SANDERS 2016

CampeadorOh and did I mention Sanders is also a sexist and mysoginist? (Gasp!)

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-sexism-bernie-sanders-215375

It's a difficult thing for leftists to have to take their own medicine.

Sanders is done, maybe that pathetic classified email defense of Clinton at the debate was not that well advised. Clinton makes Sanders look like a political novice, which is bad. As much as I despise Sanders and his policies, on a personal level he is not so rotten and corrupt as the Clinton machine. Somewhere inside him I think there is a genuine (albeit misguided) feeling of wanting to make things better for all through imposition of socialism. Clinton is the definition of pure power-hungry corruption.

The question I have, and I means this in all honesty, is would you Sanders supporters vote for Clinton in the general election knowing that she hoodwinked your candidate out of the nomination? Or will you fall back on that "lesser of two evils" bullshit?

HP123Not going to lie I agree with a lot of what Sanders has to say. He's saying all of the right things and he seems like he has the right mindset. The problem is that his solution of raising taxes to 90% is NOT the answer. Even if you took 100% of the wealthiest people in America's money it wouldn't even come close to fix the inequality. More government regulation is NOT the answer. Keep America a democracy.

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson

zezekinExcept that is not what he is planning to do at all???

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/28/chris-christie/chris-christie-says-bernie-sanderss-plan-raise-you/

HP123The article you provided shows that Bernie hasn't even released a proposed tax plan. That 90% number is pulled from an interview back in May. Okay, so say it isn't 90% does 80% sound better? The majority of your paycheck going to the government sound good? He's a self proclaimed socialist and he wants the government to control your money. Simple as that. Thank fucking god he won't win the primary.

S.J.WWait so saying "all the shouting in the world won't fix our systematic problem with gun violence". How the fuck is that sexist?

CampeadorThat sounds pretty sexist to me, insinuating that Hillary is shouting because she's a woman and therefore suffering from hysteria.

Essentially Sanders is still part of the entrenched, institutionalized, misogynistic white male culture that oppresses all women. He should be conscious of his words and how they are interpreted, and he also needs to check his white male privilege when addressing women. His comments simply demonstrate how Sanders too is part of the sexist patriarchy that oppresses women like Hillary.

You should know this being from the social justice crowd, I'm surprised at you. Time to dump Sanders, or risk being a sexist yourself.

S.J.WYou aren't that smart are you???

S.J.Whahahah you're literally trying too hard. Anyone who thinks Bernie saying shit about gun control and shouting is sexist is pretty dumb. Notice how feminists and "SJWs" aren't reacting to Bernie's statement with disgust??? Because Hilary is playing politics and trying to smear Bernie. And it's idiots like you who are lapping it up. No one on the left is buying it. Continue making false claims. And you can't really throw around saying Bernie is sexist when the two leaders of the GOP Trump and Carson are basically running on platforms of racism, xenophobia and other forms of hate trying to get elected.

HP123I'm sorry were you trying to make a point? Or did the diarrhea just slip out of your mouth on accident?

Campeador"Some Clinton allies pointed to the top ranks of Sanders’ campaign as the root of what they see as an insensitivity problem: Sanders’ campaign manager, communications director, field director, early state organizer, Iowa campaign coordinator and top strategists are all men"

“I found that very difficult,” said Kunin, the first female governor of Vermont and a former Bill Clinton administration appointee who is now serving as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton’s campaign. “Men can shout and Bernie is a very good shouter. But we’re women. Women raise their voices and it’s considered unseemly. We’re still subconsciously seeing women as different — Bernie should just be careful. To accuse a woman of shouting makes her unattractive.”


Between this and his writing about how women fantasize about being raped, I cannot see how he is not a sexist.

By the way, almost everyone on the left is buying it,

"An ABC/Washington Post poll showed 61 percent of Democratic women support Clinton, compared with 22 percent for Sanders."

or are you calling Democratic women stupid? You really are a sexist!

S.J.WOkay well firstly. Sanders is a declared democrat socialist. If you can't tell the difference between a socialist and a democrat socialist then you don't have the mental capacity to engage in a political discussion.

Secondly although Bernie hasn't proposed a tax plan yet. You can gauge a rough estimate of what it would look like using his statements.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Tax_Reform.htm

And you can also see what he is fighting against on his page.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/income-and-wealth-inequality/

Seriously, what Bernie is fighting for is pretty much what every other first world country in the world has. It's not he's some super progressive left wing socialist,etc,etc. He's literally just trying to make the US catch up to the rest of the developed world in offering free education, healthcare and a little bit more equality.

HP123Look at your references, bud. "using his statements" "what he's fighting against on his page". Feel free to look outside the box and use other references.

Funny to see even people from ontario are getting brainwashed as well. It's nice to know America's politics are so important to you, Mr. Canadian.

S.J.Whahahha, you're not the first person to use that insult. Sorry didn't know I was only allowed to be concerned with shit that went on in my country. Also hahahahah, you looked at my profile. Glad to know you're so concerned with me that you went on my profile. ;)You're a fucking joke. Those two brain cells must have worked extra hard to come up with such a witty comeback.

So if I'm not going to use Bernies statements to form my opinion on his tax plan, where am I meant to form my opinion from? Chris Christie or Trump??? How about Fox news???

And I'm hardly "brainwashed" fighting for free health care and education is hardly brainwashed. It's literally whatever ever other developed country in the world guarantees as a right regardless of income.

CampeadorThat sounds pretty sexist to me, insinuating that Hillary is shouting because she's a woman and therefore suffering from hysteria.

Essentially Sanders is still part of the entrenched, institutionalized, misogynistic white male culture that oppresses all women.

HP123Ahh it's people like you why I rarely come on newschoolers. Can't argue with stupid.

HP123The article you provided shows that Bernie hasn't even released a proposed tax plan. That 90% number is pulled from an interview back in May. Okay, so say it isn't 90% does 80% sound better? The majority of your paycheck going to the government sound good? He's a self proclaimed socialist and he wants the government to control your money. Simple as that. Thank fucking god he won't win the primary.

zezekinIt's not going to be 80% either. His estimated tax plan is going to be max 50% for the very top which isn't even that high historically speaking. Also he isn't a socialist he is a democratic socialist and there is a huge difference. He doesn't want the government controlling our money, but he does want to help the people who are having to pay 50k for college a semester and the people who are struggling to survive on what the current government gives them. And if you don't think that Bernie has the potential to win the whole thing then you are sadly mistaken.

CampeadorThat sounds pretty sexist to me, insinuating that Hillary is shouting because she's a woman and therefore suffering from hysteria.

Essentially Sanders is still part of the entrenched, institutionalized, misogynistic white male culture that oppresses all women. He should be conscious of his words and how they are interpreted, and he also needs to check his white male privilege when addressing women. His comments simply demonstrate how Sanders too is part of the sexist patriarchy that oppresses women like Hillary.

You should know this being from the social justice crowd, I'm surprised at you. Time to dump Sanders, or risk being a sexist yourself.

S.J.WYou literally thought a socialist and a democratic socialist were the same thing. If anyone is stupid here, it's you. I've provided sources and if you've looked at previous pages and in my other thread "bernie sanders will ruin America" I've also posted studies which finds that investing in education returns about 6 dollars for every dollar invested and I've also posted studies which find no correlation between crime and illegal immigration. I've also posted studies which find people on welfare do much better and get back on their feet much quicker than without welfare. So go back to whatever shit stain town you come from and try not to think too hard next time Trump says something racist based on no facts. :)

zezekinIt's not going to be 80% either. His estimated tax plan is going to be max 50% for the very top which isn't even that high historically speaking. Also he isn't a socialist he is a democratic socialist and there is a huge difference. He doesn't want the government controlling our money, but he does want to help the people who are having to pay 50k for college a semester and the people who are struggling to survive on what the current government gives them. And if you don't think that Bernie has the potential to win the whole thing then you are sadly mistaken.

HP123nah he won't even win primary

_Fluffy_https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_for_the_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016

CampeadorExplain why this matters.

The Clinton campaign is right, all you Sanders supporter are sexists.

CampeadorExplain why this matters.

