Thoughts on Bernie Sanders?

[handymanshandle]

I like Bernie Sanders, I really hope he wins.

He's the best option for presidency. He's had the best record on LGBT rights, he's been very solid on where be stands on issues. While I have come to agree with @thekeemo about give Palestine a little room to coexist (like the 1967 borders). I still like Bernie on almost everything else.

[Hackentosher]

Daddy? I think it would be a good idea to break up the corruption in the 1%, I agree with a lot of his ideas for local reform, but I'm not sure how someone like that would handle foreign relations with other countries. 

[AyeJayKay]

His socialistic approach to economics would send the USA into a deep depression (just look at several European countries as examples and South American as well) and with the US going down would send the entire world into an economic frenzy.

 

Also, I don't actually like to make these comparisons but I thought it was funny when someone pointed out a particular German who blamed all the nation's problems on the 1%. Who also wanted to expand the governments powers.

[stconquest]

11 minutes ago, AyeJayKay said:

His socialistic approach to economics would send the USA into a deep depression (just look at several European countries as examples and South American as well) and with the US going down would send the entire world into an economic frenzy.

 

Also, I don't actually like to make these comparisons but I thought it was funny when someone pointed out a particular German who blamed all the nation's problems on the 1%. Who also wanted to expand the governments powers.

 

This.  Is this person's mind anywhere near reality?  Drawing irrelevant parallels between Bernie Sanders and Adolf Hitler; that is a whole level of stupidity unto it's own... yes it is... yes it is.

 

Hitler breathed in air, so do you....Muahahahaha!  Funny =/.

[AyeJayKay]

6 minutes ago, stconquest said:

 

This.  Is this person's mind anywhere near reality?  Drawing irrelevant parallels between Bernie Sanders and Adolf Hitler; that is a whole level of stupidity... yes it is... yes it is.

Indeed. However, more reasonable than the "omg Trump is Hitler!!!!!!~~~" idiotic comments liberal media loves to spew out.

[stconquest]

1 minute ago, AyeJayKay said:

Indeed. However, more adept than the "omg Trump is Hitler!!!!!!~~~" idiotic comments liberal media loves to spew out.

Let's read this thread now... nope, no mention of Trump being similar to Hitler.

 

Maybe you should think before posting shit.

[AyeJayKay]

2 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Let's read this thread now... nope, no mention of Trump being similar to Hitler.

 

Maybe you should think before posting shit.

Are you implying that this thread is under the context of liberal media? Or are you showing your inherent biases already?

 

I would say you should think too but I think you have but just can't.

[Omon_Ra]

16 hours ago, thekeemo said:

He has his evils (Pro-israel and guns).

But he is the lesser evil.

What he is proposing has worked and is working in Europe.

Yeah, I'm not big on his Israel stance; oddly enough I tend to agree with Trump's Israel position (isolationist/let them deal with it).

 

I like Bernie, especially his anti-Wall Street and campaign finance reform ideas. However, it bothers me that a quasi-independent is still in competition, yet NOBODY gave Ron Paul a chance. Yes, Paul had his crazy ideas, but so does Bernie, so did Obama, so did EVERY President running for office. People pick apart  'weaknesses' in a candidate like there are candidates that are strong in everything from foreign affairs, to economics, to executive tasks. Don't forget a President selects a cabinet for this very reason.

 

The issues that Bernie is bringing up are things I've been rambling on about to my friends/family for years, yet I was always looked at like I was a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist. I can't help but think that a LOT of his supporters are on a sort of bandwagon, kind of like Obama's supporters, where they just do what is the 'cool' thing. He still is my preferred candidate out of the rest, however I can't pin point it, but there's something I don't quite trust about him. I do like watching Hillary squirm every time he mentions the corporate backing of modern American politics.

 

1 minute ago, AyeJayKay said:

His socialistic approach to economics would send the USA into a deep depression (just look at several European countries as examples and South American as well) and with the US going down would send the entire world into an economic frenzy.

 

Also, I don't actually like to make these comparisons but I thought it was funny when someone pointed out a particular German who blamed all the nation's problems on the 1%.

