DUMP TRUMP (previously 2020 candidates)
nan said:
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
gerritn said:
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:
gerritn said:Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
True though.
ridski said:
nan said:True though.
gerritn said:Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
Another term for "predictable" could be "obvious".
He didn't run for re-election to the Senate as a Democrat this past November.
nan said:
gerritn said:Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
You pick impeccable sources. Isn't Michael Tracey the a$$clown who accused Maxine Waters of "shoving" him? I believe he is.
His 2016 campaign manager doesn't call him the front-runner.
https://www.apnews.com/dd5a05f91f174f2f8ac4ec9e8da36b9f
“This time, he starts off as a front-runner, or one of the front-runners,” Sanders’ 2016 campaign manager Jeff Weaver told The Associated Press, highlighting the senator’s proven ability to generate massive fundraising through small-dollar donations and his ready-made network of staff and volunteers.
Weaver added: “It’ll be a much bigger campaign if he runs again, in terms of the size of the operation.”
Amid the enthusiasm — and there was plenty in Burlington as the Sanders Institute convened his celebrity supporters, former campaign staff and progressive policy leaders — there were also signs of cracks in Sanders’ political base. His loyalists are sizing up a prospective 2020 Democratic field likely to feature a collection of ambitious liberal leaders — and not the establishment-minded Hillary Clinton.
nan said:
gerritn said:Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
It's even worse. Whenever he runs for re-election, he will run as a Democrat first, but then he doesn't accept the nomination but runs as an independent. This virtually makes it impossible for a real democrat to run against him. Talk about corrupt politicians.
See: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/bernie-sanders-democrat-independent-vermont-60184
DaveSchmidt said:
gerritn said:Also, no one is running yet.
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
You are correct. However, the Great Mentioner is mentioning all sorts of possibilities. I don't think any want to be frontrunner right now. It usually doesn't end well for one anointed as frontrunner this early.
You know, I voted for Bernie last time and I really (REALLY) would have preferred him over HRC but he is just too old for 2020.
gerritn said:
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
I still find this interesting. Bernie is an independent and everyone feels like the DNC ripped him off. He was a party outsider that tried to utilize the Democratic Party's infrastructure to become the nominee for POTUS. Yes, the DNC did not play very fair but he was not a member of the party. Did everyone expect the DNC to welcome him with open arms?
As a registered Democrat, I expect MY party to treat all candidates fairly and to, generally, facilitate a DEMOCRATIC process by which we can select our nominees. If Democrats want Bernie as their nominee (and note, I did say "if") who are the party hacks to put their thumbs on the scale?
Can someone please tell me what a Democrat is supposed to be? All these attacks on Bernie as not a real Democrat, when he channels FDR and the New Deal. Don't' get it--instead you go for these far to the right or centrist would be Republicans who take corporate money and do the bidding of donors over voters. They should all be like Bernie, who is more a Democrat than Hillary ever was.
What part of Medicare for All, A Green New Deal, a living wage, a tax on Wall Street and more regulations, end to some wars (should be all--he's not so great there), prison reform, ban on fracking, and more do you all not like? And no ties to Wall Street or corporations.
I know he is old as dirt and kind of a repellent personality, but you don't have to date him or invite him for Thanksgiving. I want a candidate who fits this profile and if the Democrats want to win they will stop wining about superficial crap like party labels--which is really just the donors telling them to keep people like Bernie out.
Some of you be like this:
Klinker said:
As a registered Democrat, I expect MY party to treat all candidates fairly and to, generally, facilitate a DEMOCRATIC process by which we can select our nominees. If Democrats want Bernie as their nominee (and note, I did say "if") who are the party hacks to put their thumbs on the scale?
If we want a democratic process for choosing a nominee, then we shouldn't put up the crackpot system that's in place now. If it was democratic, all states would vote on the same day and they would utilize the voting process. We would have none of this nonsense regarding the Iowa caucuses or the entire universe descending on New Hampshire or putting everything into campaigning in South Carolina.
