Bernie Sanders for President

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

Good show in Iowa, Bernie!

But he lost..... IMO, it doesn't mean anything unless you win.
However, you are probably congratulating him for showing strongly despite a loss, and I suppose that could mean that he still has a chance, which I suppose is true (I hope so... I am pretty pessimistic though. I am inclined to believe that it's pretty much a rigged game).

Well, if your definition of winning is who received the most caucus votes, then Hillary won 49.8 to 49.6%. If you're definition of winning is who receives the most delegates to the convention, then it was a tie, because each will receive 22 delegates. However, if the question is, who would you have rather been last night, consider these points:

-Hillary campaigned all over Iowa once before in 2008, and has had at least the skeleton of a political machine on the ground there ever since.
-Hillary has Superpacs, tons of money, by their own admission the most established organization in the history of Iowa politics, and the endorsements of every major Iowa politician and newspaper. She was also endorsed by the NY Times over the weekend. She had her popular former President husband and daughter campaigning all over the state for her, and even dragged poor Gabby Gifford up on stage with her.
-Last year at this time, Bernie had a zero recognition score in Iowa and polled in the single digits.
He had no money, no organization, no volunteers, no campaign infrastructure. All he had was a message,
-When campaigning starts in earnest, Bernie draws huge, excited. motivated crowds. Hillary draws smaller less enthusiastic crowds.
-As his message starts to resonate, Bernie cuts the deficit from 40 points to 25 to 18 to 12 to 8 to 4, and finally, by election day, is in a statistical dead heat.
-caucus goers show up in droves, many participating for the first time, many of those to vote for Bernie
-caucus goers who want a candidate they feel "cares about their needs" support Bernie 78%; caucus goers who want a candidate they feel is honest and that they can trust support Bernie 82%
-Bernie ties the once-anointed "invincible, inevitable nominee" and heads to New Hampshire with a healthy (and growing) lead. He lands in NH at 5 a.m. AND A CROWD OF SUPPORTERS IS WATING FOR HIM. Despite the exhausting hour and lack of sleep, he gets up on the bed of a flatbed truck and graciously speaks.

Question: Which candidate "won"?

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-hampshire-democratic/

Sanders has NH locked up..that's his territory

Hillary won 6 coin tosses. The way we elect a president is archaic.

ldent42 said:

The Juggler said:

Hillary won 6 coin tosses. The way we elect a president is archaic.

maybe Bernie could do something about that if he wins the Presidency.

They could pick a number between 1 and 10 instead ... reform!

HughFreakingDillon said:

when will America learn how to run an election.

I want to know why in the hell these primaries go on for sooooooo long. It's pretty ridiculous.

ldent42 said:

the whole process is stupid. What the fuck makes Iowa so special? (no offense to people living in Iowa)

Why not have a national primary day or something in the spring time? I've always felt the current primary schedule is unfair to states who don't vote until later. It's almost as if they don't matter as much as the early ones.

The Juggler said:

ldent42 said:

the whole process is stupid. What the fuck makes Iowa so special? (no offense to people living in Iowa)

Why not have a national primary day or something in the spring time? I've always felt the current primary schedule is unfair to states who don't vote until later. It's almost as if they don't matter as much as the early ones.

well Iowa hasn't voted for the republican nominee in something like 30 years so hard to really say Iowa matters all that much either other than being 1st. i guess one thing Iowa does is eliminate the no chance ones.

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

ldent42 said:

the whole process is stupid. What the fuck makes Iowa so special? (no offense to people living in Iowa)

Even though this is a windbag newspaper up here in Canada it is nonetheless unbiased towards America and nice to hear opinions in the press.
From this article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/frustrated-with-status-quo-iowa-voters-turn-to-fringe-candidates/article28475706/?cmpid=rss1&google_editors_picks=true
Hundreds of rallies, thousands of attack ads and countless minutes of bombardment by phone later, Iowa has become the contest that mirrors, if not exaggerates, anger on both sides of the U.S. political divide.

“Many Americans don’t feel the American dream is available to them any more,” the former senator from neighbouring Minnesota, Norm Coleman, told The Globe and Mail over the phone. “The Democrats are looking to a socialist, and the Republicans to Donald Trump. … It is not a pretty picture.”


Accurate opinion? - I don't know, it is the news that is fed to us.

Sounds about right to me. I see no error in this thinking except YET AGAIN the world "Socialist" is substituted for "Democratic Socialist" and I still don't believe the average American see Trump as anything but a blow hard.

But this also begs the question, "What exactly is the American Dream and does that dream not entail within nightmare in the long run?". If the American dream is based on consumption and wealth for all without regard to the true nature of sustainability then I would say we are definitely barking up the wrong dream.

If by the American Dream we are talking about equity and fairness, then Bernie Sanders is the one to go with. (Plus, I read somewhere that some of his positions on things like trade are actually conservative enough in nature to attract some republicans. )

ldent42 said:

the whole process is stupid. What the fuck makes Iowa so special? (no offense to people living in Iowa)

John Wayne was born there.