions given by the top 20 industries. The number 2 industry (Retired) is over $5M less than that.

Remember last year, in the Hillary thread, where we were told this time it was going to be different?

[Jeremy 1,189]

How many people have heard these speeches?  Couldn't we just ask some of them to give us a general idea what she said?  I'm sure it was at least somewhat memorable for them. 

[pantagrapher 1,029]

2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

How many people have heard these speeches?  Couldn't we just ask some of them to give us a general idea what she said?  I'm sure it was at least somewhat memorable for them. 

They've been warned that if they talk, Hillary will rescind the sweetheart deal of financial domination that she's planning to hand Goldman Sachs upon taking office.

[NCCommish 7,522]

2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

How many people have heard these speeches?  Couldn't we just ask some of them to give us a general idea what she said?  I'm sure it was at least somewhat memorable for them. 

We have. They say she lavished praise on the people paying her. To which everyone not supporting her said duh.

[The Commish 14,001]

2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

How many people have heard these speeches?  Couldn't we just ask some of them to give us a general idea what she said?  I'm sure it was at least somewhat memorable for them. 

There could be a video of Hillary killing a puppy and people wouldn't believe it.  You think second hand accounts would fly?  I personally don't need the speeches.  Her actions tell me everything I need to know.  They would be fantastic political theater though.  It'd be provided by either people feeling it necessary to defend her or those making a mountain out of a mole hill in order to bash her.  Either way

[Slapdash 16,240]

You don't need the content of the speeches to see that she will be a shill for Wall St

[hagmania 8,888]

Big turnout numbers reported in Michigan.

I'm personally not a fan of day-of phonebanking, but reach out to anyone you might know in MI or MS and ask if they plan to participate in democracy today.

[Short Corner 1,741]

3 hours ago, timschochet said:

Question for the Bernie fans who have stated they will not vote for Hillary in the general election: there's some speculation this morning on MSNBC that Hillary might select either Bernie or Liz Warren for her VP choice. If that happened, would you reconsider? 

Nope.  Still planning on voting GOP

[Jeremy 1,189]

4 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

We have. They say she lavished praise on the people paying her. To which everyone not supporting her said duh.

That would certainly make the most sense.  Probably not unlike Romney 47% speech.  You're in a room full of rich donors, you say the unwashed masses are a bunch of freeloaders.  I'm assuming she told them exactly what they wanted to hear.   

[Rich Conway 3,968]

4 hours ago, timschochet said:

Question for the Bernie fans who have stated they will not vote for Hillary in the general election: there's some speculation this morning on MSNBC that Hillary might select either Bernie or Liz Warren for her VP choice. If that happened, would you reconsider? 

There is no circumstance under which I will vote for Hillary.  Period.  The end.

[hagmania 8,888]

Terrible news:

Quote

3:14 PM CT

MSU turnout appears dead. And it doesn't appear that they early voted, according to the secretary of state:http://statenews.com/article/2016/03/voter-turnout-for-primary-low. Only around 1,500 absentee ballots were returned from the university of over 50,000 students. MSU is on spring break right now. People have hypothesized that this would be a problem. With no turnout in the areas around the campus and so few returned absentee ballots, this stands in stark contrast to Ann Arbor, home of the University of Michigan, which is seeing record turnout.

The tweet from the news agency in question

---

Here is the location of the low turnout

---

- County: Ingham

- Biggest City: Lansing, MI

- Population: 282,999

- Expected Spread: Sanders +1%

Lansing, demographically, should surprise you on the map - it is one of the most refreshingly integrated cities in the United States. The capital of Michigan, it is home to two large colleges - Michigan State University and Western Michigan University. Sanders will certainly benefit from these two colleges. This is not a slam dunk for Sanders as you might think, though. GM has a huge presence in Lansing and they were huge benefactors to the auto bailout. Demographically, there are some favorable areas for Clinton to make inroads into. There is a 21% Nonwhite population and a large female population, and the income is middle of the road in terms of the effect on voting. Sanders seeks to benefit from the extremely low median age of 31 years old, and a slightly lower median income.

/u/_supernovasky_

 

[pantagrapher 1,029]

1 minute ago, hagmania said:

Terrible news:

 

This is going to make this year's Michigan v. Michigan State game UUUUGE.

Edited March 8, 2016 by pantagrapher

[renesauz 3,055]

11 hours ago, BassNBrew said:

Avoids 8 years of cronyism and the establishment getting their way with us and a shot at setting up someone else for 8 years.  It's time people look at the big picture itself of our cause.

