HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » "The GOP will savage...

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:39 AM

"The GOP will savagely attack Sanders" seems to be code-speak for

"Hillary is acceptable to the GOP"

And after her real record of wars, corporatism and self-serving triangulation -- I BELIEVE THEM!

If, however, they wish to revise their statement to allow that the GOP would also savagely oppose Hillary what then is left to make me abandon a candidate who is not saddled with wars, corporatism and self-serving triangulation?


Edited to add -- Considering the failed attempts to staunch Sanders' groundswell with claims he never was a civil rights activist, only appeals to whites, universal healthcare is unobtainable, taxes will be too high coming from within the Democratic party itself why is there any reason to believe the GOP will be able to stop him with, "Because SOCIALISM!"?

242 replies, 12863 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 242 replies Author Time Post
Reply "The GOP will savagely attack Sanders" seems to be code-speak for (Original post)
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 OP
Skinner Feb 2016 #1
7wo7rees Feb 2016 #3
shawn703 Feb 2016 #5
Adrahil Feb 2016 #10
shawn703 Feb 2016 #16
Adrahil Feb 2016 #18
chervilant Feb 2016 #65
marions ghost Feb 2016 #82
libdem4life Feb 2016 #188
marions ghost Feb 2016 #199
libdem4life Feb 2016 #218
marions ghost Feb 2016 #240
libdem4life Feb 2016 #242
6chars Feb 2016 #226
libdem4life Feb 2016 #227
6chars Feb 2016 #228
libdem4life Feb 2016 #230
Adrahil Feb 2016 #191
RoccoR5955 Feb 2016 #35
Adrahil Feb 2016 #37
RoccoR5955 Feb 2016 #41
Adrahil Feb 2016 #48
RoccoR5955 Feb 2016 #54
Adrahil Feb 2016 #62
indigoth Feb 2016 #75
Adrahil Feb 2016 #108
PyaarRevolution Feb 2016 #117
Adrahil Feb 2016 #161
beedle Feb 2016 #127
Adrahil Feb 2016 #162
RoccoR5955 Feb 2016 #139
Adrahil Feb 2016 #195
A Simple Game Feb 2016 #176
Adrahil Feb 2016 #217
beedle Feb 2016 #219
A Simple Game Feb 2016 #220
Perogie Feb 2016 #91
Adrahil Feb 2016 #101
Perogie Feb 2016 #114
noiretextatique Feb 2016 #151
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #94
Adrahil Feb 2016 #105
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #119
liberal_at_heart Feb 2016 #124
Adrahil Feb 2016 #136
questionseverything Feb 2016 #177
Adrahil Feb 2016 #194
questionseverything Feb 2016 #235
JDPriestly Feb 2016 #204
chervilant Feb 2016 #110
Adrahil Feb 2016 #137
chervilant Feb 2016 #154
Adrahil Feb 2016 #158
chervilant Feb 2016 #178
Aerows Feb 2016 #138
chervilant Feb 2016 #156
Adrahil Feb 2016 #159
chervilant Feb 2016 #179
Adrahil Feb 2016 #193
JohnnyRingo Feb 2016 #197
RoccoR5955 Feb 2016 #216
JohnnyRingo Feb 2016 #231
LiberalArkie Feb 2016 #51
Perogie Feb 2016 #88
Adrahil Feb 2016 #109
Perogie Feb 2016 #118
Adrahil Feb 2016 #160
Vincardog Feb 2016 #168
Perogie Feb 2016 #183
Vincardog Feb 2016 #166
John Poet Feb 2016 #140
Vincardog Feb 2016 #164
basselope Feb 2016 #169
mdbl Feb 2016 #184
AlbertCat Feb 2016 #186
JDPriestly Feb 2016 #203
Peace Patriot Feb 2016 #209
Nonhlanhla Feb 2016 #185
creeksneakers2 Feb 2016 #201
shawn703 Feb 2016 #211
Volaris Feb 2016 #208
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #7
Skinner Feb 2016 #14
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #19
Chemisse Feb 2016 #42
BeyondGeography Feb 2016 #46
Arazi Feb 2016 #120
jeff47 Feb 2016 #125
Utopian Leftist Feb 2016 #163
Waiting For Everyman Feb 2016 #95
ejbr Feb 2016 #20
Chemisse Feb 2016 #43
ejbr Feb 2016 #71
Chemisse Feb 2016 #222
ejbr Feb 2016 #223
Chemisse Feb 2016 #224
ejbr Feb 2016 #234
AlbertCat Feb 2016 #187
Chemisse Feb 2016 #221
Amimnoch Feb 2016 #32
StandingInLeftField Feb 2016 #107
Amimnoch Feb 2016 #122
StandingInLeftField Feb 2016 #123
Qutzupalotl Feb 2016 #152
questionseverything Feb 2016 #182
joshcryer Feb 2016 #56
StandingInLeftField Feb 2016 #100
SamKnause Feb 2016 #8
Depaysement Feb 2016 #9
GoneFishin Feb 2016 #47
Depaysement Feb 2016 #73
GoneFishin Feb 2016 #144
Duppers Feb 2016 #98
Bonobo Feb 2016 #12
grntuscarora Feb 2016 #23
Punkingal Feb 2016 #25
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #26
Chemisse Feb 2016 #45
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #59
Chemisse Feb 2016 #68
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #76
chervilant Feb 2016 #33
SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #64
joshcryer Feb 2016 #53
delrem Feb 2016 #60
corkhead Feb 2016 #63
TTUBatfan2008 Feb 2016 #77
rock Feb 2016 #78
Kip Humphrey Feb 2016 #79
Major Nikon Feb 2016 #83
StandingInLeftField Feb 2016 #113
Perogie Feb 2016 #84
Rilgin Feb 2016 #129
roguevalley Feb 2016 #134
grasswire Feb 2016 #135
JohnnyRingo Feb 2016 #196
eviliberal Feb 2016 #207
leftupnorth Feb 2016 #213
quaker bill Feb 2016 #215
7wo7rees Feb 2016 #2
cantbeserious Feb 2016 #4
Fumesucker Feb 2016 #6
IdaBriggs Feb 2016 #11
navarth Feb 2016 #190
disillusioned73 Feb 2016 #29
Fast Walker 52 Feb 2016 #44
Bohemianwriter Feb 2016 #13
brooklynite Feb 2016 #15
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #21
Rilesome Feb 2016 #81
Beowulf Feb 2016 #17
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #28
Chemisse Feb 2016 #52
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #57
Chemisse Feb 2016 #61
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #69
Chemisse Feb 2016 #70
JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #111
Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #155
JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #173
left-of-center2012 Feb 2016 #22
boston bean Feb 2016 #24
orpupilofnature57 Feb 2016 #34
chervilant Feb 2016 #36
boston bean Feb 2016 #38
chervilant Feb 2016 #66
boston bean Feb 2016 #67
BeanMusical Feb 2016 #225
DaveT Feb 2016 #180
left-of-center2012 Feb 2016 #149
frylock Feb 2016 #165
Enthusiast Feb 2016 #27
MrMickeysMom Feb 2016 #30
orpupilofnature57 Feb 2016 #31
Vinca Feb 2016 #39
Fast Walker 52 Feb 2016 #50
winter is coming Feb 2016 #40
Paka Feb 2016 #58
Fast Walker 52 Feb 2016 #49
Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #93
Fast Walker 52 Feb 2016 #133
DrDan Feb 2016 #55
chwaliszewski Feb 2016 #72
Major Nikon Feb 2016 #74
Orsino Feb 2016 #80
UnBlinkingEye Feb 2016 #85
Gore1FL Feb 2016 #86
bigtree Feb 2016 #87
CoffeeCat Feb 2016 #89
Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #96
liberal_at_heart Feb 2016 #115
frylock Feb 2016 #167
Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #90
phylny Feb 2016 #106
antigop Feb 2016 #92
SDJay Feb 2016 #97
Gothmog Feb 2016 #102
Gothmog Feb 2016 #103
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #142
Gothmog Feb 2016 #236
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #238
SDJay Feb 2016 #131
frylock Feb 2016 #170
SDJay Feb 2016 #172
frylock Feb 2016 #171
Gothmog Feb 2016 #99
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #116
Gothmog Feb 2016 #237
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #239
raouldukelives Feb 2016 #104
liberal_at_heart Feb 2016 #112
SDJay Feb 2016 #132
Ino Feb 2016 #174
islandmkl Feb 2016 #121
Autumn Feb 2016 #126
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #128
Autumn Feb 2016 #130
Rosa Luxemburg Feb 2016 #141
themaguffin Feb 2016 #143
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #145
themaguffin Feb 2016 #146
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #147
themaguffin Feb 2016 #148
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #150
themaguffin Feb 2016 #153
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #157
themaguffin Feb 2016 #233
Maedhros Feb 2016 #175
IronLionZion Feb 2016 #181
farleftlib Feb 2016 #189
zentrum Feb 2016 #192
Gman Feb 2016 #198
Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #200
Logical Feb 2016 #202
retrowire Feb 2016 #205
YOHABLO Feb 2016 #206
Gothmog Feb 2016 #210
Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #214
pdsimdars Feb 2016 #212
redstateblues Feb 2016 #229
quantumjunkie Feb 2016 #232
merrily Feb 2016 #241

Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:45 AM

1. It's not code-speak for that at all.

Rather, it's code-speak for: "We know everything there is to know about Hillary Clinton because Republicans have been attacking her non-stop for two decades. But the Republicans have not yet begun to attack Bernie Sanders, and when they do it's going to be much worse than the treatment he received from Hillary Clinton and her surrogates."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:48 AM

3. Agree 100 percent. You are up early, nice to see you. :)

Edit to add

Passions are running high, you have the patience of Job.

Tks for DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:51 AM

5. Hillary has already been reduced to lies and distortions to attack Sanders

There's really nothing substantive to attack him on. That spooky word "socialism" has become a joke after eight years of it being used against Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:14 AM

10. Except that Sanders really IS Socialist.

 

Obama is progressive, but he never advocated the nationalization of industries. Sanders has. Personally, i don't have a problem with Sanders' history, but if you think it won't become the focus of dozens of attack ads, you are quite naive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:37 AM

16. He's never shied away from that title

Democrats don't care and he has the support of independents by a large margin. That line of attack is coming about 60 years too late to be effective with any constituency except the Glenn Beck crowd.

"We were just kidding about Obama, this guy really is a socialist - see!" doesn't give much credibility to the Republicans who would use it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:41 AM

18. Well, if he gets the nomination, we shall see. I think you are wrong.

 

Like I said, I'm FINE with his history, but again, wait until the knives come out.

I I genuiniely DO disagree with approach on some issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:39 AM

65. And, I don't understand why

"He'll be attacked by the Republicans!" makes Bernie a less desirable candidate than "She'll be attacked by the Republicans!" Hi11ary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #65)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:22 AM

82. Exactly

They are going to attack, period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #82)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:19 PM

188. Big difference is that Hillary attacks back, and Sanders just kind of blows it off and keeps talking

 

It's kind of like they are still back waiting for their return punch...and they don't get it, and he's already back on message. It's pretty impressive.

She does verbal mano-a-mano well. He deflects and proceeds well. Two different personalities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #188)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 12:10 AM

199. Good point

I think people are fed up with the gladiators trading punches thing.

They want a substantial, full-steam ahead change of course in this country. And they want it now. Bernie is so smart to just keep to the positive and not be dragged down by all the little slings and arrows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #199)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 09:40 AM

218. Kind of a political jui jitstu...he's a Master. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #218)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 01:03 PM

240. He a master because he always has been one

because he has his finger on the pulse of the country

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #240)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 04:20 PM

242. That's the "magic" of a real leader. Feels the pulse and goes with it...yes. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #188)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:54 AM

226. Controlling the discourse is key

There will be plenty to discuss about both the personality and philosophy of the Republican nominee regardless of who that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 6chars (Reply #226)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:58 AM

227. That's what a Master Statesman does. Will not go off message.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #227)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:08 AM

228. and we will not be running against a master statesman

so it should be possible to control the message. our last two successful candidates definitely did that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 6chars (Reply #228)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:10 AM

230. Therein lies the difference. Sometimes our long Primary season is a good thing.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #65)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:27 PM

191. The difference is this:

 

Hillary is already in their sights. They've been gunning for for YEARS.
The negative ads are already cooked in.

They've yet to really go after Bernie.

But they will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:08 AM

35. Sanders is NOT a pure socialist

 

Get over it already!
A pure socialist would want all production to be owned and operated by the government. This is NOT Bernie's point of view. A Democratic Socialist still believes in a capitalist economy, where private concerns own most of industry and run it. Only are services that are beneficial to the people are owned and run by the government, like roads, fire and police, healthcare, trash removal, public transportation, schools and the like.

That leaves the bulk of the industries in the hands of private concerns.

So, be that as it may, we already have some degree of Socialism in the US, as roads, public safety, and schools are owned and run by the government. I suppose if you are against any form of socialism, you want to privatize these as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #35)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:12 AM

37. Also true (at least now), but the electorate isn't that savvy.

 

FWIW, Sanders DID in fact favor traditional socialist policies in the past, including the nationalization of industries (and that will show up in ads), but even as a "Democratic Socialist," a significant chunk of the electorate will not make a distinction.

Don;t get me wrong.... if that DOESN'T happen, I will be pleasantly surprised, even delighted. But I don't think so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #37)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:15 AM

41. So please tell me

 

What industries, aside from the healthcare industry did Bernie plan on nationalizing?
Please provide a link or something of substance to back up this claim.
Thank you in advance.


I also think that if enough folks are educated to the fact that we do, in fact, have a lot of socialism in the US already, they will shrug off this crap. Many young folks already have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #41)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:23 AM

48. Here's a quote and link.

 

"And Sanders has long been unabashed about his socialist beliefs. “Nobody should earn more than $1 million,” he told the Burlington Free Press in 1974.
“I believe that, in the long run, major industries in this state and nation should be publicly owned and controlled by the workers themselves,” he wrote in 1976.


From: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/bernie-sanders-socialist-surge-119785#ixzz40KwSyzGd"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #48)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:28 AM

54. That is not Socialism!

 

He wants industries to be publicly owned and run by the workers. Publicly owned, NOT government owned.
Sheesh!
Don't think that there is socialism in the US, go read a book, "The S Word: A Short History of an American Tradition. Socialism" by John Nichols. http://www.amazon.com/The-Word-American-Tradition-Socialism/dp/184467679X

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #54)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:37 AM

62. :rolleyes:

 

Publicly owned sounds like government-owned to me. Public parks, public schools....

If you wanna split hairs, go right ahead.

But let's be clear that what he was proposing (he no longer supports that position, I think) is not any form capitalism, regulated or otherwise.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:04 AM

75. You're leaving out a couple very important word

"Publicly owned and controlled BY THE WORKERS THEMSELVES".

Nothing there about the government at all.

I worked for an employee owned and operated company for years. It was the absolute best job I ever had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to indigoth (Reply #75)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:51 AM

108. If a company is owned by the workers....

 

then it is not owned by the public.

Bernie is proposing publicly OWNED industries but worker MANAGED industries.

Ownership and management are different.

FWIW, I am in favor of employee-owned businesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #108)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:00 AM

117. Have you heard of Mondragon?

They are the biggest worker-owned cooperative in the world and are definitely successful. If there was a U.S. division of this I would support them whenever I could instead of seeing any of the money I spend getting paid to one of these CEO's whose pay is obscene. Compare CEO pay now to what it was in the past. CEO's are treated as Gods in this world and it needs to stop. Alexander the Great didn't become a God when he died and these CEO's aren't in life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PyaarRevolution (Reply #117)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:27 PM

161. Have not heard of them...

 

But I strongly support employee-owned companies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:55 AM

127. The stock market ...

 

... is composed of "publicly owned" companies.

What does Hillary have against the markets?

I'll take 'distort and obfuscate' for $1000 Alex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #127)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:31 PM

162. Errr....

 

I assume you know that Bernie was not referring to publicly traded companies, since that's what we already have.

The term "public" is routinely applied to those elements owned and controlled by "the people," typically through their agent, the government. Thus we speak of the "public sector" versus the "private sector." We talk about public parks, public schools, and as we've heard a lot about lately, publicly owned land.

I think it is clear what Sanders meant 40 years ago (and again, I know he no longer holds that position).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:37 PM

139. You know

 

In my heart, I am much against capitalism. If we had a democratic socialist system, I think that things would be a lot better for a lot of folks.
Look at all the devastation that capitalism has done to the environment. Look at how capitalism splits into haves and have nots. Look at the greed that is behind capitalism. AFAIC, the experiment of capitalism has failed, and it is high time to try something different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #139)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:36 PM

195. That's not really the issue atm

 

I think you make good points. But the issue is what the ELECTORATE is prepared to support, and what Sanders USED to support.
The fact that so many here will not admit the obvious is a sign that even they think it could be trouble.

That's for the reply. Here's a heart!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:06 PM

176. Almost all large companies are publicly owned, it's called stock and it's traded on Wall Street. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Simple Game (Reply #176)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 09:29 AM

217. Do you believe Sanders was referring to publicly traded companies?

 

Of course he wasn't. Why would he talk about companies becoming "publicly owned" if they already are?

He was quite obviously using the term in the way it is used when we speak of the "public" sector, or "public" libraries, or "public" parks, or "public" lands.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #217)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 09:49 AM

219. Do you believe he's referring to communist type public ownership?

 

I assume he means that where it makes sense, companies will be owned by whom it makes sense.

There will be some "public" ownership such as heath insurance

There will be some work ownership for companies that want to pull up roots and move to some foreign tax haven leaving the workers behind and out of luck

And the rest will be owned by private owners and publicly traded corporations.

Much like it is now, except for making it harder for corporations to screw over workers because they can make a few extra bucks by selling out their workers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #217)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 09:50 AM

220. I believe Bernie knows the difference between government owned and publicly owned.

I am not so sure you know the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #48)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:38 AM

91. you don't know the difference between employee owned and government owned?

There are currently hundreds of EMPLOYEE owned businesses in the USA.

Example one - Publix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publix

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Perogie (Reply #91)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:46 AM

101. He said PUBLICLY owned, not employee-owned.

 

And you're kind of missing the point.

If he gets the nomination, get used to repeating your points over and over again. You'll have to. You'll be talking about this quote (and others) instead of his policy proposals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #101)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:56 AM

114. duly noted

I guess he's evolved, cause that was back in the 70's. Anything newer that supports your argument?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #101)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:20 PM

151. he said publically owned, contolled by workers

someone else already corrected, so why you repeating a half-truth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #48)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:40 AM

94. This concern of yours and other Hillary supporters would seem more genuine

if it were challenged whenever others make similar statements. I can find plenty of posts here on DU calling for a 90% tax rate on earnings of the top bracket/a return to post-WW2 levels.

Yet, the only time these calls are treated as anathema to the party platform is when their leveled by a Challenger-of-Hillary.

Yet, we're supposed to believe that what Sanders said four decades ago (my older brother and I weren't even alive then!) is more disqualifying/unpalatable than an on-going criminal investigation by the FBI.

What's the slogan for the general election gonna be?

"HILLARY 2016! We're pretty sure it'll pan-out to be nothing at all!"

"HILLARY 2016! Sure they only need 218 votes to impeach but at least we can hold more than 41 senate seats to prevent removal."

"HILLARY 2016! If you were exhausted by the last 4 years when she wasn't even an administration official wait until you see what happens when she's elected!"