America is already quasi-socialist. Income tax is basically a form of redistribution of wealth, then you have the ObamaCare shit-show of a health care system, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. Socialist-type programs are what got us out of the Great Depression. But times have changed, capitalism isn't really working any more; the exploitation of resources as means of profit is completely unsustainable. Peabody Energy, the US's biggest coal company, just filed for bankruptcy because they're too damn stubborn to diversify into other forms of energy. Their only focus is to keep pulling coal out of the ground and sell it to...well nobody anymore. The fact is we're in a post-modern world where the main commodities are no longer physical items, but rather ideas. Companies don't try to sell a specific object, they are now selling a brand/lifestyle. Look at the biggest companies in the past several years, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Their products are not tangible items, yet they are some of the wealthiest companies in the world. Even a company like Apple, who does make actual products, it's less about the device itself than the 'lifestyle' of Apple. If these types of companies maintain a capitalist mentality, their resource (us) will be exploited (already is) to its fullest extent. I do like capitalism, however there's no cut and dry economic system that works top-to-bottom. Who the fuck really cares what economic system we use/call it, just stop letting corporations run the whole damn show. And it's not like Bernie is the only person who has railed on against the 1%... And if you DON'T think there is a problem with the 1%, then you're part of the problem.

[stconquest]

1 minute ago, AyeJayKay said:

Are you implying that this thread is under the context of liberal media? Or are you showing your inherent biases already?

Your next post should be:  touche.  That or use the damn report button. 

[stconquest]

6 minutes ago, Omon_Ra said:

Yeah, I'm not big on his Israel stance; oddly enough I tend to agree with Trump's Israel position (isolationist/let them deal with it).

 

I like Bernie, especially his anti-Wall Street and campaign finance reform ideas. However, it bothers me that a quasi-independent is still in competition, yet NOBODY gave Ron Paul a chance. Yes, Paul had his crazy ideas, but so does Bernie, so did Obama, so did EVERY President running for office. People pick apart  'weaknesses' in a candidate like there are candidates that are strong in everything from foreign affairs, to economics, to executive tasks. Don't forget a President selects a cabinet for this very reason.

 

The issues that Bernie is bringing up are things I've been rambling on about to my friends/family for years, yet I was always looked at like I was a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist. I can't help but think that a LOT of his supporters are on a sort of bandwagon, kind of like Obama's supporters, where they just do what is the 'cool' thing. He still is my preferred candidate out of the rest, however I can't pin point it, but there's something I don't quite trust about him. I do like watching Hillary squirm every time he mentions the corporate backing of modern American politics.

 

- -

Consider it might not be a trust issue in terms of dishonesty.  Humans make mistakes, he is human.  He might win office.  He might make mistakes.  He might not be able to do what he promises.

 

His stances are forged in the precedence of his civil record.  They will not change unless someone can prove to him there is a better way.  ... and not many people in this world can. 

 

What I am saying is:  he is not dishonest.  The only risk of voting him in is that he will not be able to accomplish all he sets out to.  You know he will try because of his conviction.  Can you say that of ANY other front runner?

[Omon_Ra]

3 minutes ago, stconquest said:

-snip-

Fair enough. Of the main candidates left he's the one I'd be most comfortable with winning, but it doesn't mean I want to vote for him...if that makes any sense? There was one sound byte of his that kind of rubbed me the wrong way. It was during one of the debates (whichever one was just after Iowa) and he was saying how much he 'loved the Iowa caucus' and how they do things there. The caucus/primary system is just as much at fault for the shit show of American elections as the corporate influence; for him to not see that, or if he does, and just wanted to pander to the voters, is pretty disappointing. I wanted to vote for him in the NC primary, but I didn't get my registration changed in time (still Republican after trying to get ol' Ron the nomination). Come general election, even if he gets the Democratic nomination, I'll be voting Libertarian (unless it's Trump v Sanders, and it's terrifyingly close). If he had run as a true independent, I would have voted for him; though he never would have gotten to where he is now if he had. I really just want a viable third, or even fourth and fifth, party to exist. The Republicrat binary is counter-productive.

[dditty]

1 hour ago, Real_PhillBert said:

He has proposed increased taxes in just about every possible way. 

 

 

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-senator-bernie-sanderss-tax-proposals

 

You can support the new taxes or be against them, but in order to have a real discussion it's very important that we are honest about what the tax policies are.

 

But it is also important to note the ramifications of his tax plan. The average american will end up paying less per year because of government healthcare. It's not as simple as if taxes go up everyone will pay more. 

[stconquest]

16 minutes ago, Omon_Ra said:

Fair enough. Of the main candidates left he's the one I'd be most comfortable with winning, but it doesn't mean I want to vote for him...if that makes any sense? There was one sound byte of his that kind of rubbed me the wrong way. It was during one of the debates (whichever one was just after Iowa) and he was saying how much he 'loved the Iowa caucus' and how they do things there. The caucus/primary system is just as much at fault for the shit show of American elections as the corporate influence; for him to not see that, or if he does, and just wanted to pander to the voters, is pretty disappointing. I wanted to vote for him in the NC primary, but I didn't get my registration changed in time (still Republican after trying to get ol' Ron the nomination). Come general election, even if he gets the Democratic nomination, I'll be voting Libertarian (unless it's Trump v Sanders, and it's terrifyingly close). If he had run as a true independent, I would have voted for him; though he never would have gotten to where he is now if he had. I really just want a viable third, or even fourth and fifth, party to exist. The Republicrat binary is counter-productive.