Ummmmm...no, it doesn't.

[msudaisy26 6,042]

1 hour ago, hagmania said:

Big turnout numbers reported in Michigan.

I'm personally not a fan of day-of phonebanking, but reach out to anyone you might know in MI or MS and ask if they plan to participate in democracy today.

I don't think I could phone bank, I know I would get super nervous and mess it up, but my mother in law called me today and asked who my husband and I were voting for and why. I told her a couple things about Bernie and hooray another vote for Bernie. Is there away  to check how many registered voters there are in you precinct?  I was voter 461 and actually had to wait about 25 minutes to vote. 

[timschochet 35,072]

1 hour ago, Rich Conway said:

There is no circumstance under which I will vote for Hillary.  Period.  The end.

Given your political arguments over the years, I'm frankly surprised there are circumstances under which you would vote for Bernie.

My question was really for the progressives here who support Bernie over Hillary. I know there are some independents, libertarian and conservative types who are attracted to Bernie because of his integrity- I take it you are one of those. 

[Tom Servo 7,181]

[Bukkeye_State 10]

On 2/23/2016 at 11:17 AM, FatUncleJerryBuss said:

3 hours ago, pantagrapher said:

I've explained already why I think she's waiting. In short: 1. she's going to win the nomination without releasing them. 2. if there's pressure for her to release them during the general, she can actually get something back for doing so ("I'll release the transcripts when Trump releases...").

And the actual release will be, as I've said, the most anti-climactic story since Geraldo opened Al Capone's vault. Boring speeches touching on general topics.

 

LOL at all the dbags who were screaming bloody murder for Romney to release his tax returns doing a 180 now saying Hillary not releasing the transcripts doesn't matter. It matters.

[Henry Ford 60,520]

7 minutes ago, Tom Servo said:

Oh, I get it.  It plays on both a misunderstanding of the tenets of socialism in general and an intentional misrepresentation of Bernie Sanders as a traditional socialist and not a Democratic Socialist in the mold of Scandinavian and Western European countries, basically conflating voting for Sanders with a willingness to take half of people's current assets for no other reason than a desire to do so, without any real understanding of the full social and economic impact.

 

That's really clever.

[Gr00vus 12,004]

8 minutes ago, Tom Servo said:

Sadly, the person who lost half the sign probably would have been happy to give the whole thing away. But I guess that wouldn't have made for such an imminently pithy photo-meme. And by imminently pithy I mean sigh inducingly inane.

[timschochet 35,072]

4 minutes ago, Bukkeye_State said:

LOL at all the dbags who were screaming bloody murder for Romney to release his tax returns doing a 180 now saying Hillary not releasing the transcripts doesn't matter. It matters.

I defended Mitt then and I'm defending Hillary now! 

[Tom Servo 7,181]

5 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Oh, I get it.  It plays on both a misunderstanding of the tenets of socialism in general and an intentional misrepresentation of Bernie Sanders as a traditional socialist and not a Democratic Socialist in the mold of Scandinavian and Western European countries, basically conflating voting for Sanders with a willingness to take half of people's current assets for no other reason than a desire to do so, without any real understanding of the full social and economic impact.

 

That's really clever.

Sorry you have such a tight sphincter. 

[Tom Servo 7,181]

6 minutes ago, Gr00vus said:

Sadly, the person who lost half the sign probably would have been happy to give the whole thing away. But I guess that wouldn't have made for such an imminently pithy photo-meme. And by imminently pithy I mean sigh inducingly inane.

I really don't care how you split it. Socialism means spreading the wealth around.

[Gr00vus 12,004]

42 minutes ago, Tom Servo said:

I really don't care how you split it. Socialism means spreading the wealth around.

So we're at the part of the show where we get to make up definitions of words, how fun!

Socialism means the people own equal shares of the means of production and the benefits thereof, that there is little to no private property. Sanders is not coming anywhere near suggesting that.

Maybe socialism means federally funded highways, network infrastructure, power plants, airports, postal service, parks management, etc., etc. I'm sure you'd be comfortable with the amount and quality of all those things should we just decide to let people pay for them directly as they see fit, yes?

Vapid attempts at defining complex concepts aside, we already have socialism here in the U.S. It's a question of degree and determination of which public goods should be funded. Do we value an educated populace? Do we value a healthy populace? How much? Are those things enough of a public good to merit using tax revenue to address?

Silly internet memes don't really put forth a case for or against socialism, they just give evidence that the people who create and propagate them probably aren't ready to participate in any meaningful discussions about the best way to govern a nation or a society.

Edited March 9, 2016 by Gr00vus

[ffldrew 3,236]

3 hours ago, hagmania said:

Terrible news:

 

When did Western Michigan move from Kalamazoo to Lansing?

[Tom Servo 7,181]

18 minutes ago, Gr00vus said:

So we're at the part of the show where we get to make up definitions of words, how fun!

Socialism means the people own equal shares of the means of production and the benefits thereof, that there is little to no private property. Sanders is not coming anywhere near suggesting that.

Maybe socialism means federally funded highways, network infrastructure, power plants, airports, postal service, parks management, etc., etc. I'm sure you'd be comfortable with the amount and quality of all those things should we just decide to let people pay for them directly as they see fit, yes?

Vapid attempts at defining complex concepts aside, we already have socialism here in the U.S. It's a question of degree and determination of which public goods should be funded. Do we value an educated populace? Do we value a healthy populace? How much? Are those things enough of a public good to merit using tax revenue to address?

Silly internet memes don't really put forth a case for or against socialism, they just give evidence that the people who create and appreciate them probably aren't ready to participate in any meaningful discussions about the best way to govern a nation or a society.

I so love it when a liberal decides to pat me on the head and tell me how stupid and unenlightened I am...

It's nice that you consider government providing a service like roads for all people to use is an example of socialism. You do realize that there very hypothetical of direct payment for services exists, right? One example is called the Pennsylvania Turnpike - one of (if not the first) toll roads in America. You know, where you pay directly to use it and the funds go directly towards its maintenance and upkeep? Hmm...funny that.

I'd like to see what you describe as "socialism" in this country today. Education is paid for (at least in PA) by my property taxes - which, I might add as a homeschooling parent I cannot opt out of...even though I derive ZERO benefit from it. I may as well light that money on fire for all the good it does me. I'd just as soon see a sales tax placed as that would force non-property owners whose children derive all the benefits of a school system. I am penalized by the state for not participating in their school system while others - who contribute nothing - get the benefits. Hmmmm...that sounds a lot like a welfare society to me. Even if I did send my kids to public school, the fact that there are renters or other non-property owners who still get to suckle at the state's teat while providing nothing is offensive to me.

The following quote from Thomas Sowell is applicable here:

Quote

One of the consequences of such notions as ‘entitlements’ is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence.

But, please continue to provide me with evidence that your my intellectual better, keeping in mind this Sowell quote as well:

Quote

 

The vision of the anointed is one in which ills as poverty, irresponsible sex, and crime derive primarily from 'society,' rather than from individual choices and behavior. To believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the whole special role of the anointed, whose vision casts them in the role of rescuers of people treated unfairly by 'society'.

 

 

[msudaisy26 6,042]

Okay I am watching MSNBC right now and they show the Bernie rally live in  the corner of the screen, but they are paying commercial over him and don't go to the rally live. Is this normal? I  am very disappointed 

[Henry Ford 60,520]

1 hour ago, Tom Servo said:

Sorry you have such a tight sphincter. 

I'm not.  It's why I'm not the one ####ting all over the thread like a whining child.

[msudaisy26 6,042]

1 hour ago, Tom Servo said:

I really don't care how you split it. Socialism means spreading the wealth around.

Yes, because the way we are doing it now is working so well for the majority. 

[msudaisy26 6,042]

21 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

Okay I am watching MSNBC right now and they show the Bernie rally live in  the corner of the screen, but they are paying commercial over him and don't go to the rally live. Is this normal? I  am very disappointed 

Never mind they just did it to Rubio too

[Gr00vus 12,004]

1 hour ago, Tom Servo said:

But, please continue to provide me with evidence that your my intellectual better

 

Your posts, fraught as they are with misspellings, grammatical errors, sentence fragments that are completely unintelligible - well, they're pretty much all the evidence I need. Quoting Sowell probably doesn't help your case much either. At least it's not Rand, so, kudos to you for that.

Quote

I'd like to see what you describe as "socialism" in this country today. Education is paid for (at least in PA) by my property taxes - which, I might add as a homeschooling parent I cannot opt out of...even though I derive ZERO benefit from it. I may as well light that money on fire for all the good it does me. I'd just as soon see a sales tax placed as that would force non-property owners whose children derive all the benefits of a school system. I am penalized by the state for not participating in their school system while others - who contribute nothing - get the benefits. Hmmmm...that sounds a lot like a welfare society to me. Even if I did send my kids to public school, the fact that there are renters or other non-property owners who still get to suckle at the state's teat while providing nothing is offensive to me.