The Clinton campaign is right, all you Sanders supporter are sexists.

AKhoodratBut any way around 1980 we started lowering taxes for the top tax bracket, money started to enter politics and middle class wages started to stagnate as corporations focused on earnings and keeping stock pries increasing as nominal wages decreased. Now we have a top tax bracket tax rate of 35% and most people at the top aren't paying that rate but a capital gains tax of 15% or lower on most of their income. Guess what? 35% is one of the lowest rates the top have payed in history, from 1953 to 1961 taxes on the top were legitimately 90% (That just happens to be in the middle of our great prosperity). An socialist democrats were not responsible for that rate of taxation, it was Eisenhower and his vice president Nixon who were in charge of the country, REPUBLICANS, so if you think raising the tax rate to 90% on the top earning Americans is ridiculous think again. Personally I think 90% is unnecessary, but 50% is a perfectly legitimate goal to raise taxes to on the top earners, after all I believe economist Arthur Laffer would agree with his Laffer curve that suggests the ideal tax rate is 50%.

S.J.WYou literally thought a socialist and a democratic socialist were the same thing. If anyone is stupid here, it's you. I've provided sources and if you've looked at previous pages and in my other thread "bernie sanders will ruin America" I've also posted studies which finds that investing in education returns about 6 dollars for every dollar invested and I've also posted studies which find no correlation between crime and illegal immigration. I've also posted studies which find people on welfare do much better and get back on their feet much quicker than without welfare. So go back to whatever shit stain town you come from and try not to think too hard next time Trump says something racist based on no facts. :)

HP123This bitch has been on welfare for over 12 years. 12 YEARS. She says there's no point in working she feels comfortable with what she receives from the government. I don't think you people realize where your tax money is going. hahahaha and that idiot thinks welfare is working.

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson

HP123This bitch has been on welfare for over 12 years. 12 YEARS. She says there's no point in working she feels comfortable with what she receives from the government. I don't think you people realize where your tax money is going. hahahaha and that idiot thinks welfare is working.

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EerZrU10NeI

HP123Welfare makes people do better and it gets them back on their feet? You sound delusional. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFv-jYCiJvI

onenerdykid

.MASSHOLE.the devils advocate would argue that their constituents would be happier with these individuals as President and put their time and effort into that.

Also, the question is how important are these issues that are being voted upon? Some issues won't require every single senator to be there since the majority stance is most likely well known.

HP123This bitch has been on welfare for over 12 years. 12 YEARS. She says there's no point in working she feels comfortable with what she receives from the government. I don't think you people realize where your tax money is going. hahahaha and that idiot thinks welfare is working.

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EerZrU10NeI

CampeadorOh and did I mention Sanders is also a sexist and mysoginist? (Gasp!)

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-sexism-bernie-sanders-215375

It's a difficult thing for leftists to have to take their own medicine.

Sanders is done, maybe that pathetic classified email defense of Clinton at the debate was not that well advised. Clinton makes Sanders look like a political novice, which is bad. As much as I despise Sanders and his policies, on a personal level he is not so rotten and corrupt as the Clinton machine. Somewhere inside him I think there is a genuine (albeit misguided) feeling of wanting to make things better for all through imposition of socialism. Clinton is the definition of pure power-hungry corruption.

The question I have, and I means this in all honesty, is would you Sanders supporters vote for Clinton in the general election knowing that she hoodwinked your candidate out of the nomination? Or will you fall back on that "lesser of two evils" bullshit?

slugworthFALSE CLAIM FALSE CLAIM FLASE CLAIM

AKhoodratIf any of you think that wealth inequality is not one the greatest if not the greatest problem in America right now your are either sadly uninformed or quite simply in denial. The last time we ha this great amount of wealth inequality was right before the great depression. You know what happened after the great depression? We elected a socialist leader, FDR, who went on to become likely the most influential and popular presidents in history, elected to four terms (still think Bernie is unelectable?). After his socialist reforms America went on to go through a period in american economic history entitled "the great prosperity" from 1947-1977. Do you know why it was called that? Because we had the largest middle class in the world, wages were rising for the middle class and the American dream was alive and well, well that is for white people, we still had a lot of work to do in gaining civil rights for all people and we have quite a bit of work to do today.

But any way around 1980 we started lowering taxes for the top tax bracket, money started to enter politics and middle class wages started to stagnate as corporations focused on earnings and keeping stock pries increasing as nominal wages decreased. Now we have a top tax bracket tax rate of 35% and most people at the top aren't paying that rate but a capital gains tax of 15% or lower on most of their income. Guess what? 35% is one of the lowest rates the top have payed in history, from 1953 to 1961 taxes on the top were legitimately 90% (That just happens to be in the middle of our great prosperity). An socialist democrats were not responsible for that rate of taxation, it was Eisenhower and his vice president Nixon who were in charge of the country, REPUBLICANS, so if you think raising the tax rate to 90% on the top earning Americans is ridiculous think again. Personally I think 90% is unnecessary, but 50% is a perfectly legitimate goal to raise taxes to on the top earners, after all I believe economist Arthur Laffer would agree with his Laffer curve that suggests the ideal tax rate is 50%.

And if your still thinking "so what, these people worked hard to get their money" I'm sure a lot of them did work very hard, but don't think that them making all this money doesn't effect you. With the alarming rate that money is involved with politics, we are all effected politicians are listening to corporate lobbyists, not you and me. Our democracy is threatened right now, but it is not threatened by Bernie Sanders, it is threatened by corporate america and wall street who are buying up Washington through Citizens United. This is a great video to illustrate the magnitude of wealth inequality we are experiencing:
https://www.newschoolers.com/videos/watch/791282/9-Out-Of-10-Americans-Are-Completely-Wrong-About-This-Mind-Blowing-Fact

AKhoodratIf any of you think that wealth inequality is not one the greatest if not the greatest problem in America right now your are either sadly uninformed or quite simply in denial. The last time we ha this great amount of wealth inequality was right before the great depression. You know what happened after the great depression? We elected a socialist leader, FDR, who went on to become likely the most influential and popular presidents in history, elected to four terms (still think Bernie is unelectable?). After his socialist reforms America went on to go through a period in american economic history entitled "the great prosperity" from 1947-1977. Do you know why it was called that? Because we had the largest middle class in the world, wages were rising for the middle class and the American dream was alive and well, well that is for white people, we still had a lot of work to do in gaining civil rights for all people and we have quite a bit of work to do today.

But any way around 1980 we started lowering taxes for the top tax bracket, money started to enter politics and middle class wages started to stagnate as corporations focused on earnings and keeping stock pries increasing as nominal wages decreased. Now we have a top tax bracket tax rate of 35% and most people at the top aren't paying that rate but a capital gains tax of 15% or lower on most of their income. Guess what? 35% is one of the lowest rates the top have payed in history, from 1953 to 1961 taxes on the top were legitimately 90% (That just happens to be in the middle of our great prosperity). An socialist democrats were not responsible for that rate of taxation, it was Eisenhower and his vice president Nixon who were in charge of the country, REPUBLICANS, so if you think raising the tax rate to 90% on the top earning Americans is ridiculous think again. Personally I think 90% is unnecessary, but 50% is a perfectly legitimate goal to raise taxes to on the top earners, after all I believe economist Arthur Laffer would agree with his Laffer curve that suggests the ideal tax rate is 50%.

CampeadorCalm down there half wit.

_Fluffy_Is that your best attempt?

Pitiful.

CampeadorAnd throughout the whole thing you fail to mention how working six months out of year for the government is a good thing. Oh, I'm sorry, because it's "fair".

Nice sugar coated history lesson on FDR you got there, I can see the public school brainwashing continues unabated. The New Deal was a socialist failure, and we are still paying the price for FDR's social experiments. To give credit to FDR for the post-war recovery is ridiculous at best. Perhaps the fact that the world was in ruins, and the only economic powerhouse was the United States may have had everything to do with it. Our ability to export (and produce domestically with no foreign competition) drove manufacturing, and made blue-collar workers middle class.

In 1980 the United States was facing a massive recession, Reagan's policies boosted the fastest and one of the most aggressive recoveries in US history. The policies of Calvin Coolidge had similar effect. The policies of FDR? Not a chance. By the way, money has always been in politics, what kind of drugged dream-state do you live in where this started in 1980?

The changes in wages and employment have are related to supply and demand, and the negotiation of bad trade deals with nations that manipulate their currencies.

Also, you know damn well that no one actually paid the 90% tax rate, that is a myth perpetuated by the left. The ways around it were numerous and easy.

As far as the 50% tax rate, Arthur Laffer's curve suggests no such thing, you have a severely flawed understanding of it (or thought the simplified diagram in your high school econ class was to be taken literally). Laffer's curve generally favors lower taxation across the board as a way to stimulate growth (and I find it quite ironic that you reference one of the thinkers behind supply-side economics, I mean trickle-down, gasp!). Laffer was one of Reagan's chief economic advisers.

Also an interesting piece on how FDR's policies prolonged the Great Depression:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123353276749137485

CampeadorAnd yet you failed on the most basic part, giving an answer to what should be an easy question, since you attribute some sort of importance to endorsements from celebrities and other politicians (from the same party).

Sanders is done, he's finished. He handed over the most potent weapon he had during the debate, in exchange for ten seconds of applause, a sound-bite, and a nice hand-shake from Hillary (who couldn't help but smile ear to ear at Sanders' naivety). His crowds are down everywhere, and he's running out of things that he can promise to give his supporters for free.

CampeadorAs far as the 50% tax rate, Arthur Laffer's curve suggests no such thing, you have a severely flawed understanding of it (or thought the simplified diagram in your high school econ class was to be taken literally). Laffer's curve generally favors lower taxation across the board as a way to stimulate growth (and I find it quite ironic that you reference one of the thinkers behind supply-side economics, I mean trickle-down, gasp!). Laffer was one of Reagan's chief economic advisers.

onenerdykidFurthermore, most every viable economist (including Laffer) agrees that that current gap in the distribution of wealth is not leading to a healthy economy.

_Fluffy_its already lead to an unhealthy economy. We are witnessing the decline of Rome all over again.

With that in mind, I did a little google search and found an article that agrees with my perspective

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-30/following-ancient-romes-footsteps-moral-decay-rising-wealth-inequality

CampeadorSuch piss-poor understanding of Ancient Rome, that analysis is an embarrassment. Correlation is not causation, and the Rome of 216 B.C. is completely different from the Rome of 316 A.D. Furthermore, the definition of a citizen during the early Roman Republic was a very narrow category, in the late Roman Empire, the designation was very broad. Also, the late Empire was much wealthier overall than the early Republic.

Also that moron (Turchin) does not even realize that centurions were in fact paid, and paid substantially more than regular soldiers. Centurion officers were not taken from the Patrician class, they were enlisted men. It is truly embarrassing that he actually published some kind of book on Ancient Rome with such awful knowledge.

I would hardly call that an "article" but it's quite revealing that most of your information comes from half-baked blogs.

In fact, the fall of Rome came from a failure of leadership, and through a series of demagogues who "appealed to the people". There are far more parallels between Obama and the demagogues of ancient Rome. He has allowed the Fed to print money for the investor class (hence your wealth inequality) and has given the poor and stupid mob "bread and circus" (with Obama bread is a very broad category). He has also concentrated power unto himself, with a complacent and corrupt Republican Congress.

The inconvenient fact that you leftists cannot come to grips with, is that your "hope and change" president has been the best president in history for the wealthy elites.

_Fluffy_

SFBur posts suck

CampeadorThe inconvenient fact that you leftists cannot come to grips with, is that your "hope and change" president has been the best president in history for the wealthy elites.

CampeadorAnd yet you failed on the most basic part, giving an answer to what should be an easy question, since you attribute some sort of importance to endorsements from celebrities and other politicians (from the same party).

Sanders is done, he's finished. He handed over the most potent weapon he had during the debate, in exchange for ten seconds of applause, a sound-bite, and a nice hand-shake from Hillary (who couldn't help but smile ear to ear at Sanders' naivety). His crowds are down everywhere, and he's running out of things that he can promise to give his supporters for free.