2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNed_Devine
(3,146 posts)Just food for thought
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Because he hadn't released his taxes except for a partial return from one year, same as Mitt Romney.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,814 posts)If you don't, you will lose the votes of people who wouldn't vote for you anyway!!!
You're only hundreds of delegates and millions of votes ahead of Bernie - don't you see how this issue has been keeping you from being the front-runner?
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,814 posts)Can you tell me all of the other potential presidential candidates who have been asked to release transcripts of their speeches as private citizens?
Take all the time you need .... I'll wait.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,814 posts)But I'm a patient woman.
I'm sure that list of other candidates who were asked for their speech transcripts will be along any minute now - it must be a very long list, given how long it's taking to compile it and post it.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)After mining the billion dollars in op research and media smears by the GOP, the well has run dry, so you all want new material to mine because your candidate can't win on his own merits. Meanwhile, Bernie still hasn't released his taxes, despite earning 8 pinoccios for claiming he did.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 16, 2016, 03:13 AM - Edit history (1)
With no sense of irony, a campaign that refuses to abide by common standards of releasing 8 years of full tax returns, who has repeatedly falsely claimed they have released them, demands than Hillary release speeches done in her capacity as a private citizen. This after Jane Sanders complained that the NY Daily News released a transcript of an interview given on the record.
Romney didn't release his full returns and he lost the election. Sanders knows that yet continues to stonewall and dissemble, and now with no awareness of how incredibly hypocritical it seems, he continues to insist Clinton be held to standards he has no intention of following himself.
I can only conclude that as president Sanders would continue to promote double standards that have characterized his campaign. I do not support a politician who seeks to enforce different standards for some people, who announces repeatedly that the votes of the South, where African Americans predominate, should count less than the very low turn-out caucus states. Not only that, his campaign has trepeatedly announced a strategy that depends on winning not with a majority vote, but instead overturning the electoral will of the mafority to install himself in power against the electoral will of the people.
So again we see Bernie has no intention to hold himself to standards he criticizes others for, as his repeated FEC violations demonstrate. That his supporters promote the same view that the candidate and the voters who support him are worth more than majority, the only conclusion I can come to is that unequal standards, rights, and votes would be central to a Sanders presidency. The double standards comes from entitlement, the same entitlement that leads him to complain when Clinton, after many months, finally criticizes him, when he has made maligning her character the heart of his campaign. It is the same entitlement that enables his supporters to harass super delegates and even pledged delegates to support Sanders with the absurd claim that he represents the "will of the people," despite the fact millions more have voted for Clinton. The only conclusion possible is that they themselves superior to the majority and that they are willing to do anything to restore their unfettered privilege.
I vote for equal rights, not double standards and discounting or overturning the votes of the majority.
jillan
(39,451 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,814 posts)And guess what? All the crying, whinging, foot-stomping, and poutrage in the world isn't going to get those transcripts released.
Which leaves Bernie having to win the nomination (which he's already lost, BTW) based on his own merits - instead of hoping that his opponent will be downed by some transcripts.
Maybe Bernie - and his supporters - should have thought that through from the beginning, and realized that banking on your opponent's downfall isn't a sound strategy.