After watching thousands of hours of debates and speeches over the years I can confidently say that you will never see a perfect political candidate.

 

Ron Paul was a breathe of fresh air during the 2008 election cycle.  I sure as hell did not agree with everything he said, but HE believed in his message.  I liked that about him the most.

 

Trump will not ever be president.  He is a celebrity with a horrendous social and financial past.  He will say and do just about anything for a sound bite.  Even if 15% of the population vote for him, it won't be enough.  People will turn out in droves just to reject his candidacy.  I feel sorry for the USA if he were to win.  If you think foreign relations were bad in the past, wait until a "pussy" like Trump tries to bully his way through deals with international officials.  Man is a loud mouth coward.  He really has no business in politics. 

 

"Dumb as a Trump" should be a meme.

 

What I have learned to listen for is where a candidates message is coming from;  how they rationalize their beliefs regarding what direction is best for the country in their mind.  I have been continually impressed with Sander's ability to deflect attacks.  No, he is not perfect; but he is damn good at it.  I have not read the "Daily News" article yet.  I hear they really tried to do a number on him for the upcoming NY primary.

 

BTW, I am not even a US citizen.  I live in Canada.  I just like to know what is going on.

 

Sanders is 251 delegates behind.  What if he wins NY?

[dditty]

35 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Consider it might not be a trust issue in terms of dishonesty.  Humans make mistakes, he is human.  He might win office.  He might make mistakes.  He might not be able to do what he promises.

 

His stances are forged in the precedence of his civil record.  They will not change unless someone can prove to him there is a better way.  ... and not many people in this world can. 

 

What I am saying is:  he is not dishonest.  The only risk of voting him in is that he will not be able to accomplish all he sets out to.  You know he will try because of his conviction.  Can you say that of ANY other front runner?

I could not agree more. If congress stays gridlocked none of the candidates will be able to accomplish anything, except maybe Sanders who has the most steadfast voting track record of them all. He also has the most experience working across the political divide - just last night he was talking about how it would be manageable to form a coalition with republicans on reducing the number of incarcerated persons because it would save tons of federal and state money. Whether or not you agree with all of his positions (and I disagree with free college for everyone) he is the most respectable candidate around and he means what he says.

[Real_PhillBert]

1 hour ago, stconquest said:

His tax plan is effectively saying:  Invest in your country.

 

Opposition says:  Give money to private entities.

 

What is there to understand?

 

9 minutes ago, dditty said:

But it is also important to note the ramifications of his tax plan. The average american will end up paying less per year because of government healthcare. It's not as simple as if taxes go up everyone will pay more. 

I said nothing good or bad about his tax policies, merely correcting the statement that he has proposed nothing other than corporate taxes. I will let people make their own decisions based on the real facts. Yes he does want to increase social spending and benefits across the board, but that does not change the simple fact that he wants to raise taxes.

[stconquest]

1 minute ago, dditty said:

I could not agree more. If congress stays gridlocked none of the candidates will be able to accomplish anything, except maybe Sanders who has the most steadfast voting track record of them all. He also has the most experience working across the political divide - just last night he was talking about how it would be manageable to form a coalition with republicans on reducing the number of incarcerated persons because it would save tons of federal and state money. Whether or not you agree with all of his positions (and I disagree with free college for everyone) he is the most respectable candidate around and he means what he says.

Last night's debate was decent.  I remember the question, something like:  How do you plan to release 1,000,000 prisoners? 

 

He believes in people.  He believes that if you support people, they will gain strength and maybe support you one day.  I like that.  Invest in the country.

[Omon_Ra]

I know there is never a perfect candidate, I didn't agree with everything Ron Paul thought, but his ability to separate his personal beliefs and the way a country should be managed is what I really liked.

 

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Sanders is 251 delegates behind.  What if he wins NT?

 

Don't forget Obama and Hillary were back and forth until the summer during his first run..so he still has a chance. Obviously a win would be ideal, but even a near dead split would be beneficial for him. Right now he's behind 53.1% to 39.3% in the RCP poll, March 18-30 it was 63% to 30.3%. He's making gains, if he can get the difference into the single digit percents I'd consider it a win. New York distributes its delegates proportionally, using some archaic system to determine this (http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/D-Math.phtml). WTF America, why can't we just vote and whoever gets the most votes wins. America is supposed to be the 'shining beacon of Democracy' yet we need multi-step formulas to determine the distribution of 'votes.'

[stconquest]

14 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

 

I said nothing good or bad about his tax policies, merely correcting the statement that he has proposed nothing other than corporate taxes. I will let people make their own decisions based on the real facts. Yes he does want to increase social spending and benefits across the board, but that does not change the simple fact that he wants to raise taxes.

I was not accusing you of anything.  I was just throwing out what his tax plan means to my ears.  I was sort of fishing to see if you hear something different. 

[thekeemo]

4 hours ago, Omon_Ra said:

Yeah, I'm not big on his Israel stance; oddly enough I tend to agree with Trump's Israel position (isolationist/let them deal with it).

 

I like Bernie, especially his anti-Wall Street and campaign finance reform ideas. However, it bothers me that a quasi-independent is still in competition, yet NOBODY gave Ron Paul a chance. Yes, Paul had his crazy ideas, but so does Bernie, so did Obama, so did EVERY President running for office. People pick apart  'weaknesses' in a candidate like there are candidates that are strong in everything from foreign affairs, to economics, to executive tasks. Don't forget a President selects a cabinet for this very reason.

Letting a very powerful country deal with its issue with a FAR less powerful country without oversight sounds like a horrible idea.

[cookiemelon]

communist

[flowalex]

 

 

I have a few problems with all of the candidates, but here is what I think about what is wrong with the plans that Sanders has suggested. I put each topic in a spoiler so it isn't a huge wall of text

1) Free health care

Spoiler

The single payer system couldn't be put in place without leaving Americans without healthcare while the transition happens, it wouldn't be able to take one simple move, but I remember hearing that Clinton tried to reform healthcare in the 80's with single payer and Obama also tried to use single payer for the ACA, Clintons proposal got vetoed and it got taken off of the ACA (possibly used as a negotiation point to get it to pass)[All Things Considered on the single payer system  http://www.npr.org/2016/01/22/464013732/bernie-sanders-revives-debate-over-single-payer-health-care]

2) Free college tuition

Spoiler

Free college tuition to public schools will cause an influx in students applying to public universities, which is already starting to happen with all universities in the US due to the Common App (Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/12/us/common-application-saturates-the-college-admissions-market-critics-say.html)  Also I remember reading that if the free college plan he proposed went through it would actually cost more than the predicated 75 Billion USD due to an influx of students who don't go to college because they can't afford it from the start, the numbers he uses are for current students in the US.  (Interesting article from Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-steinberg/a-critical-look-inside-be_b_9670808.html)

3) Problems he will have if he gets the nomination and elected president

Spoiler

If he gets the nomination, which I am not sure if he will because he calls himself a democratic socialist, which many older Americans find as a dirty word McCarthyism anyone?  I remember hearing a while back that they would rather vote for someone who was anything other than a socialist (http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/jan/29/jennifer-granholm/jennifer-granholm-says-americans-would-rather-elec/).  Once president he will have to push his plans through congress and a lot of what he does depends on who is in control of the house and senate (eg Republicans will not let any tax loopholes be closed and will not want to tax the rich)

If anyone wants my opinion on the other candidates feel free to message me and I will try to reply in a timely manner

Edited April 15, 2016 by flowalex
Fixed spoiler

[mbryant]

Feel the BERN 

[Omon_Ra]

10 hours ago, thekeemo said:

Letting a very powerful country deal with its issue with a FAR less powerful country without oversight sounds like a horrible idea.

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. If you mean Israel deal with Palestine without oversight, yes, that is a horrible idea. But America acting as a supporter/protector of Israel does nothing for our overall standing in the Middle East. We need to let them deal with their issues themselves and bring about more international scrutiny into their long list of human rights violations. Stop playing favorites with them and hold them accountable for their actions.

[thekeemo]

1 minute ago, Omon_Ra said:

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. If you mean Israel deal with Palestine without oversight, yes, that is a horrible idea. But America acting as a supporter/protector of Israel does nothing for our overall standing in the Middle East. We need to let them deal with their issues themselves and bring about more international scrutiny into their long list of human rights violations. Stop playing favorites with them and hold them accountable for their actions.

That kind of makes more sense. However I would like to see the USA defend international law by say taking action against agressors instead of just being a bystander but I see where you are coming from.

[Misanthrope]

16 hours ago, Real_PhillBert said:

He has proposed increased taxes in just about every possible way. 

 

 

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-senator-bernie-sanderss-tax-proposals

 

You can support the new taxes or be against them, but in order to have a real discussion it's very important that we are honest about what the tax policies are.

 

 

Yes there is an increase, and I don't fully agree with it but take a look, it looks like it affects the 1%ers the most with 99% of the country having 5 to 10% increase.

 

Saying he's proposing a tax raise across the board is a bit disingenuous: he's basically taxing just the reach. Most middle class would literally saving 40 to 50% of their income by not having to pay insurance premiums and college for example. So yes, but not really.