Bernie in the Bronx on 3/31/16!
yahooyahoo said:
When I saw the title, I thought this was about Bernie Williams.
Me too, I must be coming down with Opening Day fever.
Current general election polling shows Sanders squashes all three Republican candidates in a head-to-head match off.
springgreen2 said:
I hear 27,000 people are expected.
I hope they organize that crowd well. It would be a shame if some had better views than others.
I have my doubts about Sanders. Lot of it based on economists who liken Sanders promises to Trump's outrageous promises - ridiculous.
Some of it is based on his campaign. Anyone who disagrees with him is attacked as a corrupts capitalist tool, including many economists who are liberal.
Here's an extract from the latest Krugman screed about Sanders
First, the Sanders campaign needs to stop feeding the right-wing disinformation machine. Engaging in innuendo suggesting, without evidence, that Clinton is corrupt is, at this point, basically campaigning on behalf of the RNC. If Sanders really believes, as he says, that it’s all-important to keep the White House out of Republican hands, he should stop all that – and tell his staff to stop it too.
Second, it’s time for Sanders to engage in some citizenship. The presidency isn’t the only office on the line; down-ballot races for the Senate and even the House are going to be crucial. Clinton has been raising money for other races; Sanders hasn’t, and is still being evasive on whether he will ever do so. Not acceptable.
Oh, and the Sanders campaign is saying that it will try to flip superdelegates even if it loses the unpledged delegates and the popular vote. Remember when evil Hillary was going to use superdelegates to steal the nomination? Double standards aside, what makes the campaign think that he will get any backing from a party he refuses to lift a finger to help?
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/feel-the-math/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body&_r=0
I'm afraid if Clinton wins the nomination, the hard feelings towards Clinton engendered by the Sanders campaign may spill over to the general election and help the Republicans.
If you're a comfortable well-to-do liberal, you may say "lets try Sanders and if he loses the general election we'll get over it." We'll survive it. Those in the south who voted for Clinton may have a different perspective. They're at the bleeding edge where southern politicians have been curtailing their rights, where obstacles on voter registrations are placed, where voting booths are removed and hours are cut, where abortion clinics restrictions "appear", etc.
To them its not a we'll get over it. To them, being at the bleeding edge of Republican domination its life. They don't have the feel for Bernie and his pie in the sky promises.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-swinging-wisconsin-the-liberal-base-is-not-comfortable-with-clinton/2016/04/01/be84f140-f805-11e5-a3ce-f06b5ba21f33_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_wisconsin-455pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
As for Sanders "activists" who accuse Clinton being in big oil's pocket:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/01/why-hillary-clinton-is-justifiably-annoyed-by-critiques-of-her-big-oil-fundraising/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintongreenpeace-725am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
BG9 said:I'm afraid if Clinton wins the nomination, the hard feelings towards Clinton engendered by the Sanders campaign may spill over to the general election and help the Republicans.
The "hard feelings" are no worse than those in 2008 between Obama and Clinton. Many Clinton supporters felt that the nomination had been stolen from her by a nobody. I'm sure many blamed it on sexism.
The contentiousness on the Democratic side is normal for a Primary season.
The contentiousness on the Republican side is pathological. Kasich and Cruz are suggesting that not only will they not campaign for Trump if he is the nominee but they may not vote for him.
BG9 said:
I have my doubts about Sanders. Lot of it based on economists who liken Sanders promises to Trump's outrageous promises - ridiculous.
Some of it is based on his campaign. Anyone who disagrees with him is attacked as a corrupts capitalist tool, including many economists who are liberal.
Here's an extract from the latest Krugman screed about Sanders
First, the Sanders campaign needs to stop feeding the right-wing disinformation machine. Engaging in innuendo suggesting, without evidence, that Clinton is corrupt is, at this point, basically campaigning on behalf of the RNC. If Sanders really believes, as he says, that it’s all-important to keep the White House out of Republican hands, he should stop all that – and tell his staff to stop it too.
Second, it’s time for Sanders to engage in some citizenship. The presidency isn’t the only office on the line; down-ballot races for the Senate and even the House are going to be crucial. Clinton has been raising money for other races; Sanders hasn’t, and is still being evasive on whether he will ever do so. Not acceptable.
Oh, and the Sanders campaign is saying that it will try to flip superdelegates even if it loses the unpledged delegates and the popular vote. Remember when evil Hillary was going to use superdelegates to steal the nomination? Double standards aside, what makes the campaign think that he will get any backing from a party he refuses to lift a finger to help?
