Sanders Endorses Clinton
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-07-2016, 03:52 PM (This post was last modified: 12-07-2016 03:55 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 03:07 PM)Old Man Marsh Wrote:  Vote Herp, not derp. Big Grin

The Celebration of the Lizard.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
12-07-2016, 04:34 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 02:08 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(12-07-2016 01:40 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Yes, it's not a hard concept to understand. When actively running against someone you maximise on the flaws. But once a nomination has been secured it is tradition to get in line behind the Nominee, only a few times has this not been the case and it nearly always results in the party losing the election.
I think you misunderstood my post. My question was about the validity of their criticisms, not the motivation behind their endorsements. I'm aware that the loser of a presidential primary frequently ends up supporting his opponent.

(12-07-2016 01:40 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Anyone with half a brain knows that given the choice between Clinton and Trump Clinton is the sane choice if not the one most people wish was there.
There are millions of people who disagree with you there. Some of them are much smarter and much more educated than any of us can ever hope to be. Are you seriously trying to say that they're all stupid because they disagree with you on that point?

(12-07-2016 01:41 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  What I am saying people say things to appeal to the masses to get elected and it's expected -- I don't hold it against them when they lose.

In 2008 during that compaign Clinton repeatedly questioned Obama's experience and many other things. When it was clear he was the nominee she supported him. Again, I don't fault her for being pragmatic.
I do fault Bernie Sanders for it. He is someone who convinced regular, hard-working Americans to donate over $200m to his grassroots campaign by running on an anti-establishment, anti-lobbyism, anti-war, anti-TPP platform and by promising to fight against corruption and big money in politics. I expect that his endorsement of a candidate who stands for so much of what him and his supporters have been rallying against in the past will be seen as a major form of betrayal by many of them.

Well their biggest bit of stupidity would be lack of awareness of his well eloquated plan to preform this task. I don't get it as much of a news story at this point. He stated it early last July and a couple public times he wont run for a 3rd party or independent as he will want to fully endorse the democrat winner to avoid letting some far right winged republican from becoming president. That in his words was his promise he said he was going to keep.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/31/s...ation.html

He specifically said ...but he's not living up to some false idol status to some ideal of other people that isn't his ideal. So that makes folks mad and why Deities are such better idols, they generally fall in line with your beliefs.

I'm not sure what is to fault.. You fault someone for something they're 100% clear about yet people believe something else. Isn't there a Sun Tzu lesson about who is to blame for that?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
12-07-2016, 04:57 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 02:08 PM)Vosur Wrote:  I do fault Bernie Sanders for it. He is someone who convinced regular, hard-working Americans to donate over $200m to his grassroots campaign by running on an anti-establishment, anti-lobbyism, anti-war, anti-TPP platform and by promising to fight against corruption and big money in politics. I expect that his endorsement of a candidate who stands for so much of what him and his supporters have been rallying against in the past will be seen as a major form of betrayal by many of them.

At this point those $200M won't get him the Democratic candidacy, so what's a smart fellow to do?

- Running as an independant would split the vote against Hillary and pretty much ensure a Trump victory. Not something I expect most of Bernie's supporters would consider value for their money.

- Not endorsing Hillary or asking his voters to stay home would help Trump, though maybe not enough, and would get Bernie and his supporters nothing but disdain.

- Using his endorsement as leverage to get some of his planks in the Democrat platform in some form or other ensures that the money and campaigning aren't a complete waste, or worse, counterproductive. Bernie and his supporters don't get everything they wanted but they get more than nothing.

I know that you don't like Hillary but let's be honest here, he's just doing what any savvy politician will do to try and salvage something from his defeat. This is neither unusual nor unexpected.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
12-07-2016, 05:08 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 01:59 PM)Mr. Boston Wrote:  I only hope Clinton has the good sense to give him either the VP nod or a cabinet position.

Bernie strikes me as too independant to be good in either of those roles. Influence on the VP selection would be more useful. That way he could boost a younger member of his supporters into a position of significant power. Same goes for cabinet positions.

Might be smart politics for Hillary to offer him the VP with the understanding that he's going to decline.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
12-07-2016, 05:38 PM (This post was last modified: 12-07-2016 06:06 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 04:34 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Well their biggest bit of stupidity would be lack of awareness of his well eloquated plan to preform this task. I don't get it as much of a news story at this point. He stated it early last July and a couple public times he wont run for a 3rd party or independent as he will want to fully endorse the democrat winner to avoid letting some far right winged republican from becoming president. That in his words was his promise he said he was going to keep.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/31/s...ation.html

He specifically said ...but he's not living up to some false idol status to some ideal of other people that isn't his ideal. So that makes folks mad and why Deities are such better idols, they generally fall in line with your beliefs.