There is very little that is democratic about how we choose nominees.
nan said:
Can someone please tell me what a Democrat is supposed to be?
ok this is easy - A Democrat should have a 'D' next to their name. 
drummerboy said:
nan said:You pick impeccable sources. Isn't Michael Tracey the a$$clown who accused Maxine Waters of "shoving" him? I believe he is.
gerritn said:Predictable. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1069085240629563393
nan said:Geez, I don't know, maybe because he is not a Democrat?
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
MIchael Tracey, an excellent TYT reporter, tried to interview Maxine Waters and it did not go well. She pushed him and walked away when he asked her a challenging question. She comes off as less than steller--she think Michael Tracy, a Progressive, is a right-winger. She also rails on about Russia and collusion--not a good look. Tracey asked her a good question which was not from a right-wing angle. She is not used to being asked tough questions. Probably he should not have said she shoved him, but she should be able to answer fair questions. The whole thing got blown up by the media, as usual. Long story short: he is a good reporter and excellent analyst.
Here is an detailed analysis:
jamie said:
nan said:ok this is easy - A Democrat should have a 'D' next to their name.
Can someone please tell me what a Democrat is supposed to be?
Mr. Ross, that bothers me less than the fact that Bernie was fawned over in the convention, and got to write what he called the most progressive platform the party ever had. And then got the election result that helped Bernie, instead of the people being hurt because of that election result.
Ms. Nan - Those kids I've told you about, that my spouse teaches, STILL can't go to college because of Trump's hate for the DACA kids. That's just one example of what a real Democrat would have been for.
[Edited to add] Realizing that I need to be more direct in my comments - If those people who "progressives" spit on and deride as "corporate Democrats" were in office (Hillary included), those kids would be going to college. Again, just one example.
And then got the election result that helped Bernie, instead of the people being hurt because of that election result.
I've read this sentence several times and I'm still having trouble with it. Does that mean Bernie benefitted by Trump being elected?
jamie said:
Who on Earth do you like besides Stein and Sanders?
Tulsi Gabbard, Nina Turner and probably some others. I don't think I can vote for anyone who is not for Medicare for All. No excuse for that at this point.
nohero said: Ms. Nan - Those kids I've told you about, that my spouse teaches, STILL can't go to college because of Trump's hate for the DACA kids. That's just one example of what a real Democrat would have been for.
[Edited to add] Realizing that I need to be more direct in my comments - If those people who "progressives" spit on and deride as "corporate Democrats" were in office (Hillary included), those kids would be going to college. Again, just one example.
Not sure why you wrote that undocumented students cannot attend college? Check out: https://uleadnet.org/ Only Arizona, Alabama and South Carolina expressly prohibit undocumented immigrants from enrolling at any degree-granting institution but even Alabama and SC allow DACA protected students to enroll (yes, I realize that protection is tenuous these days but just three weeks ago, the 9th Circuit ruled against Trump's efforts to end DACA so things are looking up). No other states bar admission based on immigration status. And, private institutions can pretty much do what they want in regard to admission.
Perhaps you mean they cannot afford college because of financial aid eligibility restrictions? That is, indeed, a problem. Several states do not allow undocumented students to apply for public financial aid. Some make them apply as international students so they have pay out-of-state tuition. To my knowledge, the following states have educational parity laws that allow undocumented students to receive public financial aid: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey (as of May 2018), New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. And, 18 states have passed legislation allowing undocumented students to be eligible for in-state tuition rates.
For NJ update, see:
Is there something I am missing?
Without DACA, the opportunities for the undocumented are limited. I believe that's what the news items you pointed to make clear.
[Edited to add] Which is why young high school students today have greater concerns, than older students who qualified for DACA before it was curtailed.
yahooyahoo said:
Klinker said:If we want a democratic process for choosing a nominee, then we shouldn't put up the crackpot system that's in place now. If it was democratic, all states would vote on the same day and they would utilize the voting process. We would have none of this nonsense regarding the Iowa caucuses or the entire universe descending on New Hampshire or putting everything into campaigning in South Carolina.