"HILLARY 2016! Because we burned the bridges to Universal Healthcare and fairer taxes so we may as well see this through."


With her in the GE there won't even be a discussion of the issues; win, lose or draw. It will be All Benghazi, All Emails, All the Time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #94)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:49 AM

105. Are you saying my position isn't genuine? It is.

 

I actually agree with Sanders on most points (not all). My main concern about him is not that his policies are not good, but that we will be talking about stuff like this in the Fall.

You can believe it or not. That's what I think.

And frankly, I think the public is done with Bendhazi and emails. THose who would be influence by that issue are already influenced.

But the poster I am responding to asked for information. I provided it. Not that I expect the more rabid Bernie fans here to recognize that. It's ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #105)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:02 AM

119. "we will be talking about stuff like this in the Fall"

GOOD!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #105)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:32 AM

124. Sorry but using the argument that we shouldn't vote for someone because of what the

GOP will say about them strikes me as non genuine. The GOP have said that Obama is a socialist Muslim that is purposefully destroying this country. Ted Cruz just said that any Democratic President would give free reign to abortion on demand and partial birth abortion. He also said that any Democratic President would sandblast all crosses and stars of David off of veterans tombstones. They will try any and and all vicious attacks they can against any Democratic nominee. I refuse to base my vote on what the GOP will say about the candidate that I support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #124)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:09 PM

136. I'm talking about my reasoning. You can make your own decision.

 

This is why I cannot support Sanders in the primary. I am under no illusion that I will change anyone's mind here, and I think we can all make up our own minds.

If Sanders gets the nomination, I will support him with my vote ans my wallet, insofar as I can. But have no illusions. It's gonna be a shitstorm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #105)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:25 PM

177. me thinks your email hope is wishful thinking

please correct me if i am mistaken but when has either major political party run a candidate in the general that was under fbi investigation?

has it ever happened? because i don't think it has, because it is suicide

generally even the appearance of illegality is enough for the candidate to withdrawal for the good of the party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #177)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:34 PM

194. I think most people see it for what it is:

 

A politically motivated witch hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #194)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:44 PM

235. obama's fbi is conducting a political witch hunt?

odd logic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #48)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:15 AM

204. "by the workers themselves,"

How in the world is that a defense of nationalizing industry or businesses?

Do you realize how many businesses in our country are owned by the people who work at them? How many are partnerships and owned by the employees?

Are you opposed to small businesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #37)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:53 AM

110. Now, see, IMHO

"...the electorate isn't that savvy" is one of the biggest mistakes the Oligarchy (and the Republicans, and the Hi11ary campaign) is making.

But, keep telling people they're stupid. I'm sure that will garner tons of support.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #110)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:11 PM

137. I appreciate your position, but...

 

This is an electorate with re-elected Dubya in 2004. It is easily manipulated... At least large portions of it. I wish that were not true, but it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #137)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:49 PM

154. Let's presume

for the sake of argument that Dubya was reelected (if you'll recall, the push polls before midnight on election day gave the election to Kerry, so imagine our surprise that next morning). I think it's more accurate, and somewhat less offensive, to say that many of the vast Hoi Polloi have been perniciously propagandized.

Barring injury or an organic dysfunction, we humans have fully functioning brains. Telling us we're stupid is both offensive and inaccurate.

I'll grant you that sometimes I get the impression Hi11ary thinks most of us are stupid. This attitude of hers is not endearing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #154)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:21 PM

158. OK, sure. Nobody was convinced by that BS Swiftboating campaign.

 

You just keep believing that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #158)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:30 PM

178. I have no idea what you mean by

"that BS Swiftboating campaign." Care to elucidate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #110)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:26 PM

138. That was my first thought when I read that post.

 

The Hillary campaign can continue calling voters stupid if they think that is a winning strategy.

I'll just sit here and let the charges of me being stupid roll off of me like water off of a duck's back and continue to support Bernie Sanders.

It's surprising how ineffective "You are stupid to think Obama can win" ended up being.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #138)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:56 PM

156. Quite a few

of the Hi11ary supporters herein seem to think we Bernie supporters are stupid -- or that we want baby unicorns with rainbows shooting out of their butts. I find this condescension tiresome and arrogant. (And, everyone knows that Obama's win was a fluke -- at least, that is what some would have us believe...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #156)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:24 PM

159. I do not think Bernie supporters are stupid.....

 

..and if you got that from my post, you are in error. IN fact, I think they are typically smarter than the average bear. I do believe some are a bit naive, but that is not the same thing as stupid. I think progressives tend to be optimists. That's not a terrible thing, but I think that sometimes leads to wildy optimistic estimates of what can be accomplished in American politics.

I do think there is a significant portion of the electorate that IS stupid... or more accurately, willfully ignorant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #159)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:32 PM

179. Okay,

I'll grant you that. There are a LOT of willfully ignorant people in this nation. Do you think that some of them are willing to ignore a certain candidate's past missteps and misstatements?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #179)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:33 PM

193. That's a complicated question. but here goes...

 

Yes for some, no for others.

I think those who will vote against Hillary are already voting against her. The negatives are already baked in. The Republicans have been gunning for her for years.

Bernie? We'll see. I think he has a lot of latent issues that are not widely known, and the GOP will set their hair on fire bring to light ANYTHING that they can twist. They will make swift-boating look like playground teasing.

Maybe I'm wrong. And if Bernie gets the nom, I sure hope so. But I don't think we're there as a nation yet.

I am encouraged that so many Democrats are willing to embrace Democratic Socialism. But I think many have unrealistic expectations about general electoral politics in the USA.

Have a great night!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #35)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:50 PM

197. And I'm sure you can count on the GOP to say exactly that.

...or they'll use their billion dollar war chest to run B&W ads of him speaking in split screen next to Josip Stalin

Sanders will have much less to get out his message if he eschews Superpacs in favor of grassroots finance. His supporters will get a taste of Bernie's socialism when they find themselves each on the spot to pony up the maximum $2500 donation. I know I can't afford to do that, but perhaps millennials concerned with their low wages and a mountain of college debt can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #197)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 08:51 AM

216. Who is Josip Stalin?

 

I never have heard of that person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #216)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:51 AM

231. That's a Russian variation of Joseph

Sometimes spelled Josef.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:32 AM

88. Provide link

when did Sanders say he wants to nationalize industry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Perogie (Reply #88)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:52 AM

109. See Post #48

 

he calls for publicly owned industries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #109)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:00 AM

118. Any thing since the 70's that you can link to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Perogie (Reply #118)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:26 PM

160. Again, missing the point.

 

I know this is no longer Bernie's position. The right-wing attack machine will not care. They will run attack ads with the quotes, no context, and scary music in the background.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #160)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:09 PM

168. We should be influenced by the lies the RW nutz will tell? FUCK THEM and fuck that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #160)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:49 PM

183. I'm not missing the point.

You think Hillary won't be affected by the Republican onslaught and Bernie will. I think Bernie will fair better.
The only proof is to wait and see what happens. To vote based on Bernie might get called names by republicans has no merit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #109)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:05 PM

166. You don't see a difference between employee owned companies and "nationalizing"? Some things

Like prisons need to be owned by the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:59 PM

164. Provide a link to prove that lie. Bernie never advocated "the nationalization of industries"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:10 PM

169. Obama is "progressive"? Sorry, Obama is center right.

 

Oh wait, I forget under Hillary's definition of progressive, bush qualifies, b/c it means ANY progress (no matter which direction)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:50 PM

184. What industries does Bernie want nationalized?

I know he advocates regulation in some cases, but I haven't heard nationalization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:10 PM

186. Obama is progressive,

 

but admires Reagan.

Why can't Hillary Supporters spot a progressive? They'll call anybody one!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:09 AM

203. Have you seen the movie, The Big Short?

I saw it this afternoon. I'm not a socialist, but there can't be anything in this country worse than our capitalist institutions being run by a bunch of crooks and liars.

Anyone who is worried about the word "socialism" needs to see that movie, The Big Short.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #10)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 05:07 AM

209. Nationalization of WHAT industries?

That should be Sanders' attack ad back. Industries fled the country that birthed and nurtured them for the cheapest labor markets they could find in the world. Our work ethic and productivity made them prosperous, our taxes built them roads, bridges, airports, harbors, emergency services and on and on and on. And the assholes running them and investing in them fled the country, leaving devastation behind.

So what's left to nationalize? Interesting question. Our people might like to discuss it. There are a number of great models in Europe. (Norway's nationalization of its oil is fascinating.) Bolivia has made enormous social progress by nationalizing its natural gas and soon their lithium will benefit all Bolivians. Worth talking about.

But...no, we can't! Maybe we should agree to 25 cents a day, as in Cambodia, to beg them to come back?

And the hell of it is they abandoned the U.S., started making crap in places like Cambodia and China, paying truly shit wages, and are allowing those crap products to be imported back here, for purchase by our ever-more impoverished work force. They ought to be forbidden to do that. You manufacture it here, and pay good wages here, OR YOU DON'T SELL IT HERE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:55 PM

185. As opposed to the lies and distortions about Hillary

that we see daily from the Sanders camp?

And yup, socialism is gonna be a big weapon against him. Bernie supporters are incredibly naive if they think otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 12:57 AM

201. The GOP would terrify people with single payer

A total government takeover of health care with 180 million people losing employer provided health care. Can you see how they would spin that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to creeksneakers2 (Reply #201)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:33 AM

211. I'd be saving about 50% on health care personally

Spin it all they want, doesn't beat having more money every paycheck to live on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 03:10 AM

208. That, plus

That, plus the fact the demographic '18-25 year olds'
Is now completely populated with people born AFTER the collapse of the Berlin Wall. So fuck the GOP's ridiculous red-baiting...mostly, it won't work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:01 AM

7. When did being investigated become a rationale for voting for a candidate?

And what, exactly, will they be attacking Sanders for? As I noted in my edit, they're trying to throw the sink at Sanders, up to an including race-baiting, but the plumbing seems to be pretty solid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #7)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:26 AM

14. Do you genuinely not know what Republicans will attack Sanders for?

Because I find that incredibly hard to believe.

Here's the deal: I know you all think that Bernie has been attacked mercilessly during the primary, but the truth is that Hillary Clinton has an incentive to pull her punches -- she will need Sanders supporters in the general election if she is the nominee. Furthermore, the attacks that the Republicans would be using against Bernie in the general election are not attacks that would work very well in the context of a Democratic primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:41 AM

19. Sorry, I'm not buying that.

Fake or not, there's no Sanders equivalent to Benghazi, emails, Whitewater, etc. and whether we care to admit it or not Clinton has not been successful in dealing with these issues. The fact these linger disproves your contention that she is capable of adroitly dismissing the GOP's attacks. She endures because she has rigged the party's machinery to insulate her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:17 AM

42. They don't need scandals. They have 'socialism'.

They'll say he wants to make America a welfare state - and they'll say it over and over with ads, etc, until just about everybody in the nation believes Bernie would be a huge disaster. Hell, they'll probably roll out the old welfare cadillacs!

They have his plans to raise taxes. Imagine the ads they can produce, complete with scary music!

We can't predict for certain how things will go if Bernie is the nominee, but I think our chances of winning will be lower than if Hillary won.

And I'm a Bernie supporter. I've always admired him. But I think people are being naive about his vulnerabilities. I look at the Republican field and I am terrified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #42)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:22 AM

46. If Obama had death panels, no way Bernie doesn't get tagged with Stalinist death camps

You know, just to drive the point home. The ghost of Lee Atwater is laughing somewhere, at least at the thought that Bernie is getting hit hard right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #42)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:16 AM

120. As a Sanders supporter as well, I agree with you. We ain't seen nothing yet

Anyone who doesn't see that its going to be a big haul over the finish line (thanks Recursion! ), is being naive.

The socialism thing is going to be brutal.

I think we can overcome it but make no mistake, its going to get bad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #42)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:44 AM

125. Republicans cry socialism at EVERY Democrat.

Republicans will cry socialism at Clinton too. They will run the same welfare state ads. They will run the same tax ads - what little she has released to pay for her policies raises taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #42)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:37 PM

163. Don't forget that Hillary has

extra baggage, and no, I don't mean Bill. I mean that she has flip-flopped her position so many times on so many issues that it has become impossible for her to hide her transparent ambitions. No one "changes their mind" that often unless they are doing it to gain some sort of favor. Bernie has held true to his positions. He is not so inflexible as to be incapable of change, but neither is his position dependent upon the direction that the political wind is blowing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:41 AM

95. 100% agree, I'm not buying it either.

This iis the most twisted logic I've heard in a long while. Hillary's known toxic messes are somehow safe while unknown fantastical issues with Bernie will be deadly... and the built in assumption that he would be helpless and ineffective to deal with them.

Bernie is no drive up, and he knows where lots of bodies are buried too.

Plus, she could be getting indicted after the nominating process. Hello! I call that a deal breaker if ever there was one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:42 AM

20. Can you provide an example?

This seems to be what confuses us: what attacks are there to make? Given that we believe the power brokers want anyone but Bernie, it seems odd that they would even permit him to make it to the general without throwing everything there is at him. True, there's still time, but I suspect the PACs will attack full throttle should this remain a close race.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ejbr (Reply #20)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:18 AM

43. They aren't attacking Bernie yet because they want him to win the primary.

Hillary is a bigger threat to them because she has a better chance of winning the GE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #43)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:55 AM

71. Thanks for reply,

but that doesn't answer the question: what will they attack him with when socialist dreamer hasn't even dissuaded many independents or conservatives?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ejbr (Reply #71)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:10 AM

222. As I posted above,

The conservatives haven't even warmed up to attacking him yet. Their best attack will be 'socialism' and you can bet they will never once say 'Democratic socialism.'

They'll say he wants to make America a welfare state - over and over with ads, etc, until just about everybody in the nation believes Bernie would be a huge disaster. Hell, they'll probably roll out the old welfare cadillacs!

They have his plans to raise taxes. Imagine the ads they can produce, complete with scary music! They love to appeal to people's fears - and it works.

He may or may not prevail through all this, but we should at least be realistic about the rocky road ahead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #222)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:16 AM

223. Given the present polling

everyone in America DOESN'T think he would be a big disaster or he wouldn't be beating Repugs with their match ups. Not only that, but as evidenced in the states where he shares his platform he becomes MORE liked and his poll numbers rise. The red baiting is not working not even with Independents AND conservatives. So again, what will they attack him with (that will work)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ejbr (Reply #223)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:20 AM

224. I hope you are right.

I just know the GOP has not even started with attacks against Bernie.

I hope Bernie's inspirational message is contagious and sweeps the nation. But I am terrified that it won't. Not one of the Republican candidates fails to terrify me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #224)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:14 PM

234. Well, since I can't predict the future,

I hope I am right too. Still need to get thru the primaries, so...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #43)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:19 PM

187. she has a better chance of winning the GE.

 

Well, she lost the last primary.... she's only won 2 elections for the same seat.

I don't see that she has a better chance of winning anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlbertCat (Reply #187)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:03 AM

221. But that is with Democratic voters.

The pool of voters in the GE will be completely different.

I could be wrong. She is clearly flawed as a candidate. I just think the Republicans will eviscerate Bernie because of how left of center he is. Whether it sticks with voters remains to be seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:07 AM

32. There's already hints of what they will attack him on out there.

 

There's a RW article out there attacking his wife for loan fraud.

There's a RW article out there about his divorce to his first wife in 1966, and his position on abortion and even suggests his first wife may have had one.

There's a RW article from one in Vermont asking New Hampshire voters to support Bernie.

There's one on him being a "pro abortion fanatic".

I'll do links if i can be guaranteed no hide for linking RW links for the purpose of illustrating the point.

Let me also state very clearly, NONE of these are things I agree with, but the Republican attack machine is getting warmed up, and the more Senator Sanders gains in the polls, the more that machine will start to fling.

Compared to the Republican clown car, I think even with the attacks, Sanders could very well pull off a GE win. Let's face it.. after 8 years of a Democratic Party President office, this should have been an easy win for the Republicans. Luckily they handed us a fairly easy win in the GE by fielding such a wonderfully absurd group of pathetic candidates. Bernie or Hillary should give Trump a huge thank you card once they are elected.

One very real advantage Hillary does have over Bernie is that she has undergone the test of shielding herself against the Republican shit flinging machine. The Republicans have thrown EVERYTHING at her and her family, and she's still standing strong. Bernie hasn't, and I agree Skinner, If Bernie does win the nomination, his supporters are in for a rude awakening. They will be brutal, and they will drudge up EVERY skeleton in his closet, and plant additional skeletons in that closet for good measure. They will attack his politics. They will attack his family. They will attack his dog/cat. They will attack his friends. They will dig up every old friendship he's had throughout his life and attack them and anything and everything they did.

Edit: The referenced article above suggesting Deborah shilling Messing (Sanders first wife) had an abortion when her and Bernie were married in the 60's has been pulled. That's one I can't provide a link on. It was linked on one of the open political sites I frequent and argue on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:51 AM

107. I take serious issue that she is still "standing strong"

Certainly not amongst a growing cadre of Democratic voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StandingInLeftField (Reply #107)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:22 AM

122. Well, you can. The numbers say different.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html
for the Primary, Hillary @ 8.6 above Bernie is the closest he's gotten, and the trend since then has not been favorable.

Trump vs. Clinton:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

Cruz vs. Clinton:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_cruz_vs_clinton-4034.html

And this is with the Republican smear machine working full time against here already.

Bernie has better numbers in both of those same charts. However, as is the whole point of these posts, the Republican smear machine hasn't even really warmed up on him yet. Hell, there's articles out there that is pushing for Republicans to support Sanders in open primaries specifically because they have more confidence against him, in particular in New Hampshire the GOP was very much pro-Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #122)


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #122)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:27 PM

152. 25% of the VT Republicans voted for Sanders over the years,

and because they wanted to, not because Rove told them to.

That's how we win in November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:49 PM

182. the first 3 you list have already been here at du

one thing hc is great at is getting the nominee past scandals,she did it for obama too

i can not tell you the things repubs will say about hc...i would get a hide

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:30 AM

56. Both candidates are pulling punches.

They won't use anything that the Republicans would use in the GE. Sanders could easily pull the email gambit and the media would eat it the fuck up. Lord knows his "supporters" are livid he's got actual character and won't give fodder to the Republicans. Clinton could easily pull one of the many right wing conspiracies that haven't gained traction, but it's not happening, because she knows it's going to be a tough battle come the GE. The whole of the Democratic party will back Sanders in the GE, and that's even why Sanders isn't fully ruling out Super PACs. We're talking about a billion dollar election here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #14)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:46 AM

100. And do you think Bernie will fold like a house of cards?

As a self-identified Democratic Socialist, you don't think Bernie has had an uphill time of it his entire political career? Are you worried about low-information Republican voters or low-information independents? Because, as I see things unfolding, he's not having much difficulty convincing DEMOCRATIC voters of his efficacy OR his agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:02 AM

8. The Republicans and the Tea Party hate the Clinton's.

The Republicans and the Tea Party HATE Bill Clinton.

The Republicans and the Tea Party DESPISE Hillary Clinton.

She has more baggage than the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

She is a multi-millionaire who has gorged at the teat of Goldman Sachs, Wall Street,

and corporations that rip off and pollute the U.S. and the world.

She voted to give power to Bush. (The Iraq war)

That shows extremely poor judgment. (Libya)

She changes positions when it benefits her.

She is parroting Bernie constantly.

She is riding on president Obama's coattails.

She lies. (Numerous videos have been posted proving this)

She hired David Brock.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:13 AM

9. Not so sure

Old dirt can be used again and again to remind people that the candidate is dirty, to suppress turnout, etc. Then there are the emails, an issue that may get worse.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Depaysement (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:22 AM

47. Republicans friggin' hate her. They probably don't even know why. But they will swarm the voting

precincts to vote against her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #47)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:56 AM

73. I know why

She plays their game better than they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Depaysement (Reply #73)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:05 PM

144. That sounds about right. Whatever the case, it seems like if she was a man with an R after her name,

and all other things being the same, they would be totally ok with her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #47)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:42 AM

98. For some, that is true.

My elderly mother (R) called me one day and the 1st thing she said was, "I just hate Hillary Clinton."
"Why, mom??"
"Well..well..I just do!"
Me again: "No, that's not acceptable. You MUST have a reason."

She never gave me a single reason. Not one. She repeats things her old biddy friends say and that's what shapes her political decisions. Too bad my right-wing brother drives her to vote. Grrrrr.



Feeling the Bern here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:19 AM

12. If that is true, why do Hillary's numbers go down and down, while

Bernie's go up and up?

Presumably, by your theory, all of Hillary's negatives are known and she should not suffer from further exposure.

Meanwhile, as time has passed since Bernie has gained fame, knowledge of his supposed "socialism" etc. becomes better known but his numbers increase.

No, the fact is that there is more to this thing than "knowing about" a candidate.

There is "getting to KNOW" a candidate.

And in Bernie's case, people like him more and more as they get to know him while Hillary is the reverse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:53 AM

23. People keep acting like Bernie just popped out of the blue.

He's been in public service just as long, if not longer, than HRC, and his career has been an open book to anyone who cared to read it. He has been ridiculed, ignored, and attacked, as has HRC, and has shown an ability to keep going.
If nominated he will be subject to the full force of R attacks.But I am convinced he can weather them every bit as well (better, actually) than HRC--- with the dignity and determination he has always displayed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:58 AM

25. Do we know everything about Hillary?

I wonder about the Clinton foundation, and I wonder about her speeches. These are honest concerns, not the "I hate Hillary" stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:59 AM

26. There will be nothing new left for the Republicans to attack him on, Hillary is throwing everything

and having to make most of it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #26)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:20 AM

45. She is not attacking him for being too far to the left.

And that is exactly what the Republicans will be doing if he wins the primary. And that is his real vulnerability in the eyes of the moderate voters (who will decide the election).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #45)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:35 AM

59. Really, that is what the unicorn arguement is all about. Hillary is "pragmatic."

Socialist much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #59)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:43 AM

68. Huh? I'm really not up with the GD P lingo.

And I'm not making any argument against Sanders. It's very likely I will vote for him.

I'm only pointing out that he is a bigger risk in terms of winning the GE. It's silly to allow your excitement for a candidate preclude any reasonable discussion of the pros and cons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #68)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:04 AM

76. I disagree that Bernie has less chance in the General than Hillary.

The polls, for one, show he does better than Hillary against the Republican field.

Bernie does not have all of her bagagge for another.

He gets stronger the more people that hear his message.

More people think he is trustworthy than any other candidate.

Republicans will get off of their death bed to vote against HRC while Bernie brings many Republicans to his cause.

HRC numbers continue to drop while Bernie's rise.

This election cycle has proven that Americans are tired of the "Establishment" representing Donors. HRC is onthe wrong end of this trend, while Bernie has always been against the establishment way of doing things.

I don't know where you are getting that I am being "silly"? I am excited that we finally have someone honest and principled enough not to sell us out to donors and is for fighting for Publicly Funded Elections to put an end to the legalized bribery that HRC is the poster child for! But, I am not naive enough to ignore what is really going on here. I recognize that in trying to restore Representative Democracy, TPTB will use and try EVERYTHING to stop Bernie. He is a threat to their control over our government. They WANT HRC to win, that tells me all I need to know!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:07 AM

33. I know that you're for Hi11ary, Skinner.

So, can you please tell me why her vote on the invasion of Iraq, her "landed under sniper fire" deceit, her use of a private server for her SOS emails, her ties to Wall Street and other mega-corporations, and etc. have not deterred you from supporting her?

Please help me understand why she is your candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #33)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:39 AM

64. Because she's not Bernie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:25 AM

53. This goes without saying.

One shouldn't be in denial about the Republican attack machine even if we don't like it. It doesn't make the slanders against Sanders true, it means that it will ramp up if he gets the nomination (and he has a good shot at it).

The thing is, if Trump is the nominee, which is looking more and more likely, the Republicans will certainly lose the Latino vote, and they need at minimum 40% of that vote, which Romney couldn't even pull.

So using this as an argument about elect ability is quite shallow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:35 AM

60. She hasn't faced it for decades. She ran in two elections for the Senate, and won.


Neither Bernie nor Hillary have run for POTUS in a GE before, and there's no way that her favorable/unfavorables across the board are better than Bernie's, no way that "she already beat them" can hold water.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:37 AM

63. Much worse? Balderdash

They have nothing but outdated red baiting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:07 AM

77. Except we don't...

If we knew everything about her, there would not be an open FBI investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:12 AM

78. Really obvious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:14 AM

79. You lost me on the crystal ball part, Skinner (...and when they do it's going to be...).

besides, IMHO, the OP has a better bead on the truth, sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:25 AM

83. From what I've seen, most of the treatment from Clinton and her surrogates has backfired brilliantly

So I'm not sure worse treatment is necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes when you sling mud, all you manage to do is get yourself dirty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #83)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:55 AM

113. ^ This

And boy are their mothers gonna be mad at them when they come home from playing in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:29 AM

84. What kind of stuff are the Republicans holding back?

What kind of stuff would they say that would be worse than what they have said about Obama or Clinton?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:59 AM

129. The GOP attacked Kerry, Clinton, Dukakis and every Democratic Party Office Holder

They attack that is what they do and sometimes it leaves marks. However, their attacks on Kerry did not drive his unfavorables to negative numbers nor did a majority of this country think he was dishonest. The same with Dukakis. The same with Obama.

I hope you see the difference. They will attack our nominee whether its Bernie or Hillary. We know (emphasis added) that she has unfavorables. Personally I think it is because the Republicans hate her and a lot of democrats are real ambivalent starting with her vote on the Iraq war and the countless other wrong votes and her connections with money politics. This is fact, she has unfavorables.

It is not a given that just because the GOP attacks a candidate they can drive unfavorables to negative numbers or cause people's main view of that candidate to be dishonesty. This is the case for Hillary alone and some of us are sorry that other members of our party can not see what a risk they are taking by supporting a candidate who does not even have to be attacked in the General Election to drive her unfavorables negative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 12:51 PM

134. just because they know doesnt mean they won't use it.

How does that make her better? Some of them are talking impeachment already if she wins. Doesn't matter if they don't win it. We still have to go through ANOTHER Clinton impeachment again. NO!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:09 PM

135. apparently we didn't know everything

We just learned this very week about the Clintons getting 16.5 million dollars from a private for-profit college entity for a pseudo chancellor position that began when Hillary invited that entity to a State Department dinner.

One example.

And, of course, we have no knowledge of what the FBI/DoJ intend to do to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:39 PM

196. True that.

With something like 75% of voters saying they could not vote for a socialist, Bernie can't count on the GOP campaign war machine to differentiate between "Democratic Socialist" and Josip Stalin. Republicans will spend a billion dollars comparing Sanders to history's worst dictators and he's unlikely to fare well.

As for Clinton, the GOP has been reduced to pounding a muted Benghazi drum that sounds fainter by the month. It would serve them little to trot out the ghost of Vince Foster or faded memories of Whitewater. Remember that before she announced her candidacy, she was a Sec of State mutually respected by both sides for doing a capable job.

Like most, I appreciate Bernie's views, but I'll bet the odds on this election. There's too much at stake to lose on lofty ideals that would probably sour on the palette of most voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 03:00 AM

207. "SOCIALIST SOCIALIST OH DEAR JESUS HE'S A SOCIALIST!!!!!"

 

And somehow, I don't think the Republicans are going to prefix the s-word with "democratic" in tjeir attack ads against him. Sadly, said s-word still scares the hell out of too many Americans. Excellent point, Skinner!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:38 AM

213. Ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:41 AM

215. Same logic was in play in 2008

Any (D) candidate will be savagely attacked. Bernie is not special in this regard. They still have not quit savagely attacking President Obama. It is simply a known and really not relevant.

YAWN

Next someone will tell me the sun will rise in the AM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:46 AM

2. Desperation. This is really getting brutally ugly.

Damned it all!! Scorched earth........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:48 AM

4. Camp Can't Decide - List Of Bernie FUD

Current talking points against Bernie:

01: Dreamer
02: Not realistic
03: Still unelectable
04: Still behind in delegates
05: One issue/one note
06: Supporters are insane, crazy people
07: Member of Congress and did nothing
08: Member of Congress and part of the establishment
09: NRA supporter
10: Racist
11: From a white state with no black people
12: Minorities abandoned him
13: Did nothing during civil rights movement (debunked)
14: Too old to be elected president
15: Phony, fake, fraud
16: Socialist/Communist
17: Supporters are mean spirited (mostly because they debunk the bullshit)
18: No foreign policy experience/Not ready to be commander-in-chief
19: Not a real Democrat/Johnny come lately
20: Uses Super PACS/donors broke the law
21: GOP will savagely attack

Please add to the growing list for tracking and identification purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:00 AM

6. 22: Young female Bernie supporters are driven by nothing more than lust for the hot, hot Berniebros

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:19 AM

11. ROFL! That is the gist of the Steinham insult, isn't it?

 

Well paraphrased!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:17 PM

190. Well, that's my experience anyway.

Don't tell my wife.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:02 AM

29. #19..

 

Makes me laugh - that one really shows desperation.. I know I hadn't been around here in a while but I was still surprised when I saw those "criticisms"... and here I thought Bernie was universally liked/admired for his strong stance with the left - I was wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:19 AM

44. A big one--- "supporters don't want to see a woman president"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:19 AM

13. No wonder.... Hillary is far closer to the corrupt GOP...

 

Than Bernie Sanders... Looking at her policies....Her dogwhistle, her war mongering...Her close ties to Wall Street criminals and arms dealers....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:34 AM

15. No, it means "the GOP has already savagely attacked Clinton"

...and we know she's able to stand up to it. Sanders is still a mystery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:43 AM

21. How has she weathered the GOP storm?

Last I looked the tempest is at full gale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:19 AM

81. She stands up to it?

She capitulates at every turn. Part of the problem. Not the solution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:39 AM

17. We already know ALL there is to know about Hillary?

Really? Why are there FBI investigations into her server and the Clinton Foundation? Why won't she release the transcripts of her Goldman Sachs speeches? These aren't GOP-manufactured scandals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beowulf (Reply #17)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:02 AM

28. They would beat the hell out of her on the transcripts which she can never produce.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #28)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:24 AM

52. The GOP won't attack her on the speeches.

That's only upsetting for liberal voters, plus they are just as dirty with tinged money from big business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #52)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:34 AM

57. Tell that to Trump!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #57)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:37 AM

61. That's because it's the primaries and they are trying to beat her down with the primary voters.

Once we're in the GE, the attacks will be that she is too liberal, along with all the personal crap they can muster.

Of course, Trump is the exception to every rule. There's really no way to predict what he will say/do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #61)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:46 AM

69. Trump has already attacked her on her Wall Street ties so there is no prediction necessary.

Since you didn't start off denying there is anything to the transcripts, I will give you an opportunity to make your case here.

I know she is compromised by the money she has taken. I don't want another President beholden to the Plutocrats and corporations, just us. No one but the most die hard, in denial HRC supporter believes that HRC isn't compromised by the quid pro quo she owes. This is a big reason why we don't believe her. It makes no sense for them to have given, and keep giving her money for nothing, cause this chick ain't free!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #69)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:51 AM

70. I agree with you completely.

That's one of the things I dislike about Hillary.

Trump is (likely) attacking her on it now to help Bernie win the primary. And because he's illogical, he could continue to do so later, but I don't think it will get traction with the GE voters, since, while Hillary is flirting with big business, the Republicans are MARRIED to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #70)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:55 AM

111. Yes but Donald Trump is not reliant on the big money

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #111)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:56 PM

155. No, he just admits that he has bought politicians in the past with a quid pro quo!

Isn't that a crime? I believe that it is influence peddling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #155)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:40 PM

173. I can assure you that voters will look at the two sides of the coin very differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:44 AM

22. As if Bill & Hillary aren't dumping mud on Bernie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #22)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:58 AM

24. If you think this is bad, wait until Republicans start

bringing in the heavy equipment to dump shit on him.

Then you'll really know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:07 AM

34. They invented ' Citizens United ' partially so they could Openly hate Hillary, even though they have

 

the same Boss, 1%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:10 AM

36. So, we've established that BOTH candidates

will be attacked by the Republicans. That still does not deter me from supporting Bernie Sanders, any more than it will deter you from supporting Hi11ary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #36)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:12 AM

38. What we have established is Hillary has already faced it for decades, and with Bernie it hasn't even

begun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:40 AM

66. How is that even relevant?

That's what I don't understand. Each of these candidates will be subject to attack. Why is this even an issue that is supposed to deter us from voting for Bernie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #66)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:43 AM

67. One person has already been through the bullshit and is still standing.

That's something to consider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #67)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:49 AM

225. She won 2 elections virtually unopposed and was given the SoS job by Obama.

She's quite a fighter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:45 PM

180. What has she won while facing all that GOP stuff?

Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:03 PM

149. GOP can use Hillary's words against Bernie n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:02 PM

165. Just like that happened in 2008, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:01 AM

27. The GOP will savagely attack any and all Democratic candidates.

But the dopes have been calling Obama a Socialist for 8 years. They have destroyed their best talking point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:03 AM

30. Seems like camp Weathervane PROVES that you can't stop him with ...

..."because socialism" ... True. I read your post from last year with interest, too.

Nobody (deemed in my book as a Republicrat) really wants Bernie to go any further...

Camp Weathervane should just continue until they BERN out and we're ALL sick of their fascist based arguments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:04 AM

31. It' called " Esoteric " and it's a compliment to his courage and their Cowardice .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:13 AM

39. There is one thing we don't know about Hillary Clinton:

the outcome of the FBI investigation. You must notice the GOP is staying quiet about emails, Benghazi, etc. lately. They don't want it to get stale before the general election. Hillary as a nominee is far from a cake walk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #39)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:24 AM

50. this is true-- and there could be serious dirty tricks yet to come on this

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:14 AM

40. I would have said it's code for "Super Tuesday firewall failing!!!!"

because there's no need to convince people Bernie can't win in November if you're sure he can't win the nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to winter is coming (Reply #40)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:34 AM

58. +1

Bingo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:23 AM

49. I actually don't think the GOP knows how to attack Sanders

 

all they really seem to have are old tired attacks that he is ready for.

What is really the worst they can say about him? He's a communist? Already did that. He will raise taxes? Already did that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fast Walker 52 (Reply #49)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:40 AM

93. He's been attacked as a socialist since his humble beginnings. He's quite ready for this line of

attack. After that they have little of substance, just like Hillary has little to use against him. If Bernie's proposals are to be framed as not serious by the GOP, then WTF have the GOP got, cause I can't think of a less serious group of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #93)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 12:32 PM

133. indeed! If there's any group of people who should be afriad of political attack--

 

it should be the freaking horrible GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:29 AM

55. no - it's codespeak for "The GOP will savagely attack Sanders"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:55 AM

72. I'm Kinda Torn...

What if I want Bernie to win but don't want Hillary or any of the republican candidates to win?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:00 AM

74. The wingnuts that I know are certainly calling Bernie a socialist like it's a dirty word

However, several of them have also given note to Bernie's honesty and integrity.

Whatever bad things you want to say about Bernie, you can't there's the slightest indication he's been bought or is for sale. That's not true for any of the other viable candidates on either side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:15 AM

80. No, it's meant to imply that Sanders can't take a punch.

Clinton has certainly survived and thrived as a wingnut bugbear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:30 AM

85. Free Republic

 

Features more attacks on Bernie than Hillary now, it seems upon casual inspection. The freepers are in disarray, Trump is the equivalent to Bernie for the GOP establishment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:30 AM

86. It's more like:

1> Look what I found in the sink!

2> What is it?

1> I don't know.

2> Let's throw it at Bernie!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:31 AM

87. and vice-versa

...the Hillary can't win threads suggesting republicans will scandalize her; almost wishful thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:33 AM

89. What I find the most laughable about this argument (if you can even call it an argument)

is that the assumption is that the Republicans will be the worst that Sanders will face. The assertion is that this is when the real attacks come out.

So, this means that HRC is holding back? LOL! With David "hatchet job" Brock on the case...are you kidding?

She's throwing everything she can at him. They've got people working 24/7 to make something--anything--stick on Sanders.

The Clinton camp is desperate to save her campaign. The worst is happening right now. Anyone who tells you any differently is being disingenuous, or has an agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CoffeeCat (Reply #89)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:41 AM

96. Exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CoffeeCat (Reply #89)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:57 AM

115. Well said! With David Brock as Hillary's attack dog we are already getting a fair amount of what

we will see from the GOP and Bernie is still kicking ass in the caucuses and primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CoffeeCat (Reply #89)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:08 PM

167. Yep. What they're admitting is that either Hillary's oppo research team really REALLY sucks..

or there is no there there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:37 AM

90. The GOP won't like Democrats. Period. Why should I give a fuck?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #90)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:49 AM

106. There you go, making sense. How dare you ;) nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:39 AM

92. yep. That's exactly what it is.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/wall-street-republicans-hillary-clinton-2016-106070#ixzz3bozWtjbV

The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:41 AM

97. If HRC Had Dirt

that would cause the Sanders campaign to implode, don't you think she'd have used it by now so she could start storing up cash for the GE? Yeah, I get how folks think that she's 'pulling her punches' but I don't think she is, at least not right now. We've moved from the HRC campaign ignoring Sanders to belittling him to now trying to eviscerate him, and it's not working.

My point is that whatever the repukes could come up with in the GE, it would have to be completely made up and ridiculous. Same thing happened in 08. Every piece of slime that could even be twisted into fake outrage or a fake scandal was tossed at Obama by HRC. None of it stuck because it was all garbage - Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, Obama in weird garb bowing in MuslimLand, et al. I don't remember anything 'new' coming out in the GE, and I thought at the time that if Obama could run the gauntlet that is the Clinton Machine unscathed, he'd have no problem with the Roves of the world. I feel the same way now with Sanders. The Clintons are not going to leave any stone unturned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SDJay (Reply #97)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:46 AM

102. No, because she does not need to and she wants sanders votes in November

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #102)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:47 AM

103. The GOP attack ads on Sanders write themselves

The attack ads from this appearance on Meet the Press write themselves https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/12/why-bernie-sanders-isnt-going-to-be-president-in-5-words/

Meet the Press ✔ @meetthepress
CHUCK TODD: Are you a capitalist?@BernieSanders: No. I'm a Democratic Socialist.
8:33 AM - 11 Oct 2015

And, in those five words, Sanders showed why — no matter how much energy there is for him on the liberal left — he isn't getting elected president.