I'm not sure what is to fault.. You fault someone for something they're 100% clear about yet people believe something else. Isn't there a Sun Tzu lesson about who is to blame for that?
I don't consider that an accurate assessment of what happened. Sanders never promised to "fully endorse" the winner of the Democratic primary because the word "endorse" carries a particular meaning in the political sphere. He curiously enough found himself in a similar situation back in the 90s. His thoughts on the race back then were similar to his views on the current one, but that didn't stop him from writing the following piece about his unenthusiastic "support" for Bill Clinton:


"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton’s politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I’m a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I’ve decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps “support” is too strong a word. I’m planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I’m kidding. You think I’m exaggerating. Well, I’m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I’m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country—for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."

(12-07-2016 04:57 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  At this point those $200M won't get him the Democratic candidacy, so what's a smart fellow to do?

- Running as an independant would split the vote against Hillary and pretty much ensure a Trump victory. Not something I expect most of Bernie's supporters would consider value for their money.

- Not endorsing Hillary or asking his voters to stay home would help Trump, though maybe not enough, and would get Bernie and his supporters nothing but disdain.

- Using his endorsement as leverage to get some of his planks in the Democrat platform in some form or other ensures that the money and campaigning aren't a complete waste, or worse, counterproductive. Bernie and his supporters don't get everything they wanted but they get more than nothing.

I know that you don't like Hillary but let's be honest here, he's just doing what any savvy politician will do to try and salvage something from his defeat. This is neither unusual nor unexpected.
Oh, I agree that it's a smart move under the given circumstances. However, I have my doubts that people voted for him because they wanted someone with political savvy. Many Sanders supporters saw him as the leader of a once-in-a-lifetime political revolution, someone who would fight for what is right even with the entire establishment against him. Someone who would fight for the common people and not be beholden to special interests. They certainly didn't want a spineless opportunist who abandons the revolution as soon as it becomes politically convenient to do so by endorsing one of its worst enemies for president. The Democratic platform doesn't dictate Clinton's actions as president, by the way, so I'm skeptical of its pragmatic value.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
12-07-2016, 06:06 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
Hilary is a terrible compromise. Still voting Trump is the height of irresponsibility and recklessness. Even just for sanity's sake, who wants to see Trump's mug on the news every other day for the next 4 years?

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like tomilay's post
12-07-2016, 06:15 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
I really do not want Hillary Clinton as our president. She is a war criminal, a republican, and a liar who only tells people what is current with the times so she can get ahead. Even during her job in law, what ever that job was again when she got fired years ago, she was seen as unethical and a liar by her boss.

She is involved in more scandals than any other politician in U.S history and I trust nothing she says as being truthful. I will be voting for Jill Stein only because if any third party gets enough votes during an election and polls consistently at 15% or so across the nation than it will open up the door for a third party to be taken seriously during the next election cycle.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Shadow Fox's post
12-07-2016, 06:25 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 05:38 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(12-07-2016 04:34 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Well their biggest bit of stupidity would be lack of awareness of his well eloquated plan to preform this task. I don't get it as much of a news story at this point. He stated it early last July and a couple public times he wont run for a 3rd party or independent as he will want to fully endorse the democrat winner to avoid letting some far right winged republican from becoming president. That in his words was his promise he said he was going to keep.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/31/s...ation.html

He specifically said ...but he's not living up to some false idol status to some ideal of other people that isn't his ideal. So that makes folks mad and why Deities are such better idols, they generally fall in line with your beliefs.

I'm not sure what is to fault.. You fault someone for something they're 100% clear about yet people believe something else. Isn't there a Sun Tzu lesson about who is to blame for that?
That's not an accurate assessment of what happened. Sanders didn't ever promise to "fully endorse" the winner of the Democratic primary. The word "endorse" carries a particular meaning in the political sphere. Sanders actually found himself in a similar situation back in the 90s. His thoughts on the race at the time weren't too different from his views on the current race. Yet, that didn't stop him from writing the following piece about his unenthusiastic support for Bill Clinton:


"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton’s politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I’m a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I’ve decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps “support” is too strong a word. I’m planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I’m kidding. You think I’m exaggerating. Well, I’m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I’m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country—for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."

(12-07-2016 04:57 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  At this point those $200M won't get him the Democratic candidacy, so what's a smart fellow to do?

