Bernie Supporters Please Pay Attention to This Good Advice and Then Smile

[Joe Nation]

I love Trae!

[link:

|

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Trae is great!

[John_Doe80004]

2. this is too funny

i don't really have a sense of humor but i was rotflmao on this one!!!

[highprincipleswork]

3. Why won't they support him? Well, if he's not the candidate? So who was responsible for NAFTA anyway

Oh right, the husband of the person we're thinking of nominating.

Thinking of it?

Yes, that's right. Superdelegates don't vote until July, and a lot can still happen before then.

Hope Bernie stays in for the duration.

[Joe Nation]

5. Your Saint

[|

[highprincipleswork]

7. Ours is not a lost cause. It's a just cause.

[Joe Nation]

9. It's over

It's over. I love Bernie. I respect Bernie, but it's over. Time to let it go. I know you've heard this a lot and I am sorry that I am repeating what others have said already but it is over. Think of it as a new day. Something else to get excited about. We arise so that we might fall. I would have been happy with either Bernie or Hillary. Thank your lucky stars you aren't forced to vote for Trump.

[highprincipleswork]

11. This is not going to be over for a long, long time. There is a movement out here, and it is not

going away, as much as the head in the sand people would like it to.

It's part of how people feel and how they think and the reality of their lives and how they are being treated.

That need, hidden by the mass media as best they can, is not going away anytime soon. And the Democratic Party, under the leadership of folks like the Clintons, is not going to sufficiently address that need.

And yes, as the original video in this post states, that will cause some people even to go to Trump.

I wish the Democratic Party was still the great Democratic Party, but it isn't. It's corrupt, it's rigged, it's corporate driven versus people driven, it's totalitarian, it's all sorts of really nasty stuff.

This isn't over, and won't be till some other solution meets peoples' true needs.

[Joe Nation]

13. Take your feelings out of it

and start using your head. Anyone that goes to Trump if they don't get Bernie Sanders is unstable anyway. They belong with Trump in my opinion. Bye!

[highprincipleswork]

15. See ya! I didn't even say Bernie supporters would go to Trump. I said "some" would. With some good

reason, because he's going to come out against trade deals like NAFTA. Guess who our candidate will likely be? The wife of the person who brought us NAFTA!! Sound like an easy sell to you?

Seriously. Those who think beating Trump will be a cakewalk ought to look at the Republican nominating process and see who won in that slugfest. Those who think putting Hillary out there as a combatant is a safe bet ought to check in with her weaknesses. These are not weaknesses planted there by Bernie supporters. They are just there. Deal with it.

[Joe Nation]

17. NAFTA is/was important but it is just one issue

The Supreme Court is more important in my opinion but that isn't my only reason to vote Clinton. TPP has to be fought going forward and Clinton has voiced concern over it even as Obama supports it for some reason. I'd forget NAFTA and start fighting this century's battle not last century's.

[RobertEarl]

19. I'm sold!!

What the heck, why not. Hillary is our savior. She will solve all or problems. She is an angel who has never done anything wrong and if all our government servants were like her this would be utopia!!!

Thank the angels for newcomer posters like you who come here and show us all the light that we who have been struggling for years trying to chase away the darkness just never had posters like you to tell us we are all wrong all this time and we just need to settle for whatever the god-damned oligarchs give us.

Hallelujah!! Where have you been these last 15 years?

[highprincipleswork]

20. I'm talking about what Trump is going to say, and it's going to be so easy with Hillary as the

candidate. A child can see it.

The day when a complete asshole like Trump can be the anti-trade, jobs in America hero versus the candidate from the Democratic Party is really a sad, sad day.

[Silver_Witch]

29. You mean the "gold standard" of trade agreements!

Oh I think Hillary will pass that day one! If she is lucky Prsident Obama will get it passed before she takes office so it wont ruin her reelection run in 2020! Then onto fracking and keystone!

[BobbyDrake]

23. I pity anyone dumb enough to believe anything Trump says.

Water vapor has more substance than Trump's opposition to free trade.

[puffy socks]

28. Reagan and Bush are

responsible for NAFTA
Its their baby
Clintons sig was ceremonial

[highprincipleswork]

32. Guess you folks can't see that Democrats like the Clintons are responsible for passing so much

Republican shit that Republicans could never have passed. Democrats would have fought them on it.

But no, you guys have to go for the stealth Republican campaign, with crumbs thrown to a few segments of the Progressive population. Perhaps you hope to be one of the group to whom crumbs will be thrown.

[puffy socks]

33. NAFTA wasn't signed into law by Clinton

Bush had already finished the negotiations and had Congressional approval


The Glass-Steagall act would have been passed anyway after they over bro any veto Clinton used

Repealing Graham Leach Bliley act isn't going to solve the problem


Democrats have consistently helped average Americans
The proof is in the legislation theyve fougjt for
Fair pay act, preventing credit card cos from abusing customers, LGBT marriage rights, the ACA, on and on in hhe past 7 yrs alone...wiyhout the help of yheir ungrateful, perpetually complaining constituents

When Dems fight their constituents stab them in the back ...just ask Alan Grayson about the 2010 elections
or Obama who was hamstrung and blamed because Progressive babies didnt get their way....and here you are again trying to force and demand again!
It didn't work out well for you last time what makes you think it's going to work out well for you this time?

[highprincipleswork]

34. Sell out all you want.

[puffy socks]

35. Try actually reading some history

and then learn that TPP isn't the same deal. I don't agree with everything in it its unrealistic to expect perfection according to my personal values and labor is better off with trade deals than without them...unless you're dying to compete with workers in other countries who now make $.08 per hour and live in grass huts. is that the standard of living you're fighting for?

But you'll never bother reading it because all that matters is hating corporate America the corporate America and good portion of the 99% you profess to care about so much works for.

[highprincipleswork]

36. is it how Germany does it? I find your views kind of pretentious and also mistaken. but seems

we're getting to the point.

You're rather taken with the idea that "they're the employers".

As long as other countries can keep the profits and the economy going and still protect their workers, we should be able to also.

But not with Clintons. Not with Reagans. And not with their enablers either.

Obama reading books on Reagan being "the great transformer". Yeah. His talent was to take his vast charm and sell a bunch of cockamamie totally destructive ideas and for them to live thus far in perpetuity.

Did Obama do the same? Will the Clintons do the same? No, they will use their charm and political capital to shove the same imprisoning views down our throats.

It's a challenging time. Robotization and globalization are big, big challenges. Even the Internet has changed the way people do business and think of business. The model for making money has hardly a human equation. On the other hand, it better get one and also a solution for climate change, or we will continue to experience misery among a broad swath of the US population.

[puffy socks]

38. You're rather taken with the idea that "they're the employers".

No I just don't pretend that corporations/employers are going away any time soon so we have to be pragmatic to dal with them as the money and therefore power is concentrated in their hands.

"As long as other countries can keep the profits and the economy going and still protect their workers, we should be able to also. "

we are

..as I said it is painfully obvious you haven't read the TPP nor do you have any real clue as to the negatives and positives incluided therein.m. You just blather on like Bernard , complain with no solutions.

[adigal]

39. Seriously?? You believe the Dems did those things??

Dems approved making it much harder for people to declare bankruptcy. I give Obama LGBT rights and the ACA, but that has a caveat in that he gave a huge bone to the insurance corporations. Poverty??? Nothing. Global warming? Nothing. Obama loves the TPP and HIllary will follow suit.

The Dems of the last two decades have been abysmal on protecting the rights of the little guy. Terrible.

[puffy socks]

41. Uh huh.. and this is just from the 111th

Enacted
Main article: Acts of the 111th United States Congress

January 29, 2009: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–2
February 4, 2009: Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (SCHIP), Pub.L. 111–3
February 17, 2009: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Pub.L. 111–5
March 11, 2009: Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub.L. 111–8
March 30, 2009: Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–11
April 21, 2009: Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, Pub.L. 111–13
May 20, 2009: Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–21
May 20, 2009: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–22
May 22, 2009: Credit CARD Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–24
June 24, 2009: Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 including the Car Allowance Rebate System (Cash for Clunkers), Pub.L. 111–32
October 28, 2009: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, including the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Pub.L. 111–84
November 6, 2009: Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111–92
February 12, 2010: Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, as Title I of Pub.L. 111–139
March 4, 2010: Travel Promotion Act of 2009, as Section 9 of Pub.L. 111–145
March 18, 2010: Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, Pub.L. 111–147
March 23, 2010: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub.L. 111–148
March 30, 2010: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, including the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, Pub.L. 111–152
May 5, 2010: Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–163
July 1, 2010: Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–195
July 21, 2010: Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.L. 111–203
July 29, 2010: Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010
August 3, 2010: Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–220
August 10, 2010: SPEECH Act, Pub.L. 111–223
September 27, 2010: Small Business Jobs and Credit Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–240
December 8, 2010: Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–291
December 13, 2010: Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–296
December 17, 2010: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–312, H.R. 4853
December 22, 2010: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–321, H.R. 2965
January 2, 2011: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111–347, H.R. 847
January 4, 2011: Shark Conservation Act, Pub.L. 111–348, H.R. 81
January 4, 2011: Food Safety and Modernization Act, Pub.L. 111–353, H.R. 2751


Health care:



At the encouragement of the Obama administration, Congress devoted significant time considering health care reform. In March 2010, Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law, the first comprehensive health care reform legislation in decades that created the first National health insurance program, along with further amendments in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Other major reform proposals during the health care debate included:

Affordable Health Care for America Act (known as the House bill)
America's Healthy Future Act (known as the Baucus bill)
Healthy Americans Act (known as the Wyden/Bennett bill)
United States National Health Care Act (known as the Conyers bill, a single payer proposal)
Physician Payments Sunshine Act

Proposed


American Clean Energy and Security Act
District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act
Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act
DREAM Act
Employee Free Choice Act
Employment Non-Discrimination Act
Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009
Food Safety Enhancement Act
Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2009
Military Readiness Enhancement Act
Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act
Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009
Public Option Act
Respect for Marriage Act
Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act
Uniting American Families Act
Universal Right to Vote by Mail Act

Environment:
'Maximizing fuel efficiency. In August 2012, the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency released finalized standards mandating an increase in average fleet-wide fuel economy for light duty vehicles to the equivalent of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.

Enhancing the safety of underground pipelines. In January 2012, the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act (H.R. 2845) was signed into law. The bill addressed safety concerns about the 2.5 million miles of oil, natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines in the United States and reflected many of the safety, inspection and enforcement provisions included in an earlier bill introduced by Senators Feinstein and Boxer in the wake of the tragic 2010 natural gas explosion in San Bruno, Calif. Became law on January 3, 2012 (P.L. 112-90).


and plenty more!

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/active_leg_111.htm

[Tragl1]

43. Um you can't read the TPP

https://theintercept.com/2015/06/13/cant-read-tpp-cant-find-congress/

Are you seriously arguing pro TPP? Wow, I smell a plant. If you claim to be pro-consumer by definition you cannot also be pro-TPP. Those two don't go together unless you have convoluted capitalism and humanism, which is no bueno. Anyways, the context to many of those bills is they have given up/alienated rights of workers/individuals protections, not gone far enough. So it's a matter of perspective and context.

Historically for example, you can say oh wow, look what Columbus did, crossed the ocean and all that, yay, but he killed how many native Arawacks and mainland Indians through genocide and slavery?

Or a more pertinent example take the Clintons crime bill of the 90's, she and Bill like to tout the lowest unemployment rate statistic for African Americans. Well if you add in the incarceration rate by product of said legislation the net effect is that unemployment essentially stayed unchanged, but the cultural and societal impact, well that's just barely being understood today. It wasn't good though, the decimation of the black community being its after effect.

I'm just after truth and fair context, a lot of those bills are poor retreads of a tire of corporate power. Women will still make less than men, the latest bill didn't really address the inherent sexism in hiring/employment. So to argue the democrats and Clinton by proxy are the next heralding of an progressive movement.

Well, I chortle.

I am chortling now.

[puffy socks]

44. I love when smug people are dead wrong

are dead wrong







https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/about-us/who-we-are/treaty-making-process/trans-pacific-partnership-tpp/text-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership





Text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The legally verified text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was released on 26 January 2016 and can be accessed by chapter below. (This supersedes the version of the TPP text that was initially released by TPP Parties on 5 November 2015.) The French and Spanish language versions of the Agreement were released on this website on 2 February 2016.



https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/about-us/who-we-are/treaty-making-process/trans-pacific-partnership-tpp/text-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership

[Tragl1]

45. So yeah...

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/33580-trans-pacific-partnership-text-released-a-look-at-what-s-inside

Also their was a posting on wiki leaks, ive read the link.
Versions are still being hashed out with details obscured.

http://www.citizen.org/documents/TPP-USITC-Study-Press-Release.pdf

"Past inter-sessionals have been shrouded in secrecy to ensure we can’t find out what's happening and we don’t have access to those negotiators who see value in talking with us. The last three years of the TPPA have been widely condemned for their lack of transparency. The process is now going further underground"

Different addendums for the US versus NZ so

But your saying your pro TPP? That still makes me chortle.

[puffy socks]

46. so what if they negotiated behind closed doors?

That's a ridiculous premise. Who cares?

What's the big deal? What's the point of making the negotiations public? how does that help anything?

Exactly how do you expect anything to get done with the general public of each country fighting over every little piece if they see it?
We get to see the finished document and that's all that matters.

Try actually reading the document you just swore didn't exist and stop moving the goal posts to something completely asinine




Chortle all you want if it gives you a thrill.
That doesn't address the terms of the deal. But you refuse to even look at it because you know it contains positive benefits for workers in America and you cant just, with any integrity, shit all over the entire deal any more.

Welcome to the adult world of compromise.

[Tragl1]

47. chortle..

I linked a study of the bill and some common arguments against it.
If you think the TPP is good for labor...


"By making it easier for U.S. corporations to offshore decent jobs to low-wage countries, the TPP would accelerate the "race to the bottom" spurred by other free trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), putting downward wage pressure on U.S. workers while facilitating corporate exploitation of foreign workers. TPP includes the same incentives and protections for off-shoring as NAFTA, such as special investor rights that eliminate many of the risks and costs associated with relocating jobs to low-wage countries."

Yeah, good for American jobs. Seriously the best, best trade deal ever, lots of jobs. You can't be a democrat and be for this deal, so thanks for the chortle.

[puffy socks]

48. pffffft

First of all it doesn't make it easier for companies to off shore decent jobs. But having NO trade agreement would make it easier to off shore decent jobs and make it more inciting for companies. Why? Because none of the minimum wage parts of the agreement would take place thus , foreign labor will be sold at rock bottom prices and bring down US wages as companies will off shore with no labor agreements or US worker will have to compete for the shitty wages.






The TPP boosts exports and economic growth, creating more jobs and prosperity for the 12 countries involved. It increases exports by $305 billion per year by 2025. U.S. exports would increase by $123.5 billion, focusing on machinery, especially electrical, autos, plastics and agriculture industries.

It does this by removing 18,000 tariffs placed on U.S. exports to the other countries. The United States has already withdrawn 80% of these tariffs on foreign imports. The TPP evens the playing field.

The agreement adds $223 billion a year to incomes of workers in all the countries, with $77 billion of that going to U.S. workers. (Source: US Trade Representative, TPP Fact Sheet)

All countries agreed to cut down on wildlife trafficking, especially elephants, rhinoceroses, and marine species. It prevents environmental abuses, such as unsustainable logging and fishing. Those that don't will face trade penalties.


http://useconomy.about.com/od/Trade-Agreements/fl/What-Is-the-Trans-Pacific-Partnership.htm

[Tragl1]

49. This is from your own link!

"Most of the gains in income would go to workers making more than $88,000 a year. Free trade agreements contribute to income inequality in high-wage countries by promoting cheaper goods from low-wage countries."

Again I urge you to read the studies done on this agreement and not use some website written by an economics undergrad at the heritage foundation as a talking point.

You read like an uniformed libertarian to me, I'm done, you lost me trying to conversate when you counter your own counterpoint, with a false narrative.

[adigal]

50. How many of these became law?

Or were they just proposed?

[puffy socks]

51. The post has the propsed legislation

underneath that huge list at the top of passed legislation .

[Joe Nation]

4. Trae does a lot of these. They are worth looking up.

https://www.facebook.com/traecrowder/

[ProudProgressiveNow]

8. K&R nt

[Miles Archer]

10. The one wild card in all of this...

...is that the undeniable truth that Trump is a toxic candidate doesn't make Clinton a good candidate. It makes her an alternative to Trump. That's the part that people who are not members of the Clinton Group are dealing with right now. They know what "no vote" will accomplish, and many of them will vote, but it won't be because they believe in Clinton...it's because they will weigh the value of stopping Trump.

[Joe Nation]

12. Even if Clinton isn't your cup of tea...

Think about all of the great progressives she will put in key government positions. I'm not a fan of political dynasties in a democratic country like ours but I look at the bigger picture when I consider any of the candidates. Just like there are single issue voters that can't look beyond abortion, or guns, or the environment, there are also single candidate voters that can't see past the individual candidate. Bernie would also bring in good progressives but he isn't going to be the nominee. He is going to continue to be one great Senator and a critically important ally.

[Miles Archer]

14. She's not, and...

...I'm not going to give her credit for what she might do until she does it. Sorry...I'm not bashing her. I just don't like her and don't trust her and as she actually accomplishes the things on your list, I'll be there with everyone else to applaud her. I can't applaud things that haven't happened from a person I neither like nor trust.

[Joe Nation]

16. No one is asking you to give her pre-credit

But you have a head on your shoulders, you know the Democratic Party players, and you know that is where she will draw her appointees from. Sanders would do the same thing. I just think that Clinton is far, far more connected to the Democratic Party than Sanders will ever be. I don't see that as a negative for Clinton. She is smart as hell and has been battle tested for 25 years. What are they going to throw at her that she hasn't already seen? Not much is my guess.

[Lizzie Poppet]

24. Problem is, I don't trust her not to put just as many corporate tools in those positions.

More "window dressing progressives" like her who say the right things on mediagenic social issues, but always vote in the corporate interest on every issue relevant to those interests. I just can't accept that any longer.

[BobbyDrake]

25. A married couple cannot, by definition, be a dynasty.

A dynasty involves successive generations of one family, not two people from different families who married each other.

[Silver_Witch]

31. Hahahahahshshshshshshshsh

Rich this one. Oh yes they are rich and powered and a dynasty!

[adigal]

40. I think, at best, Clinton will be a one term President

And if the Dems don't primary her, which they won't, the Repubs will find someone more palatable than Trump and force him in. And we will have another Republican nightmare.

[Miles Archer]

42. They are going to spend the next four years prepping Paul Ryan.

I think that what is being said about Clinton today isn't what's going to be said about her four years from today.

Maybe she'll surprise us all.

Doubt it. Why would we think that she is going to pursue anything other than the agenda that she's pursued to date?

[m-lekktor]

18. aaah i bet this is YET ANOTHER patronizing vote the lesser evil lecture.

these don't work.

[Joe Nation]

21. Not on idiots anyway. Idiots vote their idealism

Idealism elects a lot of Republicans.

[Lizzie Poppet]

27. The results are in:

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Jun 7, 2016, 09:27 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Rude. Hide it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Agreed

[Joe Nation]

30. Score one for the democratic process

[Joe Nation]

22. Besides, some people benefit from being slapped in the face with patronizing.

Patronizing isn't always wrong or people wouldn't do it. When logic, intellect, history, common sense, a nasty, nasty beating stick fail, patronizing seems like a good plan B.

[MrMickeysMom]

26. Trae!!! DUDE!!!

I must share this with family...

[Prism]

37. Trae reminds me so much of a deceased friend

He was a gay man from Mississippi with a lot of political opinions, and Trae looks and sounds just like him. Miss that guy.

"Well it ain't that simple, Tristan!"

L.O.L.