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/feel-the-math/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body&_r=0
I'm afraid if Clinton wins the nomination, the hard feelings towards Clinton engendered by the Sanders campaign may spill over to the general election and help the Republicans.
If you're a comfortable well-to-do liberal, you may say "lets try Sanders and if he loses the general election we'll get over it." We'll survive it. Those in the south who voted for Clinton may have a different perspective. They're at the bleeding edge where southern politicians have been curtailing their rights, where obstacles on voter registrations are placed, where voting booths are removed and hours are cut, where abortion clinics restrictions "appear", etc.
To them its not a we'll get over it. To them, being at the bleeding edge of Republican domination its life. They don't have the feel for Bernie and his pie in the sky promises.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-swinging-wisconsin-the-liberal-base-is-not-comfortable-with-clinton/2016/04/01/be84f140-f805-11e5-a3ce-f06b5ba21f33_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_wisconsin-455pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
As for Sanders "activists" who accuse Clinton being in big oil's pocket:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/01/why-hillary-clinton-is-justifiably-annoyed-by-critiques-of-her-big-oil-fundraising/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintongreenpeace-725am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Re: Krugman:
(1) Bernie isn't saying Hillary is corrupt. He's saying that she's part of a corrupt campaign finance system. That's not going to hurt her if she's the nominee, since her opponent will be part of the same system, even if it's Trump, because he's not going to self-finance a Presidential campaign.
(2) I'm sure that most or all of the down-ballot candidates Hillary is helping are supporting her, so the money is not really going outside of her campaign.
(3) On the issue of unpledged super delegates, what is Krugman's point? That because Bernie has complained about the unfairness of super delegates that he shouldn't try to win their support? Nonsense.
The New York Times is a total shill for Hillary. Krugman's remarks sounded more like someone applying for a job in her cabinet than real analysis. This only makes Bernie supporters think Jill Stein is looking better and better every day.
http://benjaminstudebaker.com/2016/03/25/clinton-supporters-are-scaremongering-about-donald-trump-to-silence-the-concerns-of-the-young-and-the-poor/
Another lie from BernieBros.
Bernie Sanders’s false claim that he has released his full federal tax returns
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/05/bernie-sanderss-false-claim-that-he-has-released-his-full-federal-tax-returns/
Maybe the Washington Post fact checker is also a Hillary shill
This latest lie is rated as
Here's another lie
Fact-checking the Clinton-Sanders spat over Big Oil contributions
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/02/fact-checking-the-clinton-sanders-spat-over-big-oil-contributions/
Maybe the Washington Post fact checker is also a Hillary shill. Oh wait, didn't I say that already?
This BernieBros lie is rated as
I've heard Bernie get his crowd worked up when he talks about "taking care" of the Wall Street billionaires. Cheap low class rhetoric working his crowd.
So who are the Wall Street billionaires? I know of one - Michael Bloomberg. Should we force him to divest his assets? Put him in jail? Put him on a stage wearing a dunce cap and have him confess his crimes?
What about the others? It seems to me almost all billionaires are from the tech, oil and gas, and the retail industries.
That's why I call his rhetoric cheap and low class. Its an appeal to stick it to "evil" Wall Street emotion.
But lets assume the Sanders govt can really do Wall Street in. Will you enjoy the Wall Street job loss? Markets are electronic. Wall Street can move to some other financial capital, like London.
Would we like to see Wall Street crash? After all its a capitalist playground. So what if your 401K, IRA or your corporate and public pension funds are invested in that. You would have the knowledge that you did Wall St in. You always have social security as your backup.
First, Bernie does not want to "do in" the billionaire class. He merely wants them to pay their fair share of taxes and change the government so that it is not rigged in their favor. As for breaking up the banks, what he is saying is what he wants to do - he knows that much of that can not be done by executive fiat, but that he would have to get legislation passed.
Steve said:
First, Bernie does not want to "do in" the billionaire class. He merely wants them to pay their fair share of taxes and change the government so that it is not rigged in their favor. As for breaking up the banks, what he is saying is what he wants to do - he knows that much of that can not be done by executive fiat, but that he would have to get legislation passed.
To bad his rhetoric when he demonizes the "billionaires" doesn't reflect what you claim.
Bernie's rhetoric is eerily similar to Lenin's. Just substitute capitalist for billionaire. Lenin too made outrageous promises on education and the economy. That worked out so well.
btw- A video was found of Sander's praising the food lines in communist countries. He said people lining up for food in communist countries is a good thing. I suspect those waiting on line didn't think so.
You're insane if you really believe that Bernie is a communist/socialist. He's probably more capitalistic than anyone else running for President as he wants a level playing field rather than have laws written by those with power/money that suppress the ability of others to compete freely.
BG9 said:
Bernie's rhetoric is eerily similar to Lenin's. Just substitute capitalist for billionaire. Lenin too made outrageous promises on education and the economy. That worked out so well.
Didn't it? From what little I know the country was more educated and most people better off financially under Lenin than under the Tsar.
Steve said:
You're insane if you really believe that Bernie is a communist/socialist. He's probably more capitalistic than anyone else running for President as he wants a level playing field rather than have laws written by those with power/money that suppress the ability of others to compete freely.
I don't think so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc
Our political system may be a disaster, but words still have meaning.
Do you have any understanding of context? He was discussing political inequality. Of course, having sufficient food for all is better, but his point was that where there is a limited supply, equitable distribution is preferable to the elites getting it all.
BG9 said:
I've heard Bernie get his crowd worked up when he talks about "taking care" of the Wall Street billionaires. Cheap low class rhetoric working his crowd.
So who are the Wall Street billionaires? I know of one - Michael Bloomberg. Should we force him to divest his assets? Put him in jail? Put him on a stage wearing a dunce cap and have him confess his crimes?
What about the others? It seems to me almost all billionaires are from the tech, oil and gas, and the retail industries.
That's why I call his rhetoric cheap and low class. Its an appeal to stick it to "evil" Wall Street emotion.
But lets assume the Sanders govt can really do Wall Street in. Will you enjoy the Wall Street job loss? Markets are electronic. Wall Street can move to some other financial capital, like London.
Would we like to see Wall Street crash? After all its a capitalist playground. So what if your 401K, IRA or your corporate and public pension funds are invested in that. You would have the knowledge that you did Wall St in. You always have social security as your backup.
What are you talking about??
Steve said:
Do you have any understanding of context? He was discussing political inequality. Of course, having sufficient food for all is better, but his point was that where there is a limited supply, equitable distribution is preferable to the elites getting it all.
That is the type of hyperbole only used by Socialists. I'd add that having sufficient goods like food for all is probably the best defense for capitalism you're going to find. Its also an indictment of the economic ignorance people like BS try to sell.
He's the only candidate looking to provide a fair playing field on which to compete. Bernie's the true capitalistic the race
No offense, but ypur assertion is laughable. The things that BS would like to do are destructive. His policies will make us poorer and less free. In his defense, i think he really believes these things. Though, I suppose that could be taken as an insult.
terp said:
No offense, but ypur assertion is laughable. The things that BS would like to do are destructive. His policies will make us poorer and less free. In his defense, i think he really believes these things. Though, I suppose that could be taken as an insult.
They'll make you poorer if you are not paying your fair share in taxes. They'll frustrate the military-industrial complex by funding infrastructure, not war. Your fears are transparent.
terp said:
No offense, but ypur assertion is laughable. The things that BS would like to do are destructive. His policies will make us poorer and less free. In his defense, i think he really believes these things. Though, I suppose that could be taken as an insult.
Who do you think would be more likely to reign in the surveillance state (or at least try to do so)?
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
Sorry for the late notice, but if you can make it, Bernie's going to be in the Bronx today.
https://go.berniesanders.com/page/event/detail/rally/44pmm
A Future to Believe In South Bronx Rally with Special Guest Speakers Rosario Dawson and Grammy winner Residente on 3/31
Official EventJoin Bernie Sanders for a rally in South Bronx, with Rosario Dawson and multiple Grammy and Latin Grammy winner Residente.
This event is free and open to the public. Tickets are not required, but RSVPs are strongly encouraged. Admission is first come, first served.
For security reasons, please do not bring bags and limit what you bring to small, personal items like keys and cell phones. Weapons, sharp objects, chairs, and signs or banners on sticks will not be allowed through security. On-street parking in the surrounding area is available but limited. Information on public transit can be found here.
Doors Open: 4:00 p.m.
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2016
Add to calendar
Host: Bernie Sanders
Location: Saint Mary’s Park (New York, NY)
450 St. Ann's Ave
Bronx
New York, NY 10455