- Running as an independant would split the vote against Hillary and pretty much ensure a Trump victory. Not something I expect most of Bernie's supporters would consider value for their money.

- Not endorsing Hillary or asking his voters to stay home would help Trump, though maybe not enough, and would get Bernie and his supporters nothing but disdain.

- Using his endorsement as leverage to get some of his planks in the Democrat platform in some form or other ensures that the money and campaigning aren't a complete waste, or worse, counterproductive. Bernie and his supporters don't get everything they wanted but they get more than nothing.

I know that you don't like Hillary but let's be honest here, he's just doing what any savvy politician will do to try and salvage something from his defeat. This is neither unusual nor unexpected.
Oh, I agree that it's a smart move under the given circumstances. However, I have my doubts that people voted for him because they wanted someone with political savvy. Many Sanders supporters saw him as the leader of a once-in-a-lifetime political revolution, someone who would fight for what is right even with the entire establishment against him. Someone who would fight for the common people and not be beholden to special interests. They most certainly didn't want spineless opportunist who abandons the revolution as soon as it becomes politically convenient to do so by endorsing one of its worst enemies for president. The Democratic platform doesn't dictate Clinton's actions as president, by the way, so I'm skeptical of its pragmatic value.

I don't know what phrasing of special significance is out there that would matter to you. So saying the word endorse is seemingly that relevant to you, even though every logical conclusion leads it to be possible. Even months ago he was stated he will do everything in his power working to not let Trump or Cruz win and working will support Hilary to do that.

How anyone can interpret that as any lacking plans of doing this exact pattern in the case of a non-nomination for Sanders in this race is focused in some irrational miscued patterns of the past. It's simple to have expected this as the outcome. If he's going to do all in his power.. I don't know what in the world you think would follow these recent patterns.

You don't seem to want to follow American political obvious outcomes... and I'm not exactly sure why. You carry a tone and make statements of surprise of some situations in this outcome with Hillary, You were confused why Trump would say he will debate Bernie before the California voter to take it back days later(which several aware posters like girly were clear ahead how that was gonna happen,) and this kinda echoed some other details of the 3rd party waves. Maybe because you expect different based on European politics but these American political sphere events are nothing short of the obvious. Trump actually winning and not just being hot early and fizzling to lose to Rubio/Bush/Cruz is the only major not as easily expected event. Maybe you expect more seemingly rational behavior, but that just isn't sensible to expect.

Like you may say the 3rd parties get no respect in voters because they look silly but the real, which is clear as day again on twitter today if you look up the trending jill stein or responses to people talking about how Johnson is higher than Trump in 18-29 year olds the frequent prevailing is that, oh they just support them because they want Weed to be legal. That joke/stereotype penetrates the common perception of these groups... This is the mentality of many people who in the voting block had no clue or only passing vibes mid-way in the voting season of who Bernie Sanders was. It's that, and just the notion of "throwing a vote away" that makes people give them zero respect. They don't know any policy position they didn't know they had a convention with a guy stripping on stage or who John McAfee is even if they have had McAfee antivirus on their computer for a decade. (now maybe the mocking of those events was more muffs i dont remember but it was pointed out in those threads) The green party is the weed party and the libertarians are let guys die in the street with all the drugs party to so many who never think a step beyond that level about them.

That could be shaven off as a perception if Johnson and/or Stein get the 15% in a bunch of polls to get a network to let them debate in the Hilary vs Trump scenario. Now if Sanders had endorsed the GreenParty and Stein that would certainly happened, but if anyone is disappointed he didn't they weren't following the pattern he had held himself up to this entire presidential run he had starting with that windy day outside he announced his candidacy and people chuckled, look at that silly old man.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-07-2016, 06:33 PM
Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 01:30 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I don't take much stock in what any politician says during the primaries against their opposition. He was trying to win votes. I'm not at all fussed by it and wasn't then.

Everything he said was true. Do you disagree with what he said?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes KUSA's post
12-07-2016, 06:41 PM
RE: Sanders Endorses Clinton
(12-07-2016 06:33 PM)KUSA Wrote:  
(12-07-2016 01:30 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I don't take much stock in what any politician says during the primaries against their opposition. He was trying to win votes. I'm not at all fussed by it and wasn't then.

Everything he said was true. Do you disagree with what he said?

How is that relevant to the point? He made a political argument and he's now making a political decision, similar to the Republicans who actually endorsed Trump or their opponent in every single election.

This is what happens: when you are running for office you demonize the opponent and when you are out of the race you talk about how great he (or she) is and how you take it all back and you never really meant it.

Just another day in political paradise.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: