~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Apr 7, 2016 18:34:02 GMT
Given the sheer number of urban Democrats and minorities in NYC, Albany and Buffalo, there is no way Hillary Clinton (or any Democrat) will lose in NY. When she ran for Senator here, she lost 58 out of 62 counties, but she won the big city counties and took the election. Actually it's very frustrating for those of us who live in Suburban and rural areas. We have no true representation in Congress.
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Apr 7, 2016 18:44:37 GMT
Given the sheer number of urban Democrats and minorities in NYC, Albany and Buffalo, there is no way Hillary Clinton (or any Democrat) will lose in NY. When she ran for Senator here, she lost 58 out of 62 counties, but she won the big city counties and took the election. Actually it's very frustrating for those of us who live in Suburban and rural areas. We have no true representation in Congress. This is exactly how Washington state is because of Seattle/King County
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 7, 2016 19:12:57 GMT
Given the sheer number of urban Democrats and minorities in NYC, Albany and Buffalo, there is no way Hillary Clinton (or any Democrat) will lose in NY. When she ran for Senator here, she lost 58 out of 62 counties, but she won the big city counties and took the election. Actually it's very frustrating for those of us who live in Suburban and rural areas. We have no true representation in Congress. This is exactly how Washington state is because of Seattle/King County Same for Oregon with Multnomah County/Portland. Conservatives in our state get a really wack deal.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 14:06:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 19:13:29 GMT
Becky, I really don't think that is fair. I'm questioning if Hillary is the type of person we want representing the Democratic Party and you're attacking the idea that I can question that, even questioning my intelligence by suggesting that I "don't read much about politics." I expect better from you and actually, this breakdown in discourse really saddens me. I have a right to question any of the candidates ethics/morals/qualifications same as you do, whether or not I've been a life-long Democrat. Now I'm going to ask a question that may upset you but I feel it's a question us Democrats need to answer. Is Bernie really a Democrat? Or is he a Socialist who decided , for his own personal gain, he would be more acceptable to the masses if he put "Democrat" in front of Socialist? I know a lot has been made about the differences between a "Socialist" and a "Democratic Socialist" but when you actually compare the two there is only one big difference and that a Democratic Socialist believes in change through the ballot box and given that is Bernie's only avenue to push his ideas it would make sense he would miraculously become a Democrat. Because the reality is if he would have run as Independent Bernie Sanders - Socialist his campaign would have died a long time ago. But it would be a more honest campaign then the one he is running now. So to answer my question. No Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 7, 2016 19:45:24 GMT
Becky, I really don't think that is fair. I'm questioning if Hillary is the type of person we want representing the Democratic Party and you're attacking the idea that I can question that, even questioning my intelligence by suggesting that I "don't read much about politics." I expect better from you and actually, this breakdown in discourse really saddens me. I have a right to question any of the candidates ethics/morals/qualifications same as you do, whether or not I've been a life-long Democrat. Now I'm going to ask a question that may upset you but I feel it's a question us Democrats need to answer. Is Bernie really a Democrat? Or is he a Socialist who decided , for his own personal gain, he would be more acceptable to the masses if he put "Democrat" in front of Socialist? I know a lot has been made about the differences between a "Socialist" and a "Democratic Socialist" but when you actually compare the two there is only one big difference and that a Democratic Socialist believes in change through the ballot box and given that is Bernie's only avenue to push his ideas it would make sense he would miraculously become a Democrat. Because the reality is if he would have run as Independent Bernie Sanders - Socialist his campaign would have died a long time ago. But it would be a more honest campaign then the one he is running now. So to answer my question. No Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. Not upset in least. Honestly, I think most of us know Sanders is not a Democrat, but what he also isn't is Establishment. Sanders is someone I feel good about voting for, not the lessor of two evils.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 14:06:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 20:06:46 GMT
Now I'm going to ask a question that may upset you but I feel it's a question us Democrats need to answer. Is Bernie really a Democrat? Or is he a Socialist who decided , for his own personal gain, he would be more acceptable to the masses if he put "Democrat" in front of Socialist? I know a lot has been made about the differences between a "Socialist" and a "Democratic Socialist" but when you actually compare the two there is only one big difference and that a Democratic Socialist believes in change through the ballot box and given that is Bernie's only avenue to push his ideas it would make sense he would miraculously become a Democrat. Because the reality is if he would have run as Independent Bernie Sanders - Socialist his campaign would have died a long time ago. But it would be a more honest campaign then the one he is running now. So to answer my question. No Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. Not upset in least. Honestly, I think most of us know Sanders is not a Democrat, but what he also isn't is Establishment. Sanders is someone I feel good about voting for, not the lessor of two evils. Fair enough. But in the process of zeroing in on Bernie I have made the decision that if he should become the "Democratic" nominee I won't be able to support him. I do have a problem with him posing as a Democrat and I have a problem with his agenda. I agree more should be done to help the middle class and the poor but not Bernie's way.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 7, 2016 20:24:21 GMT
Fair enough.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 14:06:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 10:23:38 GMT
Not sure what you meant by beanbag?