Why? Because Democrat or Republican (or independent), capitalism remains a pretty popular concept — especially when compared to socialism. A 2011 Pew Research Center survey showed that 50 percent of people had a favorable view of capitalism, while 40 percent had an unfavorable one. Of socialism, just three in 10 had a positive opinion, while 61 percent saw it in a negative light.

Wrote Pew in a memo analyzing the results:

Of these terms, socialism is the more politically polarizing — the reaction is almost universally negative among conservatives, while generally positive among liberals. While there are substantial differences in how liberals and conservatives think of capitalism, the gaps are far narrower.

...The simple political fact is that if Sanders did ever manage to win the Democratic presidential nomination — a long shot but far from a no shot at this point — Republicans would simply clip Sanders's answer to Todd above and put it in a 30-second TV ad. That would, almost certainly, be the end of Sanders's viability in a general election.

Americans might be increasingly aware of the economic inequality in the country and increasingly suspicious of so-called vulture capitalism — all of which has helped fuel Sanders's rise. But we are not electing someone who is an avowed socialist to the nation's top political job. Just ain't happening.

You can try to argue that the two terms are not the same but that will not stop the Kochs from running $200 milion to $300 million using that term in negative ads that would be very effective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #103)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:00 PM

142. At this point, what difference does it make.

Expect to hear that in a GOP ad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #142)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 06:13 PM

236. You do realize that Rove is already throwing everything he has against Clinton in the primaries

Rove has determined that Sanders would be the weakest possible Democratic nominee and so has been running negative ads against Clinton in Iowa, NH and Nevada. For example, the ads in Iowa were normal Karl Rove lies http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-flattered-karl-rove-attack-ad/story?id=36343405

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton laughed off a new attack ad from a Republican super PAC run by Karl Rove during an interview Sunday on “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos.

The web spot, titled “Hillary’s Bull Market,” was launched by American Crossroads, which is run by the Republican strategist and former President George W. Bush adviser. After watching the ad for the first time during her interview on “This Week,” Clinton just smiled.

“I think it shows how desperate the Republicans are to prevent me from becoming the nominee,” Clinton said about the ad, which goes after her ties to Wall Street. “I find that, in a perverse way, an incredibly flattering comment on their anxiety, because they know that not only will I stand up for what the country needs, I will take it to the Republicans.”

In Nevada, Rove is accusing Clinton of being anti-immigrant http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/269460-rove-super-pac-links-clinton-to-trump-on-immigration-in

The super-PAC founded by Republican operative Karl Rove is running a provocative new attack ad in Nevada designed to paint Hillary Clinton as anti-immigrant.

American Crossroads is launching a digital ad titled "Hillary's Wall" that attempts to tie some of Clinton's harsher past remarks about immigration to those of Donald Trump, the current Republican front-runner.
In one scene in the commercial, influential Univision anchor Jorge Ramos asks Clinton, "What's the difference between your idea and Donald Trump's idea on building a wall?"

Preceding that moment are clips - all subtitled in Spanish - that show Clinton making tough comments about immigration that could now alienate large sections of the Democratic base.

Sanders would be a far weaker general election candidate which is why Rove is targeting Clinton.

What more do you think that Rove has to throw at Clinton that he has not used so far in Iowa. Clinton is surviving the worse that Rove can throw at her and is still doing well in these races. Again, the claims that Rove is holding back on Clinton is amusing.

Why do you think that Rove is spending so much to attack Clinton in these primaries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #236)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 06:32 PM

238. "Sanders would be a far weaker general election candidate"

It's hard to imagine how Sanders will survive without Wall St. money and an FBI investigation hanging over his head --


But I'm totally willing to find out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #102)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 12:09 PM

131. I Don't Think They Foresaw The Need

to directly attack SBS a few months ago, but they're certainly seeing it now. And yes, she will need those votes if she's the nominee, but I still think their approach would be to take him out as early as possible through some Super PAC or surrogate or whisper campaign or something not directly from HRC and then spend the next several months courting the SBS voters. That's IMHO a better strategy than going through months of a tough primary fight.

The point is this whole "We need to not put SBS on the ticket because the repukes will come hard after him" is bunk IMHO. They're going to "savage" the nominee no matter who it is, and I'd rather they try to paint SBS as some commie than have the soft middle listen to MONTHS of the Whitewater crap, the Lewinsky garbage, travelgate, BENGHAZI!!, the emails, yada yada yada.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #102)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:11 PM

170. Bill just called Sanders supporters the tea party of the left.

She must not want those votes all that much, because they just lost an awful lot of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #170)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:20 PM

172. I'm Pretty Sure That's One

you won't hear from the repukes in the GE. We know what's coming for each candidate:

HRC:

Whitewater
Travelgate
Lewinsky
Some of the loonier ones will bring up Vince Foster
Impeachment
BENGHAZI!!!
Emailgate
Servergate
Made-upGate x 100

SBS:

Wife's loan mess
Hippie freak
Fraud - not actually a civil rights leader
COMMUNIST!
SOCIALIST!
NATIONALIZING ALL INDUSTRY!

I think it makes a difference for the soft middle to hear this crappola for the first time as opposed to hearing about it for the millionth time. Those who are old enough are going to say, "Oh, man, not all this old Clinton crap again. I'm not sure I want to hear about all of this for 4 years."

I think that's worse for the good guys than hearing SOCIALIST and then realizing that sidewalks, highways, the mail, parks, and some forms of medical care are socialist programs.

There will be more of a visceral reaction to those old Clinton scandals, even if they're fake, than there will be to the 'dirt' on SBS. Of course, that's JMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SDJay (Reply #97)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:11 PM

171. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:45 AM

99. Clinton Camp: GOP Attacks On Hillary Show They'd Rather Face Bernie In Fall

The GOP really wants to run against a weaker candidate which is Sanders because he is such a weak candidate who is very vulnerable to attack ads. That is why Karl Rove is running attack ads against Clinton and in favor of Sanders http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-karl-rove-attack

The Hillary Clinton campaign on Tuesday said that recent attacks from conservatives show that Republicans are hoping Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will win the Democratic nomination because they believe he would be easier to beat in the general election.

In a Tuesday evening statement, the Clinton campaign's communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, mentioned an ad from the Rove-aligned super PAC American Crossroads, which accused Clinton of being in Wall Street's pocket. Palmieri said the ad suggests that Republicans want to face Sanders in the general election.

"While Senator Sanders tries to make a case on electability based on meaningless polls, Republicans and their super PACs have made clear the candidate they’re actually afraid to face. The Sanders argument falls apart when the GOP spokesman is trying to help him and the Republicans run ads trying to stop Hillary Clinton in the primary," she said in the statement.

Karl Rove is running an attack ad against Clinton. Rove is doing this for one purpose which is to weaken the strongest candidate. Rove knows that Sanders is a weak candidate who will be easy to beat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #99)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:59 AM

116. "The Hillary Clinton campaign on Tuesday said..."

Yes, I've no doubt the Clinton campaign wants us to think Sanders' stated philosophy of government will be a big issue in the general election. And I also have no doubt she finds herself exempt from such criticisms. In fact, I believe it so much I wrote the OP about that very thing.

Karl Rove is running an attack ad against Clinton. Rove is doing this for one purpose which is to weaken the strongest candidate. Rove knows that Sanders is a weak candidate who will be easy to beat

Yeah, can you believe Rove and the GOP would run ads about Clinton being under a criminal FBI investigation? Where would they even get that sort of material from except for the fact that by the time the general election rolls around she will have been under investigation for 6 years, 4 of which were past her time as an administration official. You'd think someone more politically savvy would have been able to lay these allegations to rest, not watch as they slowly metastasize into a criminal investigation.

How does this make her more electable/palatable?

We certainly wouldn't want this election to bog down on discussions about the proper role of government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #116)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 06:14 PM

237. You do realize that Rove is already throwing everything he has against Clinton in the primaries

Rove has determined that Sanders would be the weakest possible Democratic nominee and so has been running negative ads against Clinton in Iowa, NH and Nevada. For example, the ads in Iowa were normal Karl Rove lies http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-flattered-karl-rove-attack-ad/story?id=36343405

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton laughed off a new attack ad from a Republican super PAC run by Karl Rove during an interview Sunday on “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos.

The web spot, titled “Hillary’s Bull Market,” was launched by American Crossroads, which is run by the Republican strategist and former President George W. Bush adviser. After watching the ad for the first time during her interview on “This Week,” Clinton just smiled.

“I think it shows how desperate the Republicans are to prevent me from becoming the nominee,” Clinton said about the ad, which goes after her ties to Wall Street. “I find that, in a perverse way, an incredibly flattering comment on their anxiety, because they know that not only will I stand up for what the country needs, I will take it to the Republicans.”

In Nevada, Rove is accusing Clinton of being anti-immigrant http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/269460-rove-super-pac-links-clinton-to-trump-on-immigration-in

The super-PAC founded by Republican operative Karl Rove is running a provocative new attack ad in Nevada designed to paint Hillary Clinton as anti-immigrant.

American Crossroads is launching a digital ad titled "Hillary's Wall" that attempts to tie some of Clinton's harsher past remarks about immigration to those of Donald Trump, the current Republican front-runner.
In one scene in the commercial, influential Univision anchor Jorge Ramos asks Clinton, "What's the difference between your idea and Donald Trump's idea on building a wall?"

Preceding that moment are clips - all subtitled in Spanish - that show Clinton making tough comments about immigration that could now alienate large sections of the Democratic base.

Sanders would be a far weaker general election candidate which is why Rove is targeting Clinton.

What more do you think that Rove has to throw at Clinton that he has not used so far in Iowa. Clinton is surviving the worse that Rove can throw at her and is still doing well in these races. Again, the claims that Rove is holding back on Clinton is amusing.

