Anyone but Bernie

[whatchamacallit]

Man, they are scared shitless about Bernie Sanders. They being the political establishment on both sides of the aisle. The surging Sanders campaign is forcing them to ponder the impossible: a democratic socialist winning the whitehouse and derailing the gravy train. Seems to me, all the jabber from the media and sources close to the Democratic Party about a suitable replacement for Hillary (should she flounder) is more about stopping Sanders than the republicans.

[ibegurpard]

1. if he DOES manage to win the primary

They'll actively work against him. Bank on it.

[whatchamacallit]

2. Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the DNC preferred a business as usual republican to Sanders. n/t

[Maedhros]

12. Look what they did to Bill Halter in 2010. [n/t]

[ibegurpard]

90. yup

[Art_from_Ark]

188. 2010 AND 2014

(In 2014, the state Democratic Party pushed him out of the gubernatorial primary, and the party's choice, Mike Ross, lost to the Republican challenger by an embarrassing margin).

[FiveGoodMen]

80. I think you can safely bet on that.

[sabrina 1]

238. That's what they did in NJ when they supported Christie over a good Progressive Dem. Because

we know now that those who are actually controlling things in this country are neither Dem or Repub, they are Corporatists and will back the Corporate safe candidate no matter which party they represent.

[KingCharlemagne]

264. "Corporatists" - I think you meant to say simply 'capitalists,' but I

still take your point!

[DanTex]

10. Only in the sense of "if Bernie wins the primary, pigs will fly".

In reality, the only people threatening to abandon the party if they don't get their primary choice are Bernie supporters.

[retrowire]

13. Hello, Bernie supporter here.

Not me. I'll vote whoever wins. But I have faith that it will me my main man Bernie.

[Indepatriot]

26. Funny, I seem to recall a boatload of HRC supporters who vowed to NEVER vote for Obama.

I'm sure most of them came to their senses in the GE and voted for President Obama, but the threat was loud and clear; "Hillary or else"...... So don't even try to play that game. Sanders supporters are as loyal and "pragmatic" as ANY candidate's supporters. Of course, the differences between Sanders and HRC as compared to Obama and HRC are way, way deeper. If you would try making your case on the issues, rather than slandering us because of who we support you'd probably get a more sympathetic ear from Sandernistas. Instead, any discussion of HRC's policies,failures,donors, etc are labeled "attacks" on HRC, rather than valid points about her abilities and electability.....

[DanTex]

31. Yes, in 2008. Now it's the Bernie supporters doing that, and sounding very similar.

Hopefully the Bernie supporters will come to their senses this time around.

[October]

34. THIS time around?

...

[Indepatriot]

41. DT, please humor me and list 5 positions Hillary has on major issues that you feel are superior to

Bernie's in terms of positively effecting the lives of Working/Middle Class Americans. I'm all ears. (and scalp)...

[Divernan]

164. Or even 3? Maybe 1? Anybody? Buehler? Crickets.

He'll get back to you if she's elected.

[corkhead]

199. I'd be happy with one but the only one I ever hear is the old "not electable in the general" canard

which is poppycock.

[Sancho]

182. Here's one...because it would hijack this thread to discuss all of them.

Bernie's Robin Hood tax is a terrible idea to pay for college because it takes money out of pubic retirement funds. Hillary's plan to provide college tuition while holding states responsible is an excellent way to make tuition affordable while preventing GOP Governor's and legislatures from hijacking the money. He plan is much better and more realistic. She understands how things work better, and has a plan that might actually pass.

Bernie Sanders Robin Hood tax

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/collegeforallsummary/
Fully Paid for by Imposing a Robin Hood Tax on Wall Street. This legislation is offset by
imposing a Wall Street speculation fee on investment houses, hedge funds, and other speculators of
0.5% on stock trades (50 cents for every $100 worth of stock), a 0.1% fee on bonds, and a 0.005%
fee on derivatives. It has been estimated that this provision could raise hundreds of billions a year
which could be used not only to make tuition free at public colleges and universities in this country,
it could also be used to create millions of jobs and rebuild the middle class of this country.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/31/why-free-college-is-really-expensive.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/36vmm8/what_are_some_legitimate_arguments_against_bernie/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/29/1388484/-Bernie-Sanders-big-idea-has-a-math-problem#
http://chronicle.com/article/Bernie-Sanderss-Charming/231387?cid=megamenu
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/07/08/Pros-and-Cons-Bernie-Sanders-50-Billion-Tax-Idea

ON COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY, CLINTON LEADS WHILE THE GOP FLUNKS
http://correctrecord.org/on-college-affordability-clinton-leads-while-the-gop-flunks/
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/briefing/factsheets/2015/08/10/college-compact/

Imagine what is possible in America if we tackle the runaway costs of higher education, make sure that students who start college can finish with a degree, and relieve the crushing burden of student debt: families that can send their sons and daughters to college, graduates who can buy homes and start businesses without being held back by loans, and student parents who can balance the costs of quality child care with returning to school. We will see incomes rise and ensure Americans get ahead and stay ahead.

Students should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, books, and fees to attend a 4-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. The additional support they receive will reduce all costs, including living expenses, by thousands of dollars. Students at community college will receive free tuition. Students will have to do their part by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week.
Families will do their part by making an affordable and realistic family contribution.
States will have to step up and meet their obligation to invest in higher education by maintaining current levels of higher education funding and reinvesting over time.
The Federal government will make a major new investment in the New College Compact and will never again profit off student loans for college students.
Colleges and universities will be accountable to improve their outcomes and control their costs to make sure their tuition is affordable and that students who invest in college leave with a degree.
And we will encourage innovators who design imaginative new ways of providing a valuable college education to students – while cracking down on abusive practices that burden students with debt without value.
Debt won't hold you back
If you have student debt, you will be able to refinance your loans at current rates, with an estimated 25 million borrowers receiving debt relief. Typical borrowers could save $2,000 over the life of their loans.
For future undergraduates, the plan will significantly cut interest rates so they reflect the government's low cost of debt. This can save students hundreds or thousands of dollars over the life of their loans.
Everyone will be able to enroll in a simplified income based repayment program so that borrowers never have to pay more than 10 percent of what they make.
Fully paid for: This plan will cost in the range of $350 billion over 10 years – and will be fully paid for by limiting certain tax expenditures for high-income taxpayers.

[bread_and_roses]

183. You think the Robin Hood Tax is a bad idea??????????

[Sancho]

189. yep...it's a bad idea to steal from working people and give money to rich GOP politicians...

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 12:13 PM - Edit history (1)

Bernie's Robin Hood tax is a terrible idea to pay for college because it takes money out of public retirement funds. Hillary's plan to provide college tuition while holding states responsible is an excellent way to make tuition affordable while preventing GOP Governor's and legislatures from hijacking the money. He plan is much better and more realistic. She understands how things work better, and has a plan that might actually pass.

States set tuition. If you have a transaction tax on Wall Street, you are taxing the RETIREMENT funds of a bunch of union and public employees, and those costs will be passed on to the teachers, firemen, etc. Next, the states will raise tuition to steal as much money from the feds as possible. You are taxing the retirees to pay GOP operatives to use workers money for whatever they want to do. For example, here in Florida there are 200 Billion that is traded everyday on the market with public employee retirement funds. It's the same in most states. That means LOTS of trades and a big tax on union and public employees. If the fund is not solvent, the workers have to pay or lose their retirement!!!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/31/why-free-college-is-really-expensive.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/36vmm8/what_are_some_legitimate_arguments_against_bernie/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/29/1388484/-Bernie-Sanders-big-idea-has-a-math-problem#
http://chronicle.com/article/Bernie-Sanderss-Charming/231387?cid=megamenu

Some quotes:

Everyone knew Bernie Sanders would propose a tax on Wall Street. But spending that money on college tuition is a cynical handout to the upper-middle class.

The first problem with Sanders’ proposal is that a national tuition subsidy will be counterproductive even on its own terms. The proposal will cut the economic legs out from underneath innovations such as open online courses, which may be on the cusp of delivering low-cost, high-quality college education for all. Organizations trying to deliver radical new models will now have to compete against a $70 billion subsidy for the old system.

Additionally, directing that much guaranteed money into a system is a sure-fire way to accelerate cost inflation. The state may pick up the tab for tuition, but students will still have to pay for ancillary services (such as room, board, textbooks, etc.), and those services will go up in price.

Apparently (according to a tax lawyer who was running around one of the earlier threads), there was no exception for 401k's, meaning that every time the mutual funds in your retirement fund rebalance, which should be a few times a year, you're paying a tax and losing money from your retirement.

Edit: just used the calculator found here to calculate the costs of 0.5% over 40 years assuming you were investing just $5500/year (the max allowable to an IRA). Using these assumptions, this tax would cost you, the average investor, $157,000 over the 40 years you're investing. This is money that I'm sure you'd prefer going towards your retirement.

Hillary's plan makes more sense, because it holds the states accountable for costs!

ON COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY, CLINTON LEADS WHILE THE GOP FLUNKS
http://correctrecord.org/on-college-affordability-clinton-leads-while-the-gop-flunks/
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/briefing/factsheets/2015/08/10/college-compact/

Imagine what is possible in America if we tackle the runaway costs of higher education, make sure that students who start college can finish with a degree, and relieve the crushing burden of student debt: families that can send their sons and daughters to college, graduates who can buy homes and start businesses without being held back by loans, and student parents who can balance the costs of quality child care with returning to school. We will see incomes rise and ensure Americans get ahead and stay ahead.

Students should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, books, and fees to attend a 4-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. The additional support they receive will reduce all costs, including living expenses, by thousands of dollars. Students at community college will receive free tuition. Students will have to do their part by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week.
Families will do their part by making an affordable and realistic family contribution.

States will have to step up and meet their obligation to invest in higher education by maintaining current levels of higher education funding and reinvesting over time.

The Federal government will make a major new investment in the New College Compact and will never again profit off student loans for college students.

Colleges and universities will be accountable to improve their outcomes and control their costs to make sure their tuition is affordable and that students who invest in college leave with a degree.

And we will encourage innovators who design imaginative new ways of providing a valuable college education to students – while cracking down on abusive practices that burden students with debt without value.
Debt won't hold you back
If you have student debt, you will be able to refinance your loans at current rates, with an estimated 25 million borrowers receiving debt relief. Typical borrowers could save $2,000 over the life of their loans.
For future undergraduates, the plan will significantly cut interest rates so they reflect the government's low cost of debt. This can save students hundreds or thousands of dollars over the life of their loans.
Everyone will be able to enroll in a simplified income based repayment program so that borrowers never have to pay more than 10 percent of what they make.
Fully paid for: This plan will cost in the range of $350 billion over 10 years – and will be fully paid for by limiting certain tax expenditures for high-income taxpayers.

[NobodyHere]

195. Normally I don't like to nitpick grammar

but the concept of "pubic retirement funds" is kind of funny.

[Sancho]

198. Just a typo...easy to fix

[azmom]

226. Hahahahaha. Who would want to fund that?

[BeanMusical]

231. Trump.

His toupee is made of retired pubes, you know.

[bread_and_roses]

260. Robin Hood tax is not stealing from workers retirement

FFS - What a crock and fear-mongering. I am too old and impatient for such nonsense.

[Fast Walker 52]

83. it's seriously both sides doing that, and everyone needs to cut that shit out

[druidity33]

179. That attitude

is not nearly as prevalent among Bernie supporters as it was for HRC supporters in '08. I have seen 1 person here on DU say they wouldn't vote for Hillary under any circumstances... that's it. Not even sure if they're a Bernie supporter. You're gonna have to come up with links if you want me to believe that. OTOH i have seen tons of Bernie folk say that they will vote for the eventual nominee whoever it is.

[bvar22]

240. In reality, there are very few states "in play".

Only in those states is is critical to vote for The Democrat whoever he/she may be.

Hillary has ZERO chance of winning my state, so I, and every other Democrat in my state, are free
to vote for whoever we want, even Bugs Bunny, without "helping the Republicans."
Bernie, and his Working Man Populism (a la Huey Long) has a better chance of winning this solid Red state than Hillary.

(States are Winner take All.)

[Chan790]

186. I'd say my Sanders support is secondary to my Hillary opposition.

I'd like Sanders to win the primary and am supporting him. If not Sanders then O'Malley.

I'm completely committed to doing everything I can to keep Hillary from ever being President.

[BeanMusical]

230. You're such a sexist hater!1!!

[DesertFlower]

160. i believe they were called

the PUMAS. i'm a bernie supporter but will vote for hillary if she's the nominee. i will always vote for the democrat. and yes, i was an Obama supporter in '08. i remember how nasty things got at DU between the obama supporters and the hillary supporters.

why can't we stick together as dems?

[staggerleem]

66. Those who say that are kinda stupid, imho, ...

... because Bernie himself says he will support the Democratic nominee - whoever that may be. If you SAY that you support Bernie Sanders, and Bernie Sanders throws his support behind Hillary Clinton, and you DO NOT follow that move by throwing YOUR support behind Hillary, then you DO NOT believe, as Bernie does, that ANYTHING other than a Democratic administration will lead this nation to absolute ruin.

Unless, of course, you support absolute ruin MORE than you support Bernie.

[Historic NY]

72. Sad thing there are many here saying they won't support her....

or the DNC so what does that tell you. Its tell me they really don't care period. That they're not Democrats to begin with. What message are these Sanders supporters conveying.

[passiveporcupine]

77. NO, they are not stupid. They are naive ideologists

Most Bernie supporters will support HIllary, or whomever wins the primary.

And I suspect a lot of people are venting when they say that, but when faced with it, will end up voting dem.

[rhett o rick]

88. There are a lot of people that wouldn't be voting at all if it weren't for Sanders.

They don't like Clinton. They were anti-Clinton long before Sanders thru his hat in the ring. Some were anti-Clinton in 2008.

How undemocratic and unDemocratic to try to bully voters into supporting Clinton. If you want a candidate to get people to vote for them, get a better candidate.

If you don't think Sen Sanders supporters will support a Clinton nominee, then you'd better nominate Sanders or you will be letting the Republicons win.

[NanceGreggs]

98. I keep seeing this notion posted here ...

... that there are "a lot of people that wouldn't be voting at all if it weren't for Sanders".

Are there any stats on this? Are there any polls/surveys of people who have stated that they wouldn't be voting, but will now do so because of Sanders?

[rhett o rick]

118. And I keep seeing the notion that Senator Sanders can't win in the general.

The support for Sanders continues to grow, so it's a little early to predict he will lose.

The 99% are realizing that they have a candidate in Sen Sanders. He isn't a tool of the billionaires.

[NanceGreggs]

120. I asked a VERY specific question.

Who are these people who have said they would not have voted at all, but will now do so because of Bernie?

Do you have any evidence of this - or are you just spouting talking points that have absolutely no basis in reality?

[rhett o rick]

124. Where is the evidence that shows that Senator Sanders can't win in the General. That's

specific also. By the way, I am a poster on a message board the same as you.

[NanceGreggs]

128. You are the one claiming ...

.... (among others here) that there are voters who would NOT be voting at all if it weren't for Sanders being in the race.

I have asked you - very courteously, I might add - to provide the evidence supporting that claim.

If you can't - and I am SURE you can't, because such evidence doesn't exist - then just say so.

It's not like you'd be the only poster here who is claiming things that everyone knows aren't based on facts, but are fabricated in order to advance a certain agenda in aid of a certain candidate.

I await your links to the factual underpinnings of your assertion - which we both know don't exist.

[dreamnightwind]

134. The poster is free to make that assertion without links to support it

It is a common perception that Sanders is appealing to discouraged voters, one I agree with. I don't have any links for you, don't really care to try to win this argument, but Bernie supporters have seen a lot of people jumping in who have been feeling unrepresented and no longer participate in the process because they don't find a whole lot to believe in with what the two major parties have been offering us. If you don't agree that is fine, but it isn't some outrageous assertion the poster made, it's the feeling on theground.

[NanceGreggs]

139. Any poster is free ...

... to make any ridiculous assertion without evidence to support it.

And any poster is also free to point out that a poster is pulling "facts" out of his ass, instead of providing actual facts to support their assertions.

"It is a common perception that Sanders is appealing to discouraged voters ..."

That's the problem right there - because "common perception" is not based on fact, but on memes that are posted here in lieu of facts.

Given that the vast majority of Democrats support HRC's candidacy (in the real on-the-ground world, rather than in the DU bubble), it is rather ludicrous to state that there are voters who wouldn't have voted at all were it not for Bernie, when one has not a scintilla of evidence to back-up that statement.

"Bernie supporters have seen a lot of people jumping in who have been feeling unrepresented and no longer participate in the process ..."

Okay, fine. Name them. Show me the facts that support that assertion. But of course you can't, because it is a "fact" that has been fabricated, and has no basis in reality. If it did, you'd have the evidence to back it up.

What DU has become is a repository for non-facts based on nothingness - a place where "I heard it somewhere" has become "it MUST be true, because I heard it somewhere" - a concept that was once the sole domain of FOX-News adherents and FreeRepublic participants.

It's a sad day on DemocraticUnderground - a site once lauded for its ability to separate the propaganda from the facts - when it succumbs to the idea that facts don't really matter, and unsubstantiated "perception on the ground" is proffered in place thereof.

There is DU - and then there is reality. When the two part company, it's time to asses whether message board rhetoric is to be accepted as "reality" or not.

Unless you can support your claims, your claims are worthless. It's as simple as that.

[dreamnightwind]

140. Hillarious, not playing. - eom

[NanceGreggs]

144. Thanks for making my point.

Those here who don't have any facts to support their assertions invariably hide behind the "don't want to play with the facts" game.

And it is of no consequence. People in the real world deal with facts every day - people who now post on DU prefer to ignore them.

The question is: Who do you think is going to elect the next POTUS - the majority of real-life Democrats who support HRC, or the "don't bother me with facts" posters on a message board?

[dreamnightwind]

145. facts are great, the post you responded to wasn't intended as such, your games are stale - eom

[NanceGreggs]

146. Ah, yes, welcome to the "new DU" ...

... where facts don't matter, and asking for them from someone who purports to be stating them is to be taken as "not intended as such".

[rhett o rick]

152. So where are your facts. Does Clinton support the XL Pipeline? Fracking? The TPP? Arctic

drilling? How about the wars in the middle east? Does Clinton support continuing the Patriot Act? Domestic spying? Does she support raising the cap on Social Security? Sen Sanders is clear as to where he stands. He stands with the 99%. H. Clinton is a member with her husband of the exclusive 1% club. Fact. She told Goldman-Sachs that she thought that people were unfairly picking on the poor banksters. Her answer to the problem of the growing inequality of wealth that we need to make the economy grow. The fact is that the economy has been growing for the wealthy and not the 99%. She believes that a rising tide raises all boats. Fact is only her friends "boats" have been raising with the tide. Maybe she cares about the increasing poverty rate, the increase in infant mortality, but she is unwilling to make her wealthy friends pay their fair share.

[NanceGreggs]

154. What does your latest diatribe ...

... have to do with the question I posed?

Do you have ANY FACTS to support your contention that there are people who were not intending to vote, who are now going to do so because Bernie is running?

YOU stated that as a fact. Where are the FACTS to support your claim?

Why are Bernie supporters always touting his truth-telling, when they can't tell the truth themselves?

Either you can back-up your claim or you can't - and I think it's obvious that you can't. Because if you could, you would have done so - instead of trying to change the subject.

[rhett o rick]

157. You must be used to people obeying your every demand. Sorry but Homey don't

play that. Your billionaires may be successful in Swiftboating Sen Sanders. I only hope they don't hurt him or his family. But we the 99% will prevail against the 1% and their Goldman-Sachs and billionaire money.

The poverty rate has been increasing thanks to Wall Street and the status quo. And H. Clinton wants that to continue. Maybe let the poor eat bread.

[NanceGreggs]

159. It was a simple question.

Please provide the evidence that there are people who had no intention of voting, but will now be doing so because of Bernie.

Either you can do so, or you can't - and it is now obvious that you can't, because no such evidence exists.

You can change the subject all you want. You can rant forever about swiftboating, Goldman-Sachs, billionaire money, the poverty rate, Wall Street, the 1%, and everything else you can come up with.

But none of it changes the fact that you made a statement that was pulled out of your own ass, and has no basis in reality.

This exchange is there for everyone to see. I asked you for facts to support your assertions, and you have NONE. Zero. Nada.

And BTW, thanks so much for so completely proving that point.

[Agschmid]

218. Over the top.

What an implication.

[BeanMusical]

236. "Maybe let the poor eat bread."

No, not bread at all. What the last queen of France said was: "Let them eat cake".

[rhett o rick]

241. "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche", I believe is the phrase but I believe it's actully been debunked.nm

[Babel_17]

184. People are stating that as being the reality, not as it being "a fact"

"If it weren't for Sanders a lot of people wouldn't be posting as much." I'm not saying that's a fact, I'm saying that's how I see things.

"If it weren't for Sanders then people I talk to wouldn't be as excited about the primaries." Like the above, that's just my experience, and what I've gleaned from the media, and online.

Why are Bernie supporters always touting his truth-telling, when they can't tell the truth themselves?

Is that your experience, or a demonstrable fact? Even allowing for hyperbole, can you pull up a list of posts by self identified Sanders posters that would back up your claim?

Please note I haven't resorted to referring to pulling assertions out of ones ass.

[BeanMusical]

234. "make any ridiculous assertion without evidence to support it."

You mean like the one about Senator Sanders being unelectable in the General?

[Live and Learn]

170. I don't have official stats but I can tell you that I personally know quite a few

people that usually don't vote for Democrats that are fans of Bernie. These are people that hate Clinton for reasons that really don't make any sense but they do. I have different reasons for not wanting Clinton than they do but asked them to check Sanders out and now they are fans.

I can tell you one of the switches was due to his free college since the individual has 3 kids that are either currently enrolled or soon will be. It may be a selfish reason in this case but it is the truth.

[Live and Learn]

112. +1 And Republicans and Independents that wouldn't be voting for a Democrat if it weren't for Sander

[NanceGreggs]

150. Have you come up with the facts ...

... that support your assertion that "a lot of people wouldn't be voting at all if it weren't for Sanders" yet, or not?

If the answer is "not", maybe you should stop posting things that you know aren't true.

Just a serving suggestion ...

[DesertFlower]

161. i'm not anti clinton. on a personal level

i don't like her -- never did, but that will not stop me for voting for her if she's the nominee.

my grandfather was president of a democratic club for most of his adult life. he did not like john kennedy but he voted for him. that's what real dems do.

[Agschmid]

222. At this point... A loyalty oath from either side is the same thing, crap.

If you don't think Sen Sanders supporters will support a Clinton nominee, then you'd better nominate Sanders or you will be letting the Republicons win.

[rhett o rick]

225. This has nothing to do with a loyality oath. Clinton supporters have continually posted

that they will support the nominee whether it's Clinton or Sanders (no loyalty oath required). But on the other hand, I know quite a few Sanders supporters that will never vote for Clinton. So simple mathematics will show us that:

Sanders in the GE = Clinton Supporters + Sander supporters

Clinton in the GE = Clinton supporters + some Sanders supporters.

From the above Sanders would have more votes. I think we can add some Republican crossover for Sanders that I really doubt that Clinton would get.

Nowhere is a loyalty oath required.

[Agschmid]

247. What you've posted is the definition of a loyalty oath.

"Support my candidate because enough of his supporters will bail on yours that she doesn't have a chance."

Do you understand how elitist this sounds?

Do you understand how unfair that is to supporters of other candidates?

Stop with the crap.

Sanders in the GE = Clinton Supporters + Sander supporters

Clinton in the GE = Clinton supporters + some Sanders supporters.

This is what's wrong with our party... Give up or we won't vote for the nominee if it's not the guy we want.

Those of you looking for an example, THERE YOU HAVE IT.

[rhett o rick]

250. I can't help it if some Democrats will never vote for Clinton. I am just the messanger.

It's not a threat to state that if you want to defeat the GOP then maybe you should choose a candidate that can deliver most of the Democratic voters. Clinton can't. She has way too much baggage. On some issues she and Sanders agree, and on a lot they don't agree. They don't agree on the XL Pipeline, fracking, free college tuition, Medicare for all, war-war-and more war, the Patriot Act, and more. On which of these issues do you side with Clinton?

You said: "This is what's wrong with our party... Give up or we won't vote for the nominee if it's not the guy we want. " I think it goes more like this: "If you want us to support the Democratic nominee, don't nominate someone that voted for the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. Don't nominate someone that chooses Goldman-Sachs over the 99%."

The people are tired of the Oligarchs picking the nominee, and then threatening Democrats to vote for them or get a R-Clown.

In 2000 the Party Elite choose Gore because he was a DLC conservative, and they tried to shove him down the throats of the voters. Looks like the Party Elite want a repeat performance. The Party Elite would rather risk losing to a Republicon than allow a progressive to win the nomination.

[Agschmid]

251. You've lost it.

First I'm not the one that said this:

Give up or we won't vote for the nominee if it's not the guy we want.

Check your post history before saying that was me. (And sure I'll give you that those weren't your exact words but you came pretty close)

And do you really believe the "Oligarchs" picked Barack Obama? Because newsflash he beat Hillary last time, if the "Oligarchs" are really behind her candidacy and have been behind her candidacy then they suck at what they are doing because she isn't president currently, at least the last time I checked.

Honestly it's not my job to tell you who to support, and it's not the Democratic Parties either, it is your vote, and your choice. Same for people who support Bernie, O'Malley, Clinton, Chaffee, or Webb... yet here we are again where some Bernie supporters threaten to hold the whole party hostage if they don't get their way.

A.K.A. Loyalty Oath, and yup they still SUCK.

[rhett o rick]

254. You quote me but say that it might not be my exact words? What?

And yes I think the Oligarchs chose Obama over Clinton in 2008. Follow the money.

I assume you are familiar with the recent Princeton Study: "The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite.

So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page." (1)

They go on to say that the USofA is an Oligarchy and not a democracy.

Senator Sanders is fighting against the control of the oligarchy and their billionaires that are expected to spend possibly 2 billion dollars to put Clinton in the WH. I would hope that all Democrats would side with the 99% and fight the control of our government by the billionaires.


(1) http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

[psaylor]

73. Not Accurate

I strongly support Bernie. I have not heard any Bernie fan say anything other than that Democrats must all vote for our nominee regardless of who it is. The future of the United States is too important to stay home.

[rhett o rick]

85. If that's true, if Clinton supporters will vote for Sen Sanders if he wins the nomination, then it

only makes sense to vote for Sen Sanders. If it's true that a significant number of Sanders supporters won't support Clinton, then logically Sanders would have more support in the general than Clinton.

[Picking Dem]

147. Tower, this is Porcine Air Flight B-3RN13

ready for takeoff, sir..

[chervilant]

166. Oh, really?

I've yet to see a Sanders supporter post such an assertion, and I try to read every post about him.

[SCantiGOP]

187. DanTex

Thanks for the first reality-based comment in this thread. The paranoia and persecution complex of the OP and first few comments is staggering.

[RoccoR5955]

174. Not if, but WHEN he does win the primary.

Oh ye of little faith.
We need to be more positive.
Bernie SHALL win the nomination, and the presidency in a LANDSLIDE like never before seen!

[lewebley3]

190. Sanders is just not prepared to be President

[frylock]

205. such insightful analysis

[lewebley3]

208. Only senator of a small state 620,000: No executive Branch experience

Never been in a political fight against real opposition etc etc.

[frylock]

209. That's some real inside baseball stuff right there..

did you pull that info from Wiki?

[MineralMan]

200. Which primary?

Between primaries and caucuses, there are 50 of them. So, which is "the primary" you're talking about. He's going to need to win many primaries to get the nomination.

[BeanMusical]

239. You should alert on that poster.

Oops, I forgot that you never ever alert on anyone.

[MineralMan]

252. I don't alert on replies to me.

I do alert on personal attacks on others, though. I might alert on a post once a week or so, at most.

[BeanMusical]

261. The perception of what is or isn't a personal attack is highly subjective.

Especially when you have an axe to grind with a poster. Thank you for confirming what I was suspecting BTW.

[MineralMan]

266. That's why DU has the jury system.

Seven DUers decide. As for your last sentence, I have no idea what you're talking about.

[BeanMusical]

268. Of course you don't.

[Feeling the Bern]

201. Look at NJ did with Krispy Kreme and the Democrat in the last election. The NJ Democrats all but

abandoned their candidate.

[Reter]

215. Not if Trump wins the Republican nomination

Then they will have no choice but to support Bernie.

[KingCharlemagne]

263. Half the Hillary supporters will probly defect to the Republican - see McGovern '72 for

more on how that works when Hubert Humphrey was actually taped yucking it up with Tricky Dick over McGovern's demise. Bernie can neutralize that problem, though, by mobilizing the roughly 50% who routinely never vote to come out to the polls. He will need to GOTV more previous non-voters than he loses in defecting DINOs.

[misterhighwasted]

3. Where did you read this? I don't think the author has a clue what the Clinton campaign is

..even about.
No one is afraid of Sanders.
Whoever told you that is living in a small secluded world where nothing exists but bernie sanders.
Which is fine if it keeps them in their happy place. But reality is far different.

[ibegurpard]

4. argle bargle

Nt

[misterhighwasted]

6. Like I said, there are some who only see the world from their

Sanders happy place.
Its ok. Really.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

5. I have heard HRC operatives

say they are worried about him for some time. Also there is a memo out telling HRC staffers not to panic. I would be scared in their situation.

[DanTex]

7. Nobody is worried about Bernie actually winning.

What (some) people are worried about is losing to the GOP, and whether Bernie attacking Hillary from the left could make her a weaker GE candidate.

[erronis]

16. Hey, come on. Just spend a few more corporate millions. No worries!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

17. If no one is worried about Bernie winning the nomination,

that is very good news our movement. The trend lines on NH and IA are the same, except IA is lagging in time. Looks like Bernie will pass her in IA in September/October.

[DanTex]

18. Yes, you should celebrate. Enjoy. Meanwhile HRC will be figuring out how to beat the

GOP next fall.

[misterhighwasted]

21. THIS ^

Thanks, well stated.

[Lordquinton]

58. Maybe she should concentrate on what's at hand

cause planning her presidency didn't work out too well the first time she lost the nomination.

[LovingA2andMI]

212. DING, DING, DING -- We Have A Winner....

"....cause planning her presidency didn't work out too well the first time she lost the nomination."

[Lordquinton]

244. Counting your chicks before they hatch

Cart before the horse, and so on.

[KingCharlemagne]

265. Think Thomas E. Dewey 1948. A picture tells a thousand words:

[Lordquinton]

267. Nice

Good pic to have around for these threads.

[Picking Dem]

149. *DING* CORONATION IMPLIED *DING*

[arcane1]

36. Bernie isn't attacking Hillary from any direction n/t

[DanTex]

39. And that's great news. His supporters on the other hand...

[arcane1]

44. Are free to do as they wish, as are her supporters attacking him.

But that shouldn't get in the way of making up shit to post.

[DanTex]

46. What did I make up?

What I said is true. HRC isn't worried about losing to Bernie. The only worry is losing to the GOP, and the only concerns about Bernie are that his primary challenge might weaken her next fall. I agree, he's not attacking her, but if his supporters do, if he grows a movement full of people spewing anti-Hillary rhetoric, that could still help out the GOP.

The point is, the "concerns" that the OP is talking about aren't about losing the primary. They are only about losing the general.

[arcane1]

50. "Bernie attacking Hillary from the left" n/t

[DanTex]

53. I didn't say he was doing it, I said people were worried about that.

And it doesn't have to be negative campaign ads for Bernie's campaign to hurt Hillary's chances in the GE.

[arcane1]

54. Oh. Never mind then :)

[ibegurpard]

57. Hillary needs no help hurting her chances

She's doing that all on her own

[Old Crow]

138. "HRC isn't worried about losing to Bernie." Really?

Really? You're quite sure of this? Interesting. Because if it's true, I'd say HRC must have a real problem with hubris. If I'd experienced 2008 in the way she did, I'd be worried.

[passiveporcupine]

78. But Bernie hasn't been attacking her

That is just fear mongering to make people fear Bernie. More argle bargle.

[wendylaroux]

93. omg whatttt????

whoboy!!! too funny

[rhett o rick]

115. The meme that he is a weaker GE candidate is made up from whole cloth by Clinton supporters.

Clinton will not get any Republicons to cross over but Sen Sanders has already gotten interest from Republicans that are tired of the clowns.

Clinton will not get all the Sanders supporters to vote for her, while (according to the Clinton supporters) Sanders will get the backing of the Clinton supporters.

Clinton supporters are not worried about getting a GOP in the WH or they would choose the stronger candidate. Need I list the baggage that Clinton carries?

The people of this country are learning about Sen Sanders. His numbers continue to grow. He truly represents the 99% and not the billionaires. People are tired of the billionaires (like Goldman-Sachs) pushing their candidates into the WH.

[cantbeserious]

127. ^^^ This ^^^

eom

[misterhighwasted]

9. No one is afraid of Bernie. The focus is past the primary & their

.concern is in denying the GOP the trifecta.

[frylock]

38. "The focus is past the primary..."

that focus will turn into a lot of 1000-yard stares when she eventually loses to Sanders.

[Armstead]

8. They're too arrogant to be scared of Bernie...But thoise e-mails.....

[misterhighwasted]

11. No, its about dismantling the power behind the GOP.

Maybe looks like arrogance to some, but this high stakes race is going to require the strength, stamina, & organization of the most powerful players in the game.

[Armstead]

15. You mean the same powers that are behind the Democratic Establishment

Democratic rule is much better than GOP rule for many reasons.

But in real world terms -- on the core issues that matter -- they both serve the same masters. There may be some dueling cliques backing different horses (Kochs v Goldman Sachs) but they are ultimately part of the same club. The same club that is screwing the rest of us so they can continue to take over our economy and amass obscene wealth for themselves at everyone else's expense.

The ones in the "special happy place" are the ones who continue to deny that basic fact, and enable status quo politics, despite all real world evidence to the contrary.

[DanTex]

19. You can't possibly think that Goldman Sachs is behind Dems in the same way

that the Kochs are behind the GOP. Do you? Do I really need to explain all the reasons this is totally false?

[Armstead]

22. Um, they and the other banksters drove US economoic policy INSIDE the WH

....and funded too many Congresscritters.

I don't have time to get into "dueling links" in which I produce evidence of how closely they are in bed, and you providing links saying "Oh not really that's an exaggeration."

I will provide one link, however. Hope you read it, Even if you don't agree, it outlines the frustration many of are feeling. And cute little terms like the "Sanders happy place" don't address these harsh facts:

http://billmoyers.com/2015/08/14/bernie-sanders-halfway-there/

[DanTex]

30. OK, first of all, contributions from Wall Street go to both Dems and the GOP,

and in the last few cycles, including this one, they have gone more to the GOP than the Dems. More importantly, those contributions are from individuals, not from the corporations, and the reason they are split is that some people who work on Wall Street are liberal and others are conservative.

On the other hand, the Koch Brothers singlehandedly spend more money on campaigns than all of Wall Street combined. It doesn't go to candidates (most of it), it goes to PACs, and it all goes to help the GOP. So there's no comparison whatsoever.

On top of that, the Dems in congress are the ones who pushed through Dodd-Frank, which are the toughest financial regulations since WW2. And Dems want to overturn Citizens United while the GOP doesn't. Also, Dems want to address climate change but the GOP doesn't, and so on.

To pretend that it's the Koch Brothers and the GOP versus Goldman Sachs and the Dems is just dumb. The fact of the matter is, the difference between Hillary and Sanders is much smaller than the difference between either of them and the GOP.

[Armstead]

42. I said the Dems are better than the GOP on many levels

But when push comes to shove, the BIG MONEY banksters and corporate titans still drive policy, no matter who is in the WH or which party is in charge in Congress.

Dodd Frank is weak tea, and it hasn't been given sufficient teeth. The same people and financial institutions who tanked the economy are doing better than ever, thank you very much, while the real economy continued to erode for real people. The Too Big to Fail Monopoly has gotten bigger.

Some of that is inevitable, I realize, with our system. But we have basically rolled over and played dead when it comes to any significant challenge to the Church of the Holy Free Markets. The GOP continue to drive the agenda. WE have aided and abetted the elimination of the balance of actual liberalism that once put the restraints on the rapacious greed of the powerful.

Ultimately, the movement that Sanders has helped to cultivate is asking nothing more radical than the restoration of BALANCE that exposes and actually challenges the deceitful and destructive underpinnings that the GOP overtly pushes.

[DanTex]

47. You think the "big money banksters" are the ones who drove Dodd Frank?

Funny, because I keep hearing them and the GOP complaining about it. On the other hand, people like Paul Krugman seem to think it was quite effective.

You think big money interests want Citizens United overturned? You think they want serious action on climate change? Raising the minimum wage? Etc.

[Armstead]

119. I complain if the speed limit is lowered by 5 mph

Nobody likes to be regulated, '

Naturally they are going to complain about Dodd Frank. They don't want ANY regulations. And to them it's especially annoying because they are not used to actually having new controls placed on them, even if relatively minor. It's an affront to the natural order they have gotten accustomed to over the last 35 years.

And, if Democrats were serious about Citizens United they would be filing bills every day or doing whatever else it takes to get around the SC ruling. Sure the GOP would fight and block it. But politics is supposed to be about a battle between political parties and ideologies. Eventually, either one side wins, or a compromise is reached. The GOP understands that. Why can't the Dems be as relentless as the GOP on that any any number of other things?

As I said above, ultimately what Sanders and his supporters are trying to do is move the Democrats away from the "center right" and back to the center left (capital "L" Liberalism) to at least restore some balance to the political equation.

[azmom]

79. Thanks for trying.

[bvar22]

70. Koch Money funded the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC),

and helped get Bill Clinton elected.

Koch Industries gave funding to the DLC and served on its Executive Council
http://americablog.com/2010/08/koch-industries-gave-funding-to-the-dlc-and-served-on-its-executive-council.html

There is a Gordian Knot of corruption that has wrapped itself around both Parties.
Hillary owes the Kochs.
Bernie has the sword.

[Armstead]

107. Oh don't confuse me with facts

[LovingA2andMI]

213. The Truth Has Been Spoken.....

Thank you for Speak It and Tying Up All The Loose Ends....

Koch Industries gave funding to the DLC and served on its Executive Council
http://americablog.com/2010/08/koch-industries-gave-funding-to-the-dlc-and-served-on-its-executive-council.html

And Who Were Members of the DLC?

Thanks Again.....

[bvar22]

125. "dismantling the power behind the GOP"???!!!

While accepting MILLIONS in donations from the MIC, the Oil Industry, and Wall Street.

Yeah...THATS the ticket!

[zeemike]

49. when you have a lot of money and been around it most of your life

Arrogance becomes normal.

[passiveporcupine]

87. The e-mails are a non issue to dems

The repubs have nothing else to focus on. Benghazi is getting too stale.

[Indepatriot]

27. Reality is Sanders is drinking HRC's milkshake with little media coverage and blatent attempts at

bringing him down by the DNC Third Way crowd. Keep preaching about "reality" and we'll see you in March....

[misterhighwasted]

32. Haahaa.. ok we'll be sure to wave as HRC leaves the Primary on her way to the GE.

And bernie shuffels back to the Senate.

[Armstead]

45. and as Hillary steps into retirement from public life the third week of Nov 2016

[LovingA2andMI]

214. One Happy Day.....

[madokie]

60. There is a real world out here you know

and I don't think you're living in it.

Bernie will be our next President

[passiveporcupine]

106. Can we all please just stop this crap

My dad's bigger than your dad...blah blah blah.

Damn, this is so ugly.

[misterhighwasted]

135. Not a chance for bernie..He has no policy plan for any of his podium pounding chants.

He will never make it past the primary.
Sec Clinton, America's first Madam President 2016.

[frylock]

35. Facebook is one of those small, secluded worlds where Sanders is getting a lot of play..

there's a few people there.

[bvar22]

133. It must be those few, secluded people from Facebook....

..that are filling the stadiums at Bernie appearances.

[Chico Man]

143. Cheesy infographics

[frylock]

206. tens of thousands of likes and shares

[Chico Man]

229. Something tells me

This is going to be a source of false optimism.

Heading to a soccer game tonight. There will be about 25 thousand people there.

[Eleanors38]

56. NPR this A.M. speculated on just this regarding Biden & Gore candidacies...

A commentator remarked that the Democratic Party establishment opposes Sanders, and that a Biden candidacy may be a hedge against a faltering Hillary campaign. She didn't put much credence in a Gore effort. She also noted thar neither of these possible candidates had no where near the campaign infrastructure of Hillary or Sanders.

[monicaangela]

59. May the best candidate win!!

If Hillary is ready for prime time (this time) she will convince the voters to vote for her, if not, she may end in the same manner she ended in the 2008 election...at any rate, Bernie S. or Hillary C. would be much better than any of the Republican candidates. Slash and burn government or government of by and for the 1% of this country is worse than living in a Dictatorial Police State, something it appears we are one election away from at the present moment, IMHO of course.

[PatrickforO]

68. I know a woman in Wyoming who says that chickens are her happy place.

I'll tell you what my happy place is:

Medicare for all Americans
Strengthened Social Security with payroll tax cap removed
Corporations forced to bring the trillions in profits they are hiding offshore home and have it be taxed
Massive infrastructure projects
Massive cuts in war spending and dissolution of NSA
Free tuition at state colleges for our children and grandchildren
A real plan working towards reducing carbon emissions and mitigating climate change
An end to police brutality through better policy, better leadership, better training and body cams

That would be a VERY good start.

Aaaaah! Makes me happy just thinking about it.

You know, that's why I support Bernie. When Hillary was confronted with the FACT that most Americans want single payer healthcare, she said, "Tell me something real."

That's the difference, misterhighwasted. Hillary can't see the reality of policies that actually help us. Bernie can.

[Indydem]

153. So how exactly will President Sanders...

Get a single one of those initiatives accomplished?

He's been unable to pass a single piece of legislation during his entire tenure in office.

How, as President, will he be able to overcome the GOP and the Democratic Party (of which he is not a member) to pass all these wonderful initiatives?

Or is he just going to become Emperor Sanders and do it all by his magnanimous authority?

[Babel_17]

185. You're correct about the limitations of office, but POTUS ...

You're correct about the limitations of office, but POTUS can influence the DOJ to work with local police about improving their performance. Republicans as President have pushed the boundaries of their authority and now it's expected for all Presidents to continue that to some degree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory

So the President has leverage with Congress in so far as they need him/her to run the programs they fund. And the Republicans in Congress stay in power because of their ability to influence funding. And of course there's the budget. A President Sanders will, I expect, take the formulation of that right to the public. That's a fight Sanders will do very well in, imo.

[frylock]

207. are you implying that your democrats will side with republicans to obstruct..

President Sanders?

[StandingInLeftField]

228. Why, yes, Frylock, I believe IndyDem, may be saying just that!

It certainly sounded to me as if IndyDem was implying that rank-and-file Democratic congresspeople would OBSTRUCT President Sanders!

[frylock]

242. PUMA Pride!

[jeff47]

113. So is it their lack of fear which has them talking about losing IA and NH? (nt)

[cherokeeprogressive]

123. "I don't think the author has a clue what the Clinton campaign is even about."

That implies someone does...

[PosterChild]

151. +10 ! (Nm)

[retrowire]

14. Truth. n/t

[Enthusiast]

20. You have identified the problem. Bernie would derail the gravy train.

[George II]

25. After he loses the nomination I'd be curious to see what he does. ..

...with his committee surplus.

[Indepatriot]

28. We'll never know...

[George II]

69. He has to file a termination report for his committee.

[Picking Dem]

74. No, that would be Clinton, and there will be questions asked....

[George II]

76. EVERY candidate will be filing termination reports. You don't know much about campaign finance...

...laws, do you?

[Indepatriot]

97. Ah, finally you bring up something that Hillary actually IS more qualified than Bernie at doing...

[George II]

100. No, as far as I know she's run for office only 3 or 4 times - President in 2008 (maybe 2004?)...

...and twice for Senator.

Sanders has run for office dozens of times, he lost three times for Governor/Senator when he only got <5% of the vote, 5 or 6 times for Mayor, ten or twelve times for Representative and twice more for Senator (I may be off by one or two for the last two offices)

Unless the laws have changed, candidates have to terminate their committees after each election, win or lose.

[treestar]

23. Fantasy

No one is afraid and Bernie is not going to make a major change without a Congress even in the unlikely event he wins.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

37. That is something often overlooked in the conversation.

It happened to the current president and show's what a skilled politician he is to get done what he got done with a recalcitrant and obstructionist Congress. People forget Congress passes the laws and the President enforces them. If the D's sweep both Houses of Congress in the election and Bernie wins, then there is a chance of some of his agenda getting done. But that's putting the cart before the horse.

edited for spelling

[monicaangela]

48. There's more to it than that...well a little more

If, WE, the citizens of this nation wake up and realize the fact that we can do something about electing more reasonable people to the House and Senate, and if we are capable of successfully returning Congress to the sane, the Bully pulpit of a President goes a long way in guiding the congress. I guess it's really up to the citizens of this nation....hopefully enough of us will get out and vote so that change can come to this nation....in the proper way, through the will of the people.

[Trajan]

108. One foot goes before the other ..

We aren't afraid of congress ... We need a sea change in our institutions, and I think the American electorate is ready for that change ...

It's time to change tack on this mighty ship of state ...

You stand the chance of getting side tracked ...

[George II]

24. Do you have anything on which to base this theory?

[postatomic]

29. I had no idea

Thank you for pointing this out.

[Bubzer]

33. Who ever ends up being our candidate, we definately need to....

[monicaangela]

40. Exactly!!!

If Occupy Wall street had someone that could represent their ideas in the White House, Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren would, in my opinion, be an ideal choice. I believe Bernie Sanders would be a great President for this nation at this time. If he is able to win the primary, I will surely vote for him.

[SonderWoman]

43. Republicans are so afraid of him that they're trying to make him the nominee.

[monicaangela]

51. I agree!!

Spot on SonderWoman....your reply would make a great bumper sticker!!!

[Gothmog]

55. Conservatives’ Bernie Sanders lovefest: Why the right has the hots for a prickly socialist

Some Republicans are lapping up news of a Sanders surge -- all the better to ding Hillary Clinton http://www.salon.com/2015/07/09/conservatives_bernie_sanders_lovefest_why_the_right_has_the_hots_for_a_prickly_socialist/

Republicans for Bernie Sanders? Crazier things have happened in American politics. With the Vermont Senator seeing a rise in Democratic primary polls and growing national media attention, some Republicans are beginning to take notice of the self described democratic socialist.

There is a sub-reddit that asks, “Is it a good thing for conservatives that Bernie Sanders is running for president?” Top Romney strategist, Stuart Stevens, tweeted in early June his prediction that Sanders would beat Clinton in Iowa or New Hampshire and wrote in the Daily Beast, “Bernie Sanders will never be president. But unless Hillary changes her strategy – and soon – he can still wind up toppling her.” Did I mention he worked for Romney’s 2012 campaign?

In any case, much of the conservative talk of Sanders centers around a supposed common enemy — Hillary Clinton. At the conservative American Thinker, one writer said of the Sanders surge, “That sound you hear is Hillary Clinton supporters whistling past the graveyard,” while another wrote “Bernie Sanders sends a chilling message to Hillary campaign.”

[Gothmog]

52. Republicans should support the Vermont socialist’s campaign to force Hillary left.

Conservatives love Sanders because he is forcing Hillary Clinton to move to the left. The National Review is calling on conservatives to contribute to the Sanders campaign for reasons that have nothing to do with any fear of Sanders http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420262/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams

After a GOP power player sent me a piece from left-leaning Salon headlined “Hillary Clinton is going to lose: She doesn’t even see the frustrated progressive wave that will nominate Bernie Sanders,” my heart went pitter-patter, beginning to sense an opportunity.

But it was not until I saw a headline in The Hill warning that the “Sanders surge is becoming a bigger problem for Clinton,” accompanied by “It may be time for Hillary Clinton to take the challenge from Sen. Bernie Sanders more seriously,” that I was truly motivated to join Team Bernie and rally my fellow Republicans to do the same.

So I sent Bernie a donation and visited his campaign store, where my favorite bumper sticker was Vote for Bernie . . . you know you wanna! Now, I don’t really wanna, and neither do you. However, supporting Bernie in the early stages of his campaign is a noble cause that makes a great deal of political sense and emboldens me to announce Operation Chaos 2016.....

If you find Operation Chaos appealing, then your first step is to send ten dollars to Bernie. Just imagine: If even half of Mitt Romney’s 61 million voters from the 2012 election contributed that amount, then Sanders would have $305 million. My ten-dollar contribution bought me the satisfaction of knowing that only Sanders (and certainly not the media) can force Clinton into addressing her own hypocrisy. Only Sanders can be Clinton’s “real” primary opponent, because (unlike most other Democrats) he does not fear the Clinton Machine. Only Sanders can force Hillary into making egregious sound bites while she tries to match his natural appeal to the Democratic party’s ultraliberal base.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420262/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams

The National Review does not appear to be in fear of Sanders but instead wants to support his efforts to slow down Hillary Clinton. I must have missed the part where the conservatives are actually afraid of Sanders.

[George II]

64. They are - they want to damage Hillary Clinton as much as they can before the GE....

...hoping they can strengthen their ultimate candidate.

It's what they do. This is nothing new.

[PatrickforO]

71. This post seems to be written with the assumption that Bernie is too 'ultra left' for America

The problem with this assumption is that if you look at each of his positions, you'll see that in virtually all cases, the majority of Americans agree with Bernie.

This is the problem with the pundits, who are basically corporate-owned. Because they don't WANT Americans to realize that, hey, if we vote in the right people we CAN have better lives than we do now. So, they, and you, are perpetrating this myth that the American people are 'center right.'

It just ain't so, Gothmog.

[Gothmog]

84. I am not making the assumption-This is from the National Review and Republican voters

It is the National Review and the republicans who making this assumption or more appropriatedly believe that the best way to stop Hillary Clinton is to donate to Sanders. Conservatives are making the value judgment that having republican supporters contribute to Sanders is a good investment. You can disagree with the opinion or beliefs of the National Review and these conservatives but these conservatives and National Review readers believe that that it is a good investment for them to contribute to Sanders.

You are free to disagree with the National Review and the conservatives who contributing to Sanders. I doubt that they really care about your belief as to the viablity of Sanders. I tend to believe that the GOP types are good at dirty tricks and that they would not be supporting Sanders if they did not firmly believe that such support was to their benefit.

I live in Texas and I personally believe that Sanders at the top of the ticket would hurt down ballot races in Texas. My county party chair got taken to task by a local paper for merely attending the Sanders event in Houston http://www.democraticunderground.com/107827740 As a state party official and county party chair, he is remaining neutral during the primary process and only attended the event to see who was there. I am convinced that Sanders at the top of the ticket would set back efforts to turn Texas blue by a good bit. I may be wrong but that is my opinion as of now.

While I personally like Sanders and agree with more of positions according to that online quiz than I agree with Hillary Clinton's position, I am firm believer that the GOP is good at dirty tricks and that any support that they are giving to Sanders is not because they have the best interests of Democrats in mind.

[ibegurpard]

86. And I believe the exact opposite

Hillary will drag us all down in Montana.

[Gothmog]

89. And socialism will play well in Montana?

I am somewhat surprised by this given the number of militias and other types in that part of the country.

[ibegurpard]

91. right back atcha

I don't remember hearing about any Black men being dragged to death behind trucks here. I live in the shithole otherwise known as Texas for several years. Racists and bible thumpers.

[ibegurpard]

101. Oh and let's do a bit of comparison shall we?

My Governor is the head of the Democratic Governors association...you have Abbott. My Democratic Senator John Tester just came out in support of the Iran Accord...you have Cruz and some other Repuke. My state just put a firewall between federal family planning funding and anti abortion attempts to defund it locally...Texas is fighting to close it's last few abortion clinics. We just passed Medicaid expansion and a law to require dark money groups to reveal their funding. And we fought off a religious "freedom" bill similar to the anti gay legislation in Indiana...even with a Republican controlled legislature. Yeah stellar job you guys are doing turning Texas blue...keep it up.

[frylock]

96. Do you trust the judgment of Republicans?

[Gothmog]

129. The Republicans are masters of dirty tricks

When it comes to way to help their candidates win, the GOP play nasty and are somewhat effective

[PatrickforO]

142. Well, we knew at the outset that everyone in the establishment of both parties

would first ignore, then make fun of, then fight tooth and nail against Sanders. I hear you, but I'm very much hoping this strategy backfires.

[frylock]

94. I'm gonna lmfao when this backfires on them..

thanks for the cash, dumbshits!

[Gothmog]

130. Karl Rove funded Nader in 2000 and that strategy worked for the GOP

For some funny reason, Karl Rove funded Nader in 2000 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

Furthermore, Karl Rove and the Republican Party knew this, and so they nurtured and crucially assisted Nader's campaigns, both in 2000 and in 2004. On 27 October 2000, the AP's Laura Meckler headlined "GOP Group To Air Pro-Nader TV Ads." She opened: "Hoping to boost Ralph Nader in states where he is threatening to hurt Al Gore, a Republican group is launching TV ads featuring Nader attacking the vice president [Mr. Gore]. ... 'Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of,' Nader says [in the commercial]. An announcer interjects: 'What's Al Gore's real record?' Nader says: 'Eight years of principles betrayed and promises broken.'" Meckler's report continued: "A spokeswoman for the Green Party nominee said that his campaign had no control over what other organizations do with Nader's speeches." Bush's people - the group sponsoring this particular ad happened to be the Republican Leadership Council - knew exactly what they were doing, even though the liberal suckers who voted so carelessly for Ralph Nader obviously did not. Anyone who drives a car the way those liberal fools voted, faces charges of criminal negligence, at the very least. But this time, the entire nation crashed as a result; not merely a single car.

This is from the GOP bag of dirty tricks that worked once

[frylock]

136. This is the primary were talking about here.

[Gothmog]

162. So Rove and Company do not play dirty tricks before the general election?

I was not aware that there was some rule about not trying to sabotage the other sides primary to get a weaker opponent or that the GOP had agreed to comply with convention. Look, I have seen no evidence that the GOP has any fear of Sanders and there are many accounts of conservatives wanting to support Sanders' campaign for strategic reasons.

The premise of the OP is simply not supported by the facts. As a Hillary supporter, I am glad that Sanders is in the race. I am not afraid of Sanders and the facts seem to show that more republicans are contributing to Sanders campaign for strategic purposes than there are republicans who are afraid of Sanders. Again, I do think that the premise of this thread is correct

[frylock]

197. And as I said earlier, I'm going to be lmfao when this backfires..

and we have a President Sanders in the WH.

[Gothmog]

253. Time will tell but you are betting on the GOP not being good at dirty tricks

I wish someone would explain to me how Sanders will be competitive in a general election contest where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the GOP nominee will be spending another billion dollars. I keep asking for an explanation and I have yet to see one that has any basis in the real world

[Armstead]

122. OH Goody. A new meme. The old ones were getting kind of boring

[Gothmog]

131. I am not bored

I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how Sanders is viable in the general election when the Koch Brothers will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate will be spending another billion dollars. I have yet to hear a good explanation as to how Sanders will compete in a general election. If you have an explanation, I am still waiting

[Armstead]

132. Sunsitute "Hillary" or "O'Malley" or "(Fill in the Blank)" for Sanders

The Koch Brothers and their ilk and the RNC will funnel their money in regardless of who is the Democratic nominee. And they will use all of their powers of ingenuity to attempt to tar and feather the reputation of whomever the Democratic nominee is.

They've got a bagful of tricks for Sanders, Clinton, whomever.

Electability? If primary voters don't want Sanders, then he loses, Same as any other contender.

If he were to pull off an upset, and if the Democrats are serious about winning, they would be foolish to try and undermine him or not give him full support. If they don't, then it we would deserve to lose.

[Gothmog]

163. Clinton will keep the financing gap close but I fear that Sanders is bringing a knife to a gunfight

If any candidate in the Democratic field has a chance of raising the $2 billion need to compete, it will be Hillary Clinton. Electability is a key issue in the primary and I have repeatedly ask how Sanders will raise the funds necessary to run. There is a major difference between the Clinton and Sanders strategy here

Some candidates are better able to raise the funds necessary to complete. President Obama blew everyone away in 2008 with his small donor fundraising efforts and that made it clear that he was electable. Jeb is trying to do the same on the GOP side with his $100 million super pac.

There are many on this board who doubt that Sanders will be able to compete in a general election contest where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate will likely spend another billion. This article had a very interesting quote about the role of super pacs in the upcoming election http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/03/bernie-sanders-grassroots-movement-gains-clinton-machine

Harvard University professor Lawrence Lessig, who founded a Super Pac to end Super Pacs, said Sanders’ renouncing Super Pacs is tantamount to “bringing a knife to a gunfight”.

“I regret the fact the Bernie Sanders has embraced the idea that he’s going to live life like the Vermont snow, as pure as he possibly can, while he runs for president, because it weakens his chances – and he’s an enormously important progressive voice,” Lessig said.

President Obama was against super pacs in 2012 but had to use one to keep the race close. I do not like super pacs but any Democratic candidate who wants to be viable has to use a super pac, The super pacs associated with Clinton raised $24 million and so Clinton raised $70 this quarter.

I just saw on another board that Russ Feingold is using a super pac. Without a super pac, Sanders will be bringing a knife to a gun fight

[MissDeeds]

61. +1000

Bernie cannot be bought or controlled by the establishment. He actually stands for the people. What an unsettling thought.

K&R

[Thinkingabout]

62. As i sit posting I do not feel scared, maybe some are but not this Democrat.

I don't have any reason to be scared with Hillary doing well nationwide in the polls. I also look at the endorsements she has received from current Congressional members and see 118 and another 15 in past members of congress, I see one endorsement for O'Malley but I dont see any for Bernie. These are people who have served with Bernie for many years in some cases and they did not endorse him. It makes me wonder why. No, scared and afraid must belong to someone else.

[GitRDun]

63. Nobody is pondering anything yet

There hasn't been a single debate, and he's way behind nationally in the polls.

A couple of decent poll showings in mostly white states and crowds of people who like what is similar to the "Occupy Wall Street" theme is something, but not likely to strike fear in the hearts of political professionals.

This kind of OP belongs in the Bern-geon. Fact free and pro "our guy". If you're going to push this stuff outside the Bern-geon, give us a "scared shitless" link would ya?

[Trajan]

110. I can see that I would never want to be associated with you at any time

So, it's to the basement with you ... Join your friends ...

[GitRDun]

121. Suits me fine.

[PatrickforO]

65. You're damned right it is!

And that makes me want to support Bernie even more. When the establishment is trying to downplay and do anything to get rid of our candidate, it means the establishment doesn't give a rat's rear end about you and I. Which is why we need to work even harder for Bernie. Because he DOES care about us.

And you know what? If this movement gets as big as I think it will, the establishment will not win, because the people are ALWAYS stronger in the end.

[brooklynite]

67. And by "surging", you mean "in the teens, where he was in June"?

[Metric System]

81. We're living in bizarro world. Up is down!

[Agschmid]

223. To be fair the primary really is about state polling...

[brooklynite]

227. ...where he's behind everywhere but NH

[Agschmid]

245. That is currently accurate.

I do believe strong showings in the first few primaries would help him in the subsequent ones, and we do still have quite a bit of time until the first vote is cast.

[brooklynite]

249. Here's his big problem...

...first of all, he's still 22% behind in Iowa; add to which Clinton just got Harkin's support. I give him 40% chance of winning NH, but then we go to SC, where his progressive streak won't play as well, followed by NV, where Clinton's support with Hispanics is going to give her the edge. THEN we have Super Tuesday, 10 States nationwide, including Texas, where winning means racking up 1 M votes. He won't be able to cover all that territory to make speeches and hold rallies, and he won't have the financial resources to hire the staff he'll need to work on GOTV.

[libdem4life]

75. Derailing the Gravy Train...I'm stealing this one...succinct and on point.

[azmom]

82. We outnumber them, and they know it.

[SoapBox]

92. I absolutely agree!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

95. If they try

if they try to get rid of Bernie there will be millions of Bernies behind him. The horses have bolted and they are not going back in the stable. The populist movement is spreading like wildfire.

[bvar22]

126. American Spring?

...Time to put out the tired, old, "Moderate Republican" trash and try something that WORKED in the 50s and 60s.

[NanceGreggs]

99. No one is "scared shitless" of Bernie.

And no matter how many times that notion gets posted on DU, it won't make it a fact.

[MrMickeysMom]

232. Reference?

[NanceGreggs]

255. Surely you're smart enough to know ...

... that it's impossible to prove a negative.

Maybe you should ask the people who are claiming that anyone is "scared shitless of Bernie" to prove their assertions.

It's just another pointless DU meme repeated by people who obviously don't understand that politicians don't get "scared shitless" by the competition - because they go into every political race fully aware of what they're in for.

HRC is still way ahead of BS in the polls - do you think Bernie is "scared shitless" by that? I doubt it.

[MrMickeysMom]

257. It depends on what scares people, I'd say...

Of course, every time someone says anything on this claim, followed by someone else retorting, "no, it' ain't so"… well, then that person is tossing out the negative nobody's can possibly verify. Sigh...

I'd point them both to the politics of surrounding the claim.

I've run races and won and lost and I damn sure have a better idea of what scares most people regarding the other guy winning than you seem to.

[NanceGreggs]

258. Okey dokey.

Everyone is "scared shitless" of Bernie.

If it makes you feel better to believe that - fine. It's a pointless meme in any event, so for those who think it important, no skin off my back if they believe it or not.

[MrMickeysMom]

262. "Everyone"? I wouldn't say everyone is that degree of "scared shitless"...

Yet, the ones who have the most to gain/lose sure seem to be the most concerned.

BTW, I don't acknowledge this to feel "better". What makes me feel better is having tried my best to help my community by doing the right thing and not accepting favors, which ultimately cost me my 2nd re-election.

I already assume it doesn't bother you, else you would say so.

Best Wishes,

MMM

[Babel_17]

102. Those responsible for holding the hands of the monied class

Those responsible for holding the hands of the monied class are likely having a hard time with their reassurances. Clock is ticking for Sanders to hit a roadblock and/or HRC to generate excitement and buzz. If not, then the hand-holders might feel pressured to consider nurturing some alternates to Secretary Clinton.

[DCBob]

103. Anyone who has a reasonable chance of beating the GOP.

Bernie does not fit that criteria.

[Smarmie Doofus]

104. "IF she flounders"? She's floundering NOW.

Yeah.... Biden, Gore et al et al.

Is Sam Nunn still alive?

[JI7]

105. Sanders said he will vote for Schumer to be dem senate leader

[Motown_Johnny]

109. when was that?

[JI7]

111. when Schumer tried to get him to oppose the iran deal

[slipslidingaway]

114. knr n/t

[onehandle]

116. 'They,' eh?

I was wondering what 'they' were thinking.

Now I know what 'they' are thinking.

If not for this thread, I would have never known what 'they' are thinking.

Glad I now know what 'they' are thinking.

[DFW]

117. Sanders still supports Schumer for Democratic leader depsite the Iran disagreement

I don't, but I'm not a member of the Senate, and none of the Senators from my state are Democrats.

Oh well, I'm still very much on the fence about our nominee anyway. Hillary is qualified. Hillary has baggage. I'm ready for ANY Democrat to lead us, Hillary or whoever, at this point, and I do not feel the capital of Switzerland.

But I'm open to any and all developments.

[redstateblues]

204. Capital of Switzerland! good one!

[dreamnightwind]

137. I actually think the establishment is worried about Clinton scandals

being a problem, and they are just looking for candidates to hedge their bets.

Sad to me that they won't look to Bernie, in that sense I agree with your "anything but Bernie" premise, Bernie is clearly an outsider and getting him into the Whitehouse will be a huge accomplishment if we can pull it off, there won't be any help from the party or the media, that's for sure.

[Chico Man]

141. Some people simply don't like him

It's not that they are scared.

[jfern]

148. That's because the Democratic establishment sucks

He's not half as liberal as Jeremy Corbyn.

[L0oniX]

155. We can't be having truth tellers in office.

[MFM008]

156. 75 right before election

Bernie 75
Hillary 69
Biden 75

Holy crap don't we have some younger people in this fight that may not die on us before they are inaugurated?

[misterhighwasted]

158. I have had the same concern. At the start of this race, some wanted Warren

..who is older than Hillary, and Sanders for her VP.
Geez, thats like 70 & 74 by election day.
You have to really stop & think sometimes, ya know.
Oye!

[lovemydog]

171. What do those numbers represent?

Thanks.

[JI7]

173. O'Malley but Dems seem to want someone older this time around

[DFW]

259. Howard Dean remarked on that right after the 2008 election

I asked him if he had any thoughts about 2016, and he said he'd be almost 70 by then, and he thought the job should be given to someone about 50. He thought he was already too old in 2009 (and he had just turned 60) for another run.

Of course, that was then. He frankly thinks he now would be ready and able for the job, but he isn't willing to go through all the ugliness necessary to get there (plus the fact that if he DID try it, Judy would probably hang him by his toes from a Vermont maple tree until he came to his senses).

[JDPriestly]

167. True.

[Betty Karlson]

168. Sounds very believable.

Although, to be fair, in the primary season MOST efforts are about stopping candidates from the same party.

[billhicks76]

169. Prepare For Jeb Bush Dirty Tricks

Don't expect Hillary to expose.

[deutsey]

172. I'm very happy to see the response Sanders' message is getting

However, I'm very leery of "the political establishment" (I would amend that to "socio-economic establishment", which the political establishment serves).

Their arsenal contains many weapons for derailing and thwarting political leaders they see as posing threats to their interests.

[beam me up scottie]

175. This thread is Hillarious.

HC supporters protesteth too mucheth.

[BeanMusical]

237. Absolutely!

Can you pass the butter please?

[DCBob]

176. Scared in the sense if he somehow miraculously wins the Dem nomination, we could lose the WH.

Bernie is a risky candidate. I think almost any well known Democrat would have a better chance of winning than Bernie Sanders.

[TheFarS1de]

177. Nice try ...

..any tactic to discredit him at any turn . Try a few more angles . This forum stinks of tribal warfare .

[DCBob]

178. Just trying to clarify how many Democrats feel about Bernie.

I think its accurate.

[TheFarS1de]

180. Nope ...

one can only truly speak for oneself . Anything else is just conjecture .

[DCBob]

181. Right... I guess you forgot this was a discussion board.

[Babel_17]

191. Miraculously winning the nomination generates enormous buzz for the genereal election

Just my opinion of course. And I also think that if the Sanders campaign can defeat the HRC campaign it's, almost by definition of what we need, a good thing that it did.

[DCBob]

192. Valid point.

But the buzz might not translate to votes. Im not so sure "the more you know about Bernie the more you will like him" will work with most voters in this country.

[Babel_17]

194. A legitimate concern

That's "the undiscovered country" we'll be venturing into. But as the next several months unfold we'll be getting a lot of experience with how Sanders resonates with the country at large. So it remains to be seen but it's not like we've already bet the rent on a longshot.

[MrMickeysMom]

233. Reference?

[Teamster Jeff]

193. No doubt in my mind the DLC leadership/Third Way types would prefer a Republican over Bernie Sanders

The gravy train would continue. So would the dog and pony show.

[MisterP]

224. ever since Lamont vs. Lieberman they showed that they DID prefer Pubs over someone too lib

for years and years they ranted and raved about how Nader had caused everything up to the Lebanon War (of course the facts say Gore would've won FL anyway had they not blocked the recount): then they turn around and throw Cegelis, Lamont, McKinney, Halter, Romanoff, Sestak, Grayson, Kucinich, Buono, Lutrin, Sykes, Weiland, etc., etc., etc.--because they can and because there's no more ways to punish them; in fact they get the same money whether the candidate wins or loses
they were RELIEVED when we lost the Supermajority because then the pressure to pass laws was off (especially laws that might scare off the big donors)
they got a good thing going and they're not gonna ALLOW the mere voters to spoil all that--their attitude has always been summed up by Brecht:

the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

[ChiciB1]

196. What IS Really Sad AND Very Upsetting Is The Reality

that "we the people" who may ACTUALLY decide Bernie Sanders is who we want could possibly get a SMACK DOWN from TPTB!

So much for a REAL DEMOCRACY -- NOT! What country is this???? Oh yeah, the one who SPREADS DEMOCRACY to other countries!!

[Thinkingabout]

202. Democracy will win the primary. I have looked at the endorsements by the Congressional members, 118

in current members and 15 in past members have endorsed Hillary. So far, Bernie has not gotten any endorsements from the Congressional members, these are people who have worked in Congress and it causes me concern they do not have confidence in Bernie. For all who would like to see Hillary drop out of the race, if she does there are plenty of other candidates who can join the race and vacuum the support currently going to Hillary.

[Smarmie Doofus]

203. They were going to ignore him. Their consuitants, media gurus and buds in the industry so advised.

But when he's pulling in 25,000 to 30,000 (PEOPLE; not dollars) a pop ... an entire industry is at risk.

Get Biden! Call Gore!

The "other side" hasn't figured even that out yet. They are cautiously ( *cautiously*) optimistic that Sanders is a weaker target than Clinton.

But one can hear the anxiety even in THEIR commentary: "Hey.... we might not be able to CONTROL this thing."

It might be time to "change the subject".

[lewebley3]

211. Sanders is a Mcgovern candidate but a loser

[Smarmie Doofus]

216. McGovern never drew these kinds of crowds and he finished a relatively....

... distant second to the ( native New Englander) establishment candidate, Muskie, in NH.



Sanders is going to *annihilate* Clinton in the NH primary. (To use one of her infamously famous terms.)

*IF* SHE HASN'T ALREADY DROPPED OUT BY THEN.

(BTW: in 1972.... middle class people still had money to send their kids to ( private) college; belonged, quite often, to unions, and had extra money stashed away for retirement. )

[Octafish]

221. The debates haven't even started.

By the time they debates are done, a lot of candidates will wish they had gone along with the plan for more.

Too late, though, the nation as a whole will have heard Bernie themselves, even with the virtual news blackout on the guy's appearances, rally crowds... Oh. And positions.

[lewebley3]

243. 65%& Dem in Nh want Hillary to be the nominee: American is not voting for a socialist

If Hillary doesn't get the nomination we are going to have Trump for
Pres.

[whatchamacallit]

217. So sayeth Lewebley the third

[Adrahil]

219. So how exactly would Sanders "derail the gravy train?"

Bernie is an army on one, when it comes to actual an actual poltical movement. To REALLY make a difference, there needs to be down ticket candidates, organization, and MONEY to build a real movment that can make a difference. Where is it? As it is, Bernie drawing crowds, and ruffling some rpfeathers, but his organization is miniscule, and it had not depth.

I saw the occupy movement rise and collapse. This feels awfully familiar.... There is a lot of enthusiam, but not real meat behind it. To suceed as a mivement, it will take much, much more than Bernie.

We'll see how this all shakes out over the next year. I'll be intested in seeing the results.

[Octafish]

220. The desperation will disappear the second they must ''back'' Bernie Sanders officially.

They have to in order to co-opt the Party candidate.

whatchamacallit, the Party big wigs are in for a big surprise.

Bernie can't be bought.

[gwheezie]

235. Anyone with a logical thought knows

Whoever the dem nominee is, they have a slim chance of winning the GE. Declaring which dem can beat the GOP IMHO is just delusional at this point. It's going to be a tough fight.
I'm an HRC supporter but early on I consistently posted that I wanted Bernie and who ever else to run for the nomination. I've seen how easy it is to derail a front runner and I still think for what ever reason if HRC goes down in flames during the campaign we better have another candidate or 2 that garners enthusiasm among dems.
I'm a realist and Hillary is not my sister, I can easily switch support because I want a dem in the WH. I supported HRC in 08 but immediately supported Obama when he won the nomination fair and square. If Bernie is the nominee it will be because he ran a better campaign and had more support among dems. I'm not going to get mad about it, I'll campaign for him.
So as a supporter of HRC. I'm neither afraid or angry. And be honest Bernie supporters, if Bernie falters or has to drop out if the race for any reason, aren't glad Hillary and OMalley are in this? We're going to vote for somebody.
I'm an not wildly impressed with our dem choices anyway but HRC has a slight edge for me because of her decades long fight for women. And I like her. And I know this is silly for some but of all the people running, I'd love to have lunch with her. To me she is relateable.

[MrMickeysMom]

246. Including the influence last night with that often asshat, Bill Maher...

Subtle blowing off is something easy to pick up.

[hifiguy]

248. It's simple. He is the status quo's worst nightmare.

An uncorruptible man who champions justice.

[AikidoSoul]

256. Kick and Rec

Please do something to get Bernie to get the best security possible.

An entire team with the skills demonstrated in movies starring Wesley Snipes and Matt Damon (Bourne series) would be a good thing for starters.