But I don't disagree with him. She definitely is not qualified despite what everyone thinks. A presidency under her would be disastrous. She is so busy pandering to whatever corporation or country buys her loyalty.
It's an old saying, meaning that politics isn't a game. And I disagree with you. I think that she is very qualified. But then, I never have been able to figure out Bernie's appeal. I believe that we do need reforms, but I also think that requires a detailed plan. If he wins the nomination, I will vote for him, because despite my doubts, he will be better than the Republican alternative. And now it's time to get ready for work. Thank you for the explanation. I had never heard it before.
I do agree with you in that Bernie Sanders will be better than any of the Republican candidates currently running. However, I do not feel that is the same for Hillary Clinton. He, at least, has remained steadfast in his convictions throughout the years. She has flip flopped on issues depending on which way the wind blows. From LGBT rights, to the most recent regarding the minimum wage increase. I cannot trust a person who is not stable. True, she at least is changing her mind towards progress. But how do we know she won't change her mind once again? Bernie has proven to be truly stable on these issues, and has been for the past 30 plus years.
Which brings us to history and qualifications. Bernie has served as an elected official for 34 years and counting. This is 19 more years than the average of a presidential candidate which is 15 years. Hillary rose to an elective office in 2001. She has served as an elected official for 8 years, which is 7 years less than the average for a presidential candidate.
So yes, I do believe he is more qualified than she is. If she is elected, I do not believe that there will be much in reform. Pretty much everything will be as is, or become even worse. The political environment needs to be shaken up.
And now I have to get ready for work! TGIF!
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Apr 8, 2016 13:16:11 GMT
This is exactly how Washington state is because of Seattle/King County Same for Oregon with Multnomah County/Portland. Conservatives in our state get a really wack deal. Add Pennsylvania to that list, with Pittsburgh and Philadelphia...
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Apr 8, 2016 14:40:13 GMT
Not sure what you meant by beanbag?
But I don't disagree with him. She definitely is not qualified despite what everyone thinks. A presidency under her would be disastrous. She is so busy pandering to whatever corporation or country buys her loyalty.
She certainly is more qualified--especially more so than any other candidate running! Donations from companies do not make one any less qualified to run the country. Bernie has no clue as to what it takes to run the country--he cannot even answer questions in regards to his own platform issues. I guess you haven't watched any Bernie youtube speeches from while he has been part of congress fort he last few decades. He has spoken out against the Iraq war in 2001 (turned out to be the correct way), he has spoken out about big banks in 1998 (look what happened in 2008), he has spoken out on and keeps speaking out on income inequality which keeps getting wider, 1994 crime bill and yep he was right, and I can keep going. How is he less qualified? How does he not have a clue?
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 8, 2016 15:57:24 GMT
She certainly is more qualified--especially more so than any other candidate running! Donations from companies do not make one any less qualified to run the country. Bernie has no clue as to what it takes to run the country--he cannot even answer questions in regards to his own platform issues. I guess you haven't watched any Bernie youtube speeches from while he has been part of congress fort he last few decades. He has spoken out against the Iraq war in 2001 (turned out to be the correct way), he has spoken out about big banks in 1998 (look what happened in 2008), he has spoken out on and keeps speaking out on income inequality which keeps getting wider, 1994 crime bill and yep he was right, and I can keep going. How is he less qualified? How does he not have a clue? Washington Post: Hillary Clinton’s recordSecretary Clinton was even advised to resign: Clinton advised to consider resigning as secretary of state after Obama’s Russia commentsIn fairness, I must also include the following article, What Is Hillary’s Greatest Accomplishment?, which includes the following list:
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Apr 8, 2016 16:34:51 GMT
She certainly is more qualified--especially more so than any other candidate running! Donations from companies do not make one any less qualified to run the country. Bernie has no clue as to what it takes to run the country--he cannot even answer questions in regards to his own platform issues. I guess you haven't watched any Bernie youtube speeches from while he has been part of congress fort he last few decades. He has spoken out against the Iraq war in 2001 (turned out to be the correct way), he has spoken out about big banks in 1998 (look what happened in 2008), he has spoken out on and keeps speaking out on income inequality which keeps getting wider, 1994 crime bill and yep he was right, and I can keep going. How is he less qualified? How does he not have a clue? He cannot even answer questions that are specific to what his campaign platform is all about--just this last week as a matter of fact! He doesn't even know if the presidential office has the authority to make his plans work! He can speak about whatever he wants, but proof is in the pudding on being able to actually get things done and knowing what he can do!
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Apr 8, 2016 16:45:36 GMT
I guess you haven't watched any Bernie youtube speeches from while he has been part of congress fort he last few decades. He has spoken out against the Iraq war in 2001 (turned out to be the correct way), he has spoken out about big banks in 1998 (look what happened in 2008), he has spoken out on and keeps speaking out on income inequality which keeps getting wider, 1994 crime bill and yep he was right, and I can keep going. How is he less qualified? How does he not have a clue? He cannot even answer questions that are specific to what his campaign platform is all about--just this last week as a matter of fact! He doesn't even know if the presidential office has the authority to make his plans work! He can speak about whatever he wants, but proof is in the pudding on being able to actually get things done and knowing what he can do! Which questions are those? The breaking up big bank question?
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Apr 8, 2016 17:02:25 GMT
Historically running a Presidential campaign as an Independent has been the kiss of death for the candidate and only splits the democratic vote so the republican candidate wins by default. It's far better for the people to pick Hillary or Bernie now in the primaries than in the final election. That's why he really switched to have a fair chance. Being a democrat does not require lifelong card holding membership, just that you lean left which he does. And he can have lots of outlandish ideas but doesn't mean Congress will actually pass his bills to implement them so no need to be scared of him being "socialist" as if that's some dirty word.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 8, 2016 17:26:39 GMT
Another interesting distinction between the two:
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Apr 8, 2016 17:39:33 GMT
Historically running a Presidential campaign as an Independent has been the kiss of death for the candidate and only splits the democratic vote so the republican candidate wins by default. It's far better for the people to pick Hillary or Bernie now in the primaries than in the final election. That's why he really switched to have a fair chance. Being a democrat does not require lifelong card holding membership, just that you lean left which he does. And he can have lots of outlandish ideas but doesn't mean Congress will actually pass his bills to implement them so no need to be scared of him being "socialist" as if that's some dirty word. ^^^ if that's the case, then boy, all of his supporters are going to be pretty darned disappointed when they don't get their free college, etc. etc.!! (because I personally don't think there's a snowball's chance in you-know-where of any of it passing...)
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Apr 8, 2016 17:47:58 GMT
Historically running a Presidential campaign as an Independent has been the kiss of death for the candidate and only splits the democratic vote so the republican candidate wins by default. It's far better for the people to pick Hillary or Bernie now in the primaries than in the final election. That's why he really switched to have a fair chance. Being a democrat does not require lifelong card holding membership, just that you lean left which he does. And he can have lots of outlandish ideas but doesn't mean Congress will actually pass his bills to implement them so no need to be scared of him being "socialist" as if that's some dirty word. ^^^ if that's the case, then boy, all of his supporters are going to be pretty darned disappointed when they don't get their free college, etc. etc.!! (because I personally don't think there's a snowball's chance in you-know-where of any of it passing...) Bernie is more than just the "free college" statement. Listen to the man speak the last 30 years.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Apr 8, 2016 18:01:49 GMT
ummm-- did you not see, I did add "etc. etc." It was a general statement.
And I still don't think any of his plans will ever make it thru Congress.
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Apr 8, 2016 18:23:53 GMT
Yeah Bernie isn't good on getting things passed. www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-youIf you don't want to read the article: Sanders did something particularly original, which was that he passed amendments that were exclusively progressive, advancing goals such as reducing poverty and helping the environment, and he was able to get bipartisan coalitions of Republicans who wanted to shrink government or hold it accountable and progressives who wanted to use it to empower Americans. Here are a few examples of the amendments Sanders passed by building unusual but effective coalitions: Corporate Crime Accountability (February 1995): A Sanders amendment to the Victims Justice Act of 1995 required “offenders who are convicted of fraud and other white-collar crimes to give notice to victims and other persons in cases where there are multiple victims eligible to receive restitution.” Saving Money, for Colleges and Taxpayers (April 1998): In an amendment to H.R. 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, Sanders made a change to the law that allowed the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education to make competitive grants available to colleges and universities that cooperated to reduce costs through joint purchases of goods and services. Holding IRS Accountable, Protecting Pensions (July 2002): Sanders' amendment to the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2003 stopped the IRS from being able to use funds that “violate current pension age discrimination laws.” Although he faced stiff GOP opposition, his amendment still succeeded along a 308 to 121 vote. Expanding Free Health Care (November 2001): You wouldn't think Republicans would agree to an expansion of funds for community health centers, which provide some free services. But Sanders was able to win a $100 million increase in funding with an amendment. Getting Tough On Child Labor (July 2001): A Sanders amendment to the general appropriations bill prohibited the importation of goods made with child labor. Increasing Funding for Heating for the Poor (September 2004): Sanders won a $22 million increase for the low-income home energy assistance program and related weatherization assistance program. Fighting Corporate Welfare and Protecting Against Nuclear Disasters (June 2005): A Sanders amendment brought together a bipartisan coalition that outnumbered a bipartisan coalition on the other side to successfully prohibit the Export-Import Bank from providing loans for nuclear projects in China. Once Sanders made it to the Senate in 2006, his ability to use amendments to advance a progressive agenda was empowered. Here are some of the amendments he passed in the Senate: Greening the U.S. Government (June 2007): A Sanders amendment made a change to the law so at least 30 percent of the hot water demand in newer federal buildings is provided through solar water heaters. Protecting Our Troops (October 2007): Sanders used an amendment to win $10 million for operation and maintenance of the Army National Guard, which had been stretched thin and overextended by the war in Iraq. Restricting the Bailout to Protect U.S. Workers (Feburary 2009): A Sanders amendment required the banking bailout to utilize stricter H-1B hiring standards to ensure bailout funds weren't used to displace American workers. Helping Veterans' Kids (July 2009): A Sanders amendment required the Comptroller General to put together comprehensive reporting on financial assistance for child care available to parents in the Armed Forces. Exposing Corruption in the Military-Industrial Complex (November 2012): A Sanders amendment required “public availability of the database of senior Department officials seeking employment with defense contractors” – an important step toward transparency that revealed the corruption of the revolving door in action. Support for Treating Autism in Military Health Care: Sanders worked with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) to pass an amendment by a vote of 66-29 ensuring that the military's TRICARE system would be able to treat autism. Yeah the man doesn't know what he is doing at all.
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Apr 8, 2016 18:31:01 GMT
Yeah the man just just can't get things done.
~In a stunning upset in 1981, Sanders wins the mayoral race in Burlington, Vermont's largest city, by a mere 10 votes. Running as an independent, he shocks the city's political establishment by defeating a six-term, local machine mayor.
~During his tenure as mayor, he balanced the city budget, drew a minor league baseball team to Burlington, turned the formerly industrial waterfront into a mixed-use district featuring housing, parks, and public space. Burlington is now reported to be one of the most livable cities in the nation.
~In 1991, he was the first independent elected to the House in 40 years. He will be re-elected by the people of Vermont to serve eight terms.
~Votes against a measure providing President George H. W. Bush with authorization to use military force in the Gulf War. "I have a real fear that the region is not going to be more peaceful or more stable after the war," he says at the time.
~Co-founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus and chaired the group for its first 8 years.
~In 1992, Congress passes Sanders' first signed piece of legislation to create the National Program of Cancer Registries. All 50 states now run registries to help cancer researchers gain important insights.
~Voted against the Clinton-era North American Free Trade Agreement, which we now know sent millions of American jobs overseas.
~Sanders is one of only 67 votes against the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married. It took 17 years to overturn this Act.
~Standing up against the major pharmaceutical companies, Sanders becomes the first member of Congress to take seniors across the border to Canada to buy lower-cost prescription drugs. The congressman continues his bus trips to Canada with a group of breast cancer patients the following April. These women are able to purchase their medications in Canada for almost one-tenth the price charged in the States.
~Thanks to Sanders' efforts, IBM agreed to a $320 million legal settlement with some 130,000 IBM workers and retirees.
~About 10 years before the 2008 Wall Street crash spins the world economy into a massive recession, Sanders votes "no" on a bill to undo decades of financial regulations enacted after the Great Depression. The House passed the bill 362-57 over Sanders' objection.
~Sanders votes against the USA Patriot Act. "All of us want to protect the American people from terrorist attacks, but in a way that does not undermine basic freedoms," Sanders says at the time.
~Sanders votes against the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq. He warns at the time that an invasion could "result in anti-Americanism, instability and more terrorism." We now know that that war was one of the worst foreign policy decisions in our history.
~Sanders passes an amendment in the House to stop the government from obtaining library and book-buying records on Americans.
~Sanders defeats Vermont's richest man, Rich Tarrant, to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Sanders, running as an Independent, is endorsed by the Vermont Democratic Party and supported by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
~Sanders' authored energy efficiency and conservation grant program passes into law. He later secures $3.2 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for the grant program.
~Thanks to Sanders' efforts, funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program funding doubles, helping millions of low-income Americans heat their homes in winter.
~Sanders works with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to pass an amendment to an economic recovery bill preventing Wall Street banks that take taxpayer bailouts from replacing laid-off U.S. workers with exploited and poorly-paid foreign workers.
~Sanders passes language in the Affordable Care Act to allow states to apply for waivers to implement pilot health care systems by 2017. The legislation allows states to adopt more comprehensive systems to cover more people at lower costs.
~In 2010, President Barack Obama signs into law the Affordable Care Act with a major Sanders provision to expand federally qualified community health centers. Sanders secures $12.5 billion in funding for the program which now serves more than 25 million Americans. Another $1.5 billion from a Sanders provision went to the National Health Service Corps for scholarships and loan repayment for doctors and nurses who practice in underserved communities.
~Sanders works with Republican Congressman Ron Paul in the House to pass a measure as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill to audit the Federal Reserve, revealing how the independent agency gave $16 trillion in near zero-interest loans to big banks and businesses after the 2008 economic collapse.
~In 2012, he becomes Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee.
~Sanders, backed by seniors, women, veterans, labor unions and disabled Americans leads a successful effort to stop a "chained-CPI" proposal supported by Congressional Republicans and the Administration to cut Social Security and disabled veterans' benefits.
~Sanders introduces legislation to break up major Wall Street banks so large that the collapse of one could send the overall economy into a downward spiral.
~A bipartisan $16.5 billion veterans bill written by Sanders, Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jeff Miller is signed into law by President Barack Obama.
~In 2015, Sanders takes over as ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, using the platform to fight for his economic agenda for the American middle class.
~Sanders votes against the Keystone XL pipeline which would allow multinational corporation TransCanada to transport dirty tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
~Both the NAACP and the NHLA (National Hispanic Leadership Agenda) have given Sanders 100% voting scores during his tenure in the Senate. Earns a D- from the NRA.
|
|
|
Post by Really Red on Apr 8, 2016 18:47:08 GMT
Given the sheer number of urban Democrats and minorities in NYC, Albany and Buffalo, there is no way Hillary Clinton (or any Democrat) will lose in NY. When she ran for Senator here, she lost 58 out of 62 counties, but she won the big city counties and took the election. Actually it's very frustrating for those of us who live in Suburban and rural areas. We have no true representation in Congress. ---commercial break--- No one who doesn't win has "true" representation, right? In NY, you go by numbers. That's good, because it means that the person with the most votes wins. In the United States as a whole, we do not. So the person with the most votes (see 2000 Election) does not necessarily win. That is even worse, correct? I guess you are saying that it doesn't seem fair that cities are in large part choosing the candidate. Imagine if you lived in DC! You don't even get a real Congressman and Senator and forget it if you're a Republican there. Imagine if you lived in Hawaii or Alaska - your presidential vote doesn't count for squat there. In the end, there are a few states who choose the President. The swing states. That's the place where your vote counts (in general and for the most part). It's wrong, it's frustrating for people like you in NY and let's say Democrats in TX. You can look at a map of the US and see that land-wise, there are FAR more Republicans than Democrats. Just not voting-people-wise. And that is why we have Congressmen. So that you have someone to represent you. I wish that we could elect a president by popular vote. The reasons that the electoral college were put in place are (IMO) no longer valid today. ---end commercial break--- Back to the regularly scheduled program. This is a very interesting conversation for me. My 15yo son is FILLED with facts. He has nothing else in his head so he makes sure I cannot counter him on anything and he loves Bernie. I like Bernie, I do, but I'm just not 100% that he's a better choice than Hillary. So I read all the information everyone has put out there on both parties and you know what? We have a lot of spin doctors out here! I'm guessing that the people who like certain candidates must just rejoice in figuring out ways to spin information. It's got to the point that I don't believe much anymore. There are two reasons for me to vote for a candidate. Two major reasons. One is their choice for the Supreme Court and that's a toss-up for me between Bernie and Hillary and two is how they are perceived by the rest of the world. PERCEIVED. I think Hillary wins on that one, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. Are there things that concern me about both people? Absolutely. But I have to take into consideration my two most important reasons and weigh the rest. I love all this information, though!
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 8, 2016 21:53:11 GMT
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 8, 2016 22:09:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 8, 2016 22:26:41 GMT
Did you read the article? It explains what they did and why they did it. They are differentiating between sponsoring bills and amending bills. One is harder than the other.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Apr 8, 2016 22:38:40 GMT
No Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. And Trump is not a Republican. At the very least, he's not a conservative. Makes for one crazy election year!
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Apr 8, 2016 22:47:05 GMT
It's an old saying, meaning that politics isn't a game. And I disagree with you. I think that she is very qualified. But then, I never have been able to figure out Bernie's appeal. I believe that we do need reforms, but I also think that requires a detailed plan. If he wins the nomination, I will vote for him, because despite my doubts, he will be better than the Republican alternative. And now it's time to get ready for work. Thank you for the explanation. I had never heard it before.
I do agree with you in that Bernie Sanders will be better than any of the Republican candidates currently running. However, I do not feel that is the same for Hillary Clinton. He, at least, has remained steadfast in his convictions throughout the years. She has flip flopped on issues depending on which way the wind blows. From LGBT rights, to the most recent regarding the minimum wage increase. I cannot trust a person who is not stable. True, she at least is changing her mind towards progress. But how do we know she won't change her mind once again? Bernie has proven to be truly stable on these issues, and has been for the past 30 plus years.
Which brings us to history and qualifications. Bernie has served as an elected official for 34 years and counting. This is 19 more years than the average of a presidential candidate which is 15 years. Hillary rose to an elective office in 2001. She has served as an elected official for 8 years, which is 7 years less than the average for a presidential candidate.
So yes, I do believe he is more qualified than she is. If she is elected, I do not believe that there will be much in reform. Pretty much everything will be as is, or become even worse. The political environment needs to be shaken up.
And now I have to get ready for work! TGIF!
For me I like it if someone learns and grows and that is why they change their position on things. But to me, I don't feel that is why she has changed. I feel she changes just for the vote.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 8, 2016 22:58:12 GMT
Thank you for the explanation. I had never heard it before.
I do agree with you in that Bernie Sanders will be better than any of the Republican candidates currently running. However, I do not feel that is the same for Hillary Clinton. He, at least, has remained steadfast in his convictions throughout the years. She has flip flopped on issues depending on which way the wind blows. From LGBT rights, to the most recent regarding the minimum wage increase. I cannot trust a person who is not stable. True, she at least is changing her mind towards progress. But how do we know she won't change her mind once again? Bernie has proven to be truly stable on these issues, and has been for the past 30 plus years.
Which brings us to history and qualifications. Bernie has served as an elected official for 34 years and counting. This is 19 more years than the average of a presidential candidate which is 15 years. Hillary rose to an elective office in 2001. She has served as an elected official for 8 years, which is 7 years less than the average for a presidential candidate.
So yes, I do believe he is more qualified than she is. If she is elected, I do not believe that there will be much in reform. Pretty much everything will be as is, or become even worse. The political environment needs to be shaken up.
And now I have to get ready for work! TGIF!
For me I like it if someone learns and grows and that is why they change their position on things. But to me, I don't feel that is why she has changed. I feel she changes just for the vote. A lot of people feel that way. Of course I am not one of them. I see her as someone who has withstood attacks that would have sent a lesser person running. Bernie has never had these kinds of attacks. If he gets the nomination-and I hope he won't, since I think that he would be Jimmy Carter 2.0- he is going to be subjected to relentless attacks. If he is the nominee, I will stand on the sidelines and watch with great interest to see how he holds up.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 8, 2016 23:03:22 GMT
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 8, 2016 23:04:05 GMT
For me I like it if someone learns and grows and that is why they change their position on things. But to me, I don't feel that is why she has changed. I feel she changes just for the vote. A lot of people feel that way. Of course I am not one of them. I see her as someone who has withstood attacks that would have sent a lesser person running. Bernie has never had these kinds of attacks. If he gets the nomination-and I hope he won't, since I think that he would be Jimmy Carter 2.0- he is going to be subjected to relentless attacks. If he is the nominee, I will stand on the sidelines and watch with great interest to see how he holds up. Please. She can't even handle Greenpeace (blaming it on Sander's campaign when they had nothing to do with it). We're barely into election season and she's already showing cracks in her armor. Sanders is a level-headed statesman. He'll be fine against whomever the Republicans put up. ETA: Alright, I found this really great clip and had to share it. I think Hillary was awesome in it (and you all know I don't particular care of Hillary so, you know this is good):
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 8, 2016 23:07:03 GMT
A lot of people feel that way. Of course I am not one of them. I see her as someone who has withstood attacks that would have sent a lesser person running. Bernie has never had these kinds of attacks. If he gets the nomination-and I hope he won't, since I think that he would be Jimmy Carter 2.0- he is going to be subjected to relentless attacks. If he is the nominee, I will stand on the sidelines and watch with great interest to see how he holds up. Please. She can't even handle Greenpeace (blaming it on Sander's campaign when they had nothing to do with it). We're barely into election season and she's already showing cracks in her armor. Sanders is a level-headed statesman. He'll be fine against whomever the Republicans put up. If you say so. He seems pretty thin-skinned to me. But I don't support him, so what do I care? I did like that clip!
|
|