As a registered Democrat, I expect MY party to treat all candidates fairly and to, generally, facilitate a DEMOCRATIC process by which we can select our nominees. If Democrats want Bernie as their nominee (and note, I did say "if") who are the party hacks to put their thumbs on the scale?
There is very little that is democratic about how we choose nominees.
Well, if we go down that road, once we have chosen the nominees, there is very little democracy in how we ultimately select one of them to become president either. Democratic would be: everyone has equal access to the voting process, every vote counts, and every vote counts equally, not this corrupt electoral college nonsense.
nan said:
jamie said:Tulsi Gabbard, Nina Turner and probably some others. I don't think I can vote for anyone who is not for Medicare for All. No excuse for that at this point.
Who on Earth do you like besides Stein and Sanders?
You are what we call a one-issue voter. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
gerritn said:
nan said:You are what we call a one-issue voter. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
jamie said:Tulsi Gabbard, Nina Turner and probably some others. I don't think I can vote for anyone who is not for Medicare for All. No excuse for that at this point.
Who on Earth do you like besides Stein and Sanders?
There's an awful lot wrong with that, actually.
gerritn said:
nan said:You are what we call a one-issue voter. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
jamie said:Tulsi Gabbard, Nina Turner and probably some others. I don't think I can vote for anyone who is not for Medicare for All. No excuse for that at this point.
Who on Earth do you like besides Stein and Sanders?
How am I a one-issue voter? I want Medicare for all, a ban on fracking--and a HUGE change towards renewable energy, free and better education (including a stop to the privatization), major infrastructure upgrade, reduction in wage inequality and a living wage, a radically re-vamped foreign policy, reduction in the military budget, prison reform, higher taxes on the wealthy and corporation, stronger Wall Street regulations and more.
I'm never going to get someone with all of these so my basic must have is Medicare for All, and I'm still figuring out what else cause I think these things are extremely essential. We need so much and people are suffering greatly. Really, don't see how anyone can be considering any candidate unless they see what they are honestly working for--and what the platform is going to be. The climate is in dire shape right now--so anyone taking huge donations from oil and gas (Beto) or Big Pharma (Booker), and similar problems with others must be scrutinized deeply, because there will be people who fake like they want these things to get votes, a winning strategy that worked for Trump.
So far it does not look like the 2020 Democrat nominee (which will probably be picked by the donors) will embrace any of these (the leadership does not), although they will spout platitudes referencing some of them. This is why I have to hope Bernie will run, because he supports most of these and he does not take corporate money. There really is no other choice unless someone similar also runs. We are stuck with the old, annoying Jewish guy as our best hope.
You're a one issue voter if you say you won't vote for someone unless they support issue x. They might support issue a,b,c,d,e,f,g and h, but unless they support x, you say, you won't vote for them.
One issue voter. Just like anti-abortion voters.
nan said:
I'm never going to get someone with all of these so my basic must have is Medicare for All.
I hate to tell you this, but that is pretty much the exact definition of a one-issue voter.
If someone is going to be a one-issue voter, you'd think they'd be looking at climate change, and which candidates support a Green New Deal.
Yeah, you make yourself seem ignorant by posting stuff like that. The Green Party has a great platform, by the way, and Jill Stein knows how to run on the issues. The Democrats could learn a lot from her, but instead they just make fun cause anyone with a real platform is a threat and that's what they have been brainwashed to do. You have to wonder why when 70% of people polled say they want Medicare for All, the Democrats don't adopt it in their platform--seems like it would be a no-brainer. But, instead of wondering about that, they waste time spreading dumb propaganda about Jill Stein and Putin.
They will no doubt, follow the Manufactured Consent on Bernie too and we will end up with Hillary 2.0 and another nail biter election. But, here is a great article I just read. Maybe stop giggling about Jill Stein for a minute and read it and think about what it would be like to actually elect someone who does not have to pretend to care about voters over donors. And maybe keep that in mind when the mainstream media tries to control your brain.
Why is no one treating Bernie Sanders like the Democratic front-runner?
From a purely electoral standpoint, Sanders stands the best chance against Trump
https://spectator.us/bernie-sanders-democratic-front-runner/