That you are unable to discern what people contribute to society does not in fact mean that those people don't actually contribute to society. Rather than being "penalized", you (we) benefit, greatly, from having an educated populace.

Is it all renters and non-property owners that offend you, or just those who have children and send them to public schools?

I don't understand your toll road example. Did the tolls pay for the initial construction of the road? If not, who/what did? Does the number of toll roads somehow eradicate all the non-toll roads/interstates that people don't pay direct tolls for in this country? Are you advocating for complete privatization of all transportation infrastructure in this country? Do you foresee any possible shortcomings from such an arrangement?

Your reasoning is faulty, bordering on non-existent. In future, maybe you could think out your rants a little more before you post them.

Edited March 9, 2016 by Gr00vus

[SameSongNDance 7,014]

Wait, is he about to win Michigan?

[cap'n grunge 7,704]

5 hours ago, timschochet said:

I doubt she was either hard on them or complimentary either, beyond "Thank you for inviting me, Goldman Sachs does fine work for charity, etc." 

if I had to guess the bulk of the speech was about the state of world affairs and her time as Secretary of State. It probably didn't touch on Wall Street on banking at all. 

Exactly. So basically a pay off.

[NCCommish 7,522]

I am thrilled to see Bernie winning Michigan so far. We had polls projecting as much as a 30 point deficit not too long ago. To come back that far and be up right now is awesome. Hope we can get the win in the bag. 

[msudaisy26 6,042]

6 minutes ago, SameSongNDance said:

Wait, is he about to win Michigan?

It would make my night and I have been sick all day and have barely ate. I don't think I will be able to sleep until we know. 

[cap'n grunge 7,704]

Win or lose, i really want to see Bernie get more support from the African American community. It's just ridiculous they are completely ignoring him given his work as a young man fighting to end segregation. But somehow Hillary is their hero. I don't ####### get it. It's insane.

[The_Man 4,610]

538 reports that early returns are from heavily African American Wayne County. So that would be interesting if Bernie holds his own there

[Dinsy Ejotuz 13,418]

1 minute ago, The_Man said:

538 reports that early returns are from heavily African American Wayne County. So that would be interesting if Bernie holds his own there

Meanwhile on the Democratic side in Michigan, we have very little of the vote reporting from Wayne County (Detroit). Wayne is home to a lot of African-American voters, so don’t read too much into the early returns until more of Wayne reports.

[/quote]

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz 13,418]

1 minute ago, The_Man said:

538 reports that early returns are from heavily African American Wayne County. So that would be interesting if Bernie holds his own there

Meanwhile on the Democratic side in Michigan, we have very little of the vote reporting from Wayne County (Detroit). Wayne is home to a lot of African-American voters, so don’t read too much into the early returns until more of Wayne reports. 

 

[The_Man 4,610]

LOL I read that totally wrong

Guess I'm more thought than I drunk I was

[Gr00vus 12,004]

9 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

Win or lose, i really want to see Bernie get more support from the African American community. It's just ridiculous they are completely ignoring him given his work as a young man fighting to end segregation. But somehow Hillary is their hero. I don't ####### get it. It's insane.

He hasn't been anywhere near as visible nationally over the last 20 years. Also he has been a little tone deaf in appealing to that community in light of current concerns. As Tim quoted earlier, it seems like the emphasis now is on overt racism rather than economic disadvantage stemming from racism, and he's been playing up the latter while things like Black Lives Matter are more focused on the former.

Edited March 9, 2016 by Gr00vus

[AAABatteries 25,300]

Is Michigan winner take all?

[Rich Conway 3,968]

3 hours ago, timschochet said:

Given your political arguments over the years, I'm frankly surprised there are circumstances under which you would vote for Bernie.

My question was really for the progressives here who support Bernie over Hillary. I know there are some independents, libertarian and conservative types who are attracted to Bernie because of his integrity- I take it you are one of those. 

I'm pretty libertarian.  Bernie has lots of libertarian positions.  Sure, I don't necessarily agree with his solutions to much of our economic problems, at least I tend to think he has diagnosed them correctly.  I don't think Hillary or the GOP have even figured out what the problems are, much less know how to solve them.  And, yeah, integrity counts for a lot.  A whole lot.

[The_Man 4,610]

6% of the Wayne County vote in and Bernie leading by 1500 votes there. 

If he somehow wins this primary, isn't it a whole new race? If Hillary cant beat Bernie outside of the deeply red Deep South states, that's going to become the narrative