Bernie Sanders
Comments
-
vs. trump? ... pretty sure HRC is an easier tarmrussel1 said:
No worries. I get your point. Like I said, I just think the ideas of those candidates are actually opposed to each other. For Stein and Johnson, it's easy to come off in a certain way because they never had to cast a federal vote, or compromise with their fellow Senators, or run a State department, or be in the spotlight with people coming after you the whole time. For Sanders, the Republicans completely left him alone in the primaries because there was no reason to try to damage him, to HRC's benefit. But you can be assured that every one of these three would be torn to shreds if they were the candidate.brianlux said:
OK, I too apologize. Trollish is a bit harsh. But I did get the sense you were not addressing what I said which, in essence, is that to my way of thinking, the combined ideas of Stein, Sanders and Johnson make more sense to me- and I might add, also seem more inclined toward being focused on the good of the people- than everything I hear from Clinton and Trump combined.mrussel1 said:
Sorry you feel that way Brian. We rarely agree on things as you are far to the left of me, but saying it's trollish seems a little harsh and misplaced. I'm a marginally smart guy so most things don't get past me. If you expect me to agree with your perspective, then don't waste your time waiting.brianlux said:
You did not at all show understanding. In fact, you were coming off as a bit trollish.mrussel1 said:
Oh I understood. I'm just pointing out where I agree, rather than where I disagree. The problem is that Johnson and Bernie/Stein are not compatible ideas. In fact, they are diametrically opposed in more ways than they agree.brianlux said:
You completely missed what I'm saying here.mrussel1 said:
Well I can agree with some of what you say here. Johnson is an idea. Johnson as POTUS is a bad idea though. Good news is that Trump learned about Aleppo and possibly Syria yesterday.brianlux said:
Yeah, I suppose he probably should but it does not bother me in the least that Johnson goofed on Aleppo. Johnson is not a potential POTUS. Johnson is an idea. Just like Bernie is an idea (that verged on a reality for a while, and that is saying something) and Stein is an idea. The best of the ideas and dreams of those three- Bernie, Stein, and Johnson- add up to a whole lot more in terms of what makes sense than what Clinton and Trump offer combined- hugely! And is a more sensible group of ideas not easy to imagine, to see, to move toward? And potentially wonderful even?PJ_Soul said:
You don't think the person running for POTUS should be expected to know where Aleppo is?? While the USA is essentially at war with ISIS in Syria??brianlux said:
I'm looking for a good president, not an encyclopedia.mrussel1 said:
If you were running for POTUS, I would say yes. If you are just a guy that pays attention to what's going on in the world when you can, then I would say no. Sorry, the bar for uninformed for you and a POTUS candidate are far different. I don't want to 'drink a beer' with the president. That's how we got W.brianlux said:
I didn't know where Aleppo is until just now. But I'm an uninformed idiot, right? Right....mrussel1 said:
Gary Johnson? You mean the guy that this morning didn't know what Aleppo was? Yeah, informed voters for sure. He's ready.polaris_x said:my jaunt through Maine last week showed more signs for Gary Johnson and Trump than Clinton ... there were actually not many signs at all to be quite honest ... but of the ones I saw ... didn't see any for HRC except for a sticker on a person's car ...
Maine will go for Clinton by 8 points+. Don't you worry.
So no, looking at it that way I honestly could care less if Johnson blew it on Aleppo.
As for being far left, I don't think so. I think I'm actually rather conservative. At least I try to conserve where ever possible. But left, right, conservative, liberal, moderate- those terms have mostly lost their meaning.
this pretty much sums up why America has failed ... sorry to Bernie supporters - but he wouldn't have fixed this ...Free said:
most americans still think corporations are good for the country based on some myth that they employ people and that is all that matters0 -
We'll have to meet up at another show! Adele and Conor Oberst are next for me.BS44325 said:'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 10 -
I might go to Charles Bradley otherwise nothing until TOTD.benjs said:
0 -
Hillary Clinton has dropped the words “climate change” from most of her public addresses since winning the endorsement of her party rival Bernie Sanders, according to Climate Home analysis.0
-
Usually candidates negotiate and leverage their endorsement and support.Free said:
Of course, she has.JC29856 said:Hillary Clinton has dropped the words “climate change” from most of her public addresses since winning the endorsement of her party rival Bernie Sanders, according to Climate Home analysis.
Assuming climate wasn't used, just wondering what was?0 -
The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/0 -
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/0 -
Did you read the lawsuit?mrussel1 said:
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/0 -
I did not read the S&C and the article is unclear as to whether they are suing for damages based on DNC donations or Bernie donations. I was assuming the former as that seems more rational. If the latter then I think the case has even less merit. What about a political party would lead one to believe that it wouldn't have a preferred candidate? Is there a disclosure on a website? Is there something in the public bylaws? I would think there would need to be something to avoid a quick dismissal or judgment for the defendant.JC29856 said:
Did you read the lawsuit?mrussel1 said:
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/0 -
The point of the post wasn't about the merits of the suit, it was about a defense argument. If you want to argue case merit, I suggest you read the complaint first.mrussel1 said:
I did not read the S&C and the article is unclear as to whether they are suing for damages based on DNC donations or Bernie donations. I was assuming the former as that seems more rational. If the latter then I think the case has even less merit. What about a political party would lead one to believe that it wouldn't have a preferred candidate? Is there a disclosure on a website? Is there something in the public bylaws? I would think there would need to be something to avoid a quick dismissal or judgment for the defendant.JC29856 said:
Did you read the lawsuit?mrussel1 said:
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/
If you read it you will find the answers to your questions.
The DNC "appeared" and claims to be neutral but "in fact" wasn't based on the information leaked online.
If the DNC "prefers" "favors" and or "coordinates" with a particulate candidate, the easy solution is to disclose it.
If your up for arguing merits of "S&Cs" filed by the DNC over the years, I'd be more than happy, I have a few favorites. Let me know I'll start a new thread.Post edited by JC29856 on0 -
It's a counter argument, challenging the knowledge of the plaintiffs when they made the donation, not an admission of guilt.JC29856 said:
The point of the post wasn't about the merits of the suit, it was about a defense argument. If you want to argue case merit, I suggest you read the complaint first.mrussel1 said:
I did not read the S&C and the article is unclear as to whether they are suing for damages based on DNC donations or Bernie donations. I was assuming the former as that seems more rational. If the latter then I think the case has even less merit. What about a political party would lead one to believe that it wouldn't have a preferred candidate? Is there a disclosure on a website? Is there something in the public bylaws? I would think there would need to be something to avoid a quick dismissal or judgment for the defendant.JC29856 said:
Did you read the lawsuit?mrussel1 said:
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/
If you read it you will find the answers to your questions.
The DNC "appeared" and claims to be neutral but "in fact" wasn't based on the information leaked online.
If the DNC "prefers" "favors" and or "coordinates" with a particulate candidate, the easy solution is to disclose it.
If your up for arguing merits of "S&Cs" filed by the DNC over the years, I'd be more than happy, I have a few favorites. Let me know I'll start a new thread.0 -
Guilty of what?mrussel1 said:
It's a counter argument, challenging the knowledge of the plaintiffs when they made the donation, not an admission of guilt.JC29856 said:
The point of the post wasn't about the merits of the suit, it was about a defense argument. If you want to argue case merit, I suggest you read the complaint first.mrussel1 said:
I did not read the S&C and the article is unclear as to whether they are suing for damages based on DNC donations or Bernie donations. I was assuming the former as that seems more rational. If the latter then I think the case has even less merit. What about a political party would lead one to believe that it wouldn't have a preferred candidate? Is there a disclosure on a website? Is there something in the public bylaws? I would think there would need to be something to avoid a quick dismissal or judgment for the defendant.JC29856 said:
Did you read the lawsuit?mrussel1 said:
If a person makes a post claiming the DNC is biased, then subsequently donates to the DNC, then sues for bias, you don't think that harms their claim? Why didn't they donate to Bernie directly?JC29856 said:The DNC attorneys also get a bit creative in their effort to get this lawsuit thrown out. They claim that all of the named plaintiffs already knew that the DNC was biased when they donated — so therefore how could they have been duped if they knew? We are not joking, that was one of their actual claims in the motion to dismiss.
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/dnc-files-scathing-rebuttal-wants-fraud-lawsuit-filed-by-bernie-backers-thrown-out/
If you read it you will find the answers to your questions.
The DNC "appeared" and claims to be neutral but "in fact" wasn't based on the information leaked online.
If the DNC "prefers" "favors" and or "coordinates" with a particulate candidate, the easy solution is to disclose it.
If your up for arguing merits of "S&Cs" filed by the DNC over the years, I'd be more than happy, I have a few favorites. Let me know I'll start a new thread.
Who said it was an admission of guilt?Post edited by JC29856 on0 -
The hypocracy stink is so strong...tonifig8 said:0 -
From The Bern Report:
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Why a Republican Might Win Bernie’s Home State
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/vermont-gubernatorial-2016-bernie-sanders-scott-214285#ixzz4LP8XZJQP
0 -
All Bernie had to do was accept the green party and stein invitation to replace her on the ticket and we would have seen him in the debates tonight as I'm certain he would have garnered 15% support. He could have continued his revolution but instead he endorses Hilliary. What more could the guy ask for after getting cheated in Dem primary?0
-
You don't wonder if he was pressured to endorse her? An ultimatum placed? He did a 180 on his supporters. It doesn't make sense.JC29856 said:All Bernie had to do was accept the green party and stein invitation to replace her on the ticket and we would have seen him in the debates tonight as I'm certain he would have garnered 15% support. He could have continued his revolution but instead he endorses Hilliary. What more could the guy ask for after getting cheated in Dem primary?
0 -
so you think that the guy that most Bernie supporters believe was not the typical politician and would not sell his beliefs to anyone just buckled and did exactly that? or do you think just maybe he does believe that Hillary would be a good president?Free said:
You don't wonder if he was pressured to endorse her? An ultimatum placed? He did a 180 on his supporters. It doesn't make sense.JC29856 said:All Bernie had to do was accept the green party and stein invitation to replace her on the ticket and we would have seen him in the debates tonight as I'm certain he would have garnered 15% support. He could have continued his revolution but instead he endorses Hilliary. What more could the guy ask for after getting cheated in Dem primary?
0
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FF3GImC8Ky0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help