Why do you think that Rove is spending so much to attack Clinton in these primaries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #237)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 06:33 PM

239. You're just spamming entire posts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:49 AM

104. Indeed. The lesser of two evils to our corporate owned democracy.

Of course they prefer someone in bed with the same megalomaniacs they are than someone who wants to inspect those sheets under a blacklight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:55 AM

112. It is a redirection. That's all it is. They know Hillary will get viciously attacked by the GOP.

Hell, I bet the very first thing they do is start impeachment proceedings. I pay no attention to their attempts to make it seem like Bernie would be the only one attacked by the GOP. It is simply another pathetic meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #112)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 12:14 PM

132. Yep. Another Concern of Mine

If HRC wins and becomes POTUS, we'd all have to endure what would basically be 4 years of impeachment hearings. But that's a concern for another day. I just want to make sure that none of those nuts from the other side get close to the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #112)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:04 PM

174. They are planning to impeach her on day one...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mo-brooks-hillary-clinton_us_5625053de4b0bce3470156eb
"And in my judgement, with respect to Hillary Clinton, she will be a unique president if she is elected by the public next November, because the day she's sworn in is the day that she's subject to impeachment because she has committed high crimes and misdemeanors," he said.

On Monday evening, Brooks told MSNBC that he believes Clinton has already committed what would be an impeachable offense if she became president, citing her handling of the documents on her private server.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:21 AM

121. the whole 'she's been attacked by the Right for decades...she is battle-tested, battle-tough'...

is irrelevant bullshit...

Bernie hits her on points and facts, but he keeps things from being outright vitriolic attacks to try to diminish her person...Bernie is willing to discuss and compare their differences...and, of course, some of HRC's historical/factual background concerns things she (and her supporters) would rather avoid being brought into the discussion...

What will be the nature of the GOP attacks on Hillary? Benghazi, emails, servers, etc. are all the same crap she's been dealing with for what, four years? All the gotta-hate-Hillary specious attacks HAVE been going on since the '90s, but they are merely preaching to their choir.

What do you think the GOP will do with the speeches? "Dear Mr/Mrs Regular American. Do you feel disconnected from the leadership in Washington. Do you feel it is time for a leader that made $225,000 IN ONE HOUR IN ONE SPEECH to one of the companies that broke our economy? Don't you wonder what a $225,000 speech can possibly be about? $225,000 for ONE HOUR for ONE SPEECH...and she made more than one! Nice work if you can get it, etc."...

She has never been THE CANDIDATE...the past 'decades of attack' were for different stakes...there are most likely monsters the GOP has been waiting years to unleash...and HRC shows she can attack, but actually fend off the attacks?...she did great at the Benghazi hearing, but that was just some idiot Congressmen who were parading and prancing...I would say she has not had the full force of the RW Hate Machine cranked up against her in a long time...they won't want to take her down, they will want to STOP HER...and they will be able to turn out those kind of voters who absolutely hate what she represents...I wouldn't worry about 'electability' so much as 'acceptability'...her negatives in areas like TRUST and perception of HONESTY put her in a position where she may not inspire as many people to turn out because of her and the other side WILL turn out...because of her

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:50 AM

126. Republicans attack anyone who does not agree with their views be it Democrats or Socialists.

As if Hillary is elected it will be all Kumbaya. Rank desperation form the Hillary camp.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #126)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:57 AM

128. "As if Hillary is elected it will be all Kumbaya. Rank desperation form the Hillary camp."

What is scarier?

That they're selling us a bunch of nonsense -- or that they might be right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #128)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 12:07 PM

130. None of it is scary. The republicans will go after Bernie with all they have,

they will do the same thing with Hillary. Difference is what they will go after Hillary with actually looks as it could be bad or like there is something there. Most voters do not view Hillary as honest or trustworthy, that's a sad fact. I think the last poll I saw it was like Sixty percent of voters don't trust her. That's a real problem and the GOP hasn't even started on her, they are busy eating eating each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:47 PM

141. GOP wants Hillary to win the nomination

she has so much they can BBQ her with. Bernie has the people behind him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:02 PM

143. Yeah your "seems to be" translator is broken

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to themaguffin (Reply #143)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:06 PM

145. Please feel free to explain why the GOP won't savagely attack Hillary as they would Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #145)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:13 PM

146. They will. NOBODY said that they wouldn't. On the contrary, they will be ugly.

They hate her.

But the wording in the OP is the translation that "Hillary is acceptable to her"

This is called a straw man argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to themaguffin (Reply #146)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:47 PM

147. It's Clinton's supporters who are insisting there will be some difference between her and Sanders

with regards to the inevitable GOP attacks.

According to them the attacks will focus on Sen. Sanders' call for Universal Healthcare and fair tax policy; all things that, heretofore, were core principles of the Democratic party. Now that Sec. Clinton has adopted every GOP talking point against these ideals in a misguided effort to undermine Sen. Sanders she has done their dirty work for them.

And with annoying policy debates out of the way they are free to discuss Benghazi, email servers, criminal investigations by the FBI, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #147)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:53 PM

148. enough with the tit for tat bullshit.

Clinton supporters say shit. Bernie supporters say shit. Let's stop acting like it's on group saying shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to themaguffin (Reply #148)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:08 PM

150. It's not about tit-for-tat, it's about Clinton supporters explaining how they imagine their

talking points playing out in the election.

She already gave away the farm vis-a-vis policy so when she is inevitably attacked it won't be on policy. That leaves the "scandals" and they aren't going away as they have metastasized into a criminal investigation.

How is an election over the believability of a 6-year investigation leading to FBI involvement better than an election over the proper role of government?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #150)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:38 PM

153. Jesus, you right back to it.

Have at it. Respond if you want, but I'm not wasting more time with childish bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to themaguffin (Reply #153)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:00 PM

157. If only you had provided an actual point of debate rather than merely complain I made a post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #157)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:56 AM

233. I was clear, but go ahead and comment again.

So tired of this petty bullshit.

Anyone who thinks that both sides aren't doing it, belongs in delusional Freeperland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:04 PM

175. Not so much that "Hillary is acceptable to the GOP,"

 

but that "Sanders is not acceptable to the oligarchs that fund Hillary and the GOP."

It can't be any more plain: Sanders is staunchly opposed by moneyed interests, Hillary is richly supported by moneyed interests.

These are the same moneyed interests that profited from the Iraq war and crashed the economy. It is right and good that Sanders is not acceptable to them - I would have it no other way. The fact that Hillary is in bed with them is why I will not vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:48 PM

181. Good! The GOP will savagely attack

it's what they do. Any Dem is the most radical left-wing socialist ever. Whether it is Gore, Kerry, Obama, or Sanders.

So why not give them a Democratic socialist, at a time when Americans are not so afraid of the word "socialist" as they used to.

The GOP have probably worn out a lot of moderates and liberals with their bullshit about Obama these last 7 years.

Frankly, if the candidates of both parties are too similar, the swing voters will chose the Republican because it's a different party and feels like change.

The fact that so many people support Bernie, scares the hell out of some establishment types. (same with Trump)

America needs a very clear difference, and it has never been this clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:27 PM

189. Hillary is acceptable to the elite - she may take *some* heat from the GOP

 

enough to make it look like it's a real fight but the MSM has been giving her a pass on issues that should make her most vulnerable. They will probably continue to do so. I think she will continue to enjoy a hands-off approach to her abysmal record as well as her scandals, even in the GE. Either candidate will be acceptable to those who run this country, so whichever puppet the public will accept will be crowned next Jan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 11:28 PM

192. Yup. It's Code. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 12:09 AM

198. Coulda fooled me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 12:57 AM

200. The GOP isn't going to throw anything at Bernie that Hillary

hasn't yet or is planning in the near future.

He'll do really well in the GE against anyone in the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:08 AM

202. The hill fans are scared. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 01:21 AM

205. i love this op. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 02:02 AM

206. The History Channel will start having shows about Stalin and the KGB.. just watch.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 06:39 AM

210. Democrats would be insane to nominate Bernie Sanders

Dana Milbank has some good comments on the possible attacks on Sanders https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Sanders and his supporters boast of polls showing him, on average, matching up slightly better against Trump than Clinton does. But those matchups are misleading: Opponents have been attacking and defining Clinton for a quarter- century, but nobody has really gone to work yet on demonizing Sanders.

Watching Sanders at Monday night’s Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump — or another Republican nominee — would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.


The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the “socialist” label and requested that Sanders define it “so that it doesn’t concern the rest of us citizens.”

Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who don’t want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: “Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top — that’s my definition of democratic socialism.”

But that’s not how Republicans will define socialism — and they’ll have the dictionary on their side. They’ll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. They’ll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldn’t be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists don’t win national elections in the United States .

Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases — “one of the biggest tax hikes in history,” as moderator Chris Cuomo put it — to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that “hypothetically, you’re going to pay $5,000 more in taxes,” and declared, “W e will raise taxes, yes we will.” He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that “it’s demagogic to say, oh, you’re paying more in taxes.

Well, yes — and Trump is a demagogue.

Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government “bigger than ever,” Sanders didn’t quarrel, saying, “P eople want to criticize me, okay,” and “F ine, if that’s the criticism, I accept it.”

Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.

Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads in the general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #210)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:40 AM

214. no baggage is supposed to be worse than 25 years of baggage culminating in a criminal investigation?

What color is the sky in Milbank's world?

The entire article is one big "let's close our eyes really tight and wish ever so hard!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:36 AM

212. FDR and Bernie

 


And isn't the response . . ."I welcome their hatred."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:09 AM

229. The last Democrat to run for POTUS promising to raise taxes

Was Walter Mondale. He won one state. His home state of MN

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Wed Feb 17, 2016, 11:53 AM

232. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 01:07 PM

241. I've said before and now, I'll say it again: A Democrat's basing his or her own words and deeds on

how Republicans may react is dumb. They're just not that into us--any of us-- and nothing we can do will change that. Besides, they're evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread