Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:23 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
Susan Sarandon is the perfect face of the Bernie or Bust movement.
Rich, white, and owns a trendy ping-pong nightclub in Manhattan.
What happens to her if Trump gets elected? Nothing. She keeps being rich and white and owning a trendy ping-pong nightclub in Manhattan. And she keeps going on TV and complaining about problems that don't affect her and that she has made worse by helping Trump get elected.
|
179 replies, 13279 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | OP |
Trenzalore | Mar 2016 | #1 | |
obamanut2012 | Mar 2016 | #28 | |
lunamagica | Mar 2016 | #152 | |
appalachiablue | Mar 2016 | #175 | |
sufrommich | Mar 2016 | #2 | |
JackRiddler | Mar 2016 | #169 | |
rjsquirrel | Mar 2016 | #3 | |
TheCowsCameHome | Mar 2016 | #4 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #5 | |
JonLeibowitz | Mar 2016 | #40 | |
Tanuki | Mar 2016 | #14 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #96 | |
lunamagica | Mar 2016 | #156 | |
brush | Mar 2016 | #163 | |
JackInGreen | Mar 2016 | #6 | |
berni_mccoy | Mar 2016 | #7 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #12 | |
JackInGreen | Mar 2016 | #18 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #8 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #10 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #13 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #15 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #17 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #82 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #97 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #100 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #108 | |
astrophuss42 | Mar 2016 | #16 | |
anothergreenbus | Mar 2016 | #155 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #157 | |
anothergreenbus | Mar 2016 | #179 | |
TheCowsCameHome | Mar 2016 | #11 | |
anothergreenbus | Mar 2016 | #159 | |
RiverLover | Mar 2016 | #9 | |
baldguy | Mar 2016 | #19 | |
BeyondGeography | Mar 2016 | #20 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #24 | |
BeyondGeography | Mar 2016 | #63 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #66 | |
BeyondGeography | Mar 2016 | #72 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #73 | |
brush | Mar 2016 | #165 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #166 | |
brush | Mar 2016 | #170 | |
Dragonfli | Mar 2016 | #74 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #76 | |
bettyellen | Mar 2016 | #135 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #137 | |
redstateblues | Mar 2016 | #75 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #78 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #99 | |
onehandle | Mar 2016 | #21 | |
My Good Babushka | Mar 2016 | #22 | |
Starry Messenger | Mar 2016 | #23 | |
obamanut2012 | Mar 2016 | #29 | |
Starry Messenger | Mar 2016 | #35 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #37 | |
Starry Messenger | Mar 2016 | #38 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #39 | |
Starry Messenger | Mar 2016 | #41 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #42 | |
Starry Messenger | Mar 2016 | #45 | |
Darb | Mar 2016 | #25 | |
dchill | Mar 2016 | #26 | |
Katashi_itto | Mar 2016 | #68 | |
redstateblues | Mar 2016 | #77 | |
dchill | Mar 2016 | #79 | |
noiretextatique | Mar 2016 | #138 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #101 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #112 | |
Firebrand Gary | Mar 2016 | #27 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #30 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #36 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #44 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #47 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #50 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #55 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #57 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #58 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #59 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #60 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #61 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #62 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #48 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #49 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #51 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #56 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #70 | |
LexVegas | Mar 2016 | #71 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #104 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #106 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #109 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #52 | |
JackInGreen | Mar 2016 | #54 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #102 | |
Motown_Johnny | Mar 2016 | #31 | |
Gothmog | Mar 2016 | #32 | |
hellofromreddit | Mar 2016 | #33 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #34 | |
Nonhlanhla | Mar 2016 | #64 | |
Agschmid | Mar 2016 | #69 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #83 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #93 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #115 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #117 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #119 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #121 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #130 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #136 | |
asuhornets | Mar 2016 | #84 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #103 | |
asuhornets | Mar 2016 | #110 | |
JCanete | Mar 2016 | #118 | |
asuhornets | Mar 2016 | #122 | |
redstateblues | Mar 2016 | #81 | |
alcibiades_mystery | Mar 2016 | #43 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2016 | #46 | |
EdwardBernays | Mar 2016 | #53 | |
polichick | Mar 2016 | #67 | |
Nanjeanne | Mar 2016 | #65 | |
RandySF | Mar 2016 | #80 | |
MoonRiver | Mar 2016 | #94 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #105 | |
Armstead | Mar 2016 | #116 | |
frylock | Mar 2016 | #125 | |
tonedevil | Mar 2016 | #178 | |
Kelvin Mace | Mar 2016 | #85 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #86 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #87 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #88 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #89 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #90 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #91 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #92 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #107 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #120 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #123 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #124 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #127 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #128 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #139 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #140 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #142 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #143 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #145 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #146 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #148 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #154 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #160 | |
DanTex | Mar 2016 | #162 | |
uponit7771 | Mar 2016 | #95 | |
mcar | Mar 2016 | #98 | |
Corruption Inc | Mar 2016 | #111 | |
2banon | Mar 2016 | #113 | |
RandySF | Mar 2016 | #114 | |
whatchamacallit | Mar 2016 | #126 | |
hrmjustin | Mar 2016 | #129 | |
DisgustipatedinCA | Mar 2016 | #131 | |
hrmjustin | Mar 2016 | #133 | |
DisgustipatedinCA | Mar 2016 | #134 | |
R B Garr | Mar 2016 | #132 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #147 | |
R B Garr | Mar 2016 | #149 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #150 | |
R B Garr | Mar 2016 | #151 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #153 | |
R B Garr | Mar 2016 | #158 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #164 | |
R B Garr | Mar 2016 | #171 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2016 | #177 | |
bravenak | Mar 2016 | #141 | |
thebeautifulstruggle | Mar 2016 | #144 | |
lunamagica | Mar 2016 | #161 | |
HawkMode | Mar 2016 | #167 | |
JackRiddler | Mar 2016 | #168 | |
Logical | Mar 2016 | #172 | |
AgingAmerican | Mar 2016 | #173 | |
DisgustipatedinCA | Mar 2016 | #174 | |
BainsBane | Mar 2016 | #176 |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:25 AM
Trenzalore (2,056 posts)
1. Doesn't she shill for a make-up company and a pharmaceutical company as well
Pure as the driven snow.
|
Response to Trenzalore (Reply #1)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:10 AM
obamanut2012 (23,829 posts)
28. I know she shills for Tylenol
Response to Trenzalore (Reply #1)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:05 PM
lunamagica (9,967 posts)
152. She's the face of L'oreal, which has a terrible track record, including, but not limited to, child
labor
|
Response to lunamagica (Reply #152)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:37 PM
appalachiablue (38,310 posts)
175. The Face of L'Oreal, same for Clinton stumper, actress Eva Longoria & other women, for the record.
Response to sufrommich (Reply #2)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:40 PM
JackRiddler (24,979 posts)
169. Yes, she's quite pretty.
And smart and dedicated. Good face for any movement.
Clinton's SOS policies in the end helped make Syrian refugees. Sarandon at least wants to help them. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/dec/29/susan-sarandon-refugees-lesbos-christmas |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:27 AM
rjsquirrel (4,762 posts)
3. I despised her long before this
the very essence of a limousine liberal.
And massively overrated as an actress. |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:30 AM
TheCowsCameHome (40,072 posts)
4. That's silly
I guess successful folks can't support Bernie now?
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:31 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
5. I think successful people are great. But I like them more when they also care about less successful
people.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #5)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:27 AM
JonLeibowitz (6,282 posts)
40. Like her activism with Syrian refugees?
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:38 AM
Tanuki (14,208 posts)
14. Apparently they can be as rich as God, but Bernie will say it is "obscene" if they spend their
money supporting down-ticket Democrats all over the country as the Clooneys do.
|
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:35 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
96. They can be successful and act in the best interest of the country too no? tia
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:09 PM
lunamagica (9,967 posts)
156. She can support SBS all she wants. Is her callousness about a Trump presidency which makes her
despicable.
A Trump presidency will nor affect her, but it would be devastating for millions |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #4)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:17 PM
brush (46,895 posts)
163. Bernie is anti-corporate but Sarandon is well paid for shilling for corporations
There's a word for that.
Hypo . . . hypo something? |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:31 AM
JackInGreen (2,975 posts)
6. Loving the accusations above
with no links or otherwise, but please, continue.
We all know it's only because she didn't sing 'TOUCH ME, creature of the night!' to you. |
Response to JackInGreen (Reply #6)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:35 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
12. My mistake. If you're looking for a hip night of ping-pong in NYC, I recommend it!
Response to DanTex (Reply #12)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:52 AM
JackInGreen (2,975 posts)
18. I'm good, though I'd go if I were in the area
I'm sure I'd be able to afford that instead of one of hillaries dinners....probably for 99% less the cost too!
![]() |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:33 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
8. And George Clooney lives on a backwoods commune and is poor, AA and is never trendy?
I like and admire Clooney -- but it is just an example of the hypocrisy of your post....
You know who hates rich Hollywood limousine liberals don't you? Warch you some Fox news. Your meme is straight out of the mouth of Greg Guttfield or Bill o'Reilly. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #8)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:34 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
10. He's also not trying to help get Trump elected.
Response to DanTex (Reply #10)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:36 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
13. Neither is she. ...She is trying to get Bernie elected. I guess you missed that part
She was asked a question and answered it without saying it is what she wants.People are allowed to express themselves you know.
|
Response to Armstead (Reply #13)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:40 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
15. Please stop making excuses for her. She justified the BoB movement.
Response to DanTex (Reply #15)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:50 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
17. She doesn't need me to defend her
https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/susan-sarandon
http://www.israel21c.org/susan-sarandon-meets-israeli-aid-workers-helping-refugees/ http://www.heifer.org/join-the-conversation/blog/2012/October/susan-sarandon-heifer-internationals-work-empowers-women.html http://www.microgiving.com/blog/2014/04/susan-sarandon-charity-star-works-end-hunger-empower-women/ Susan Sarandon Charity: Star Works to End Hunger and Empower Women Posted in Help People by Becky Raymond sarandon_microgiving newsday.com Known for her roles in films like The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Bill Durham, Dead Man Walking, and Thelma & Louise, Susan Sarandon has had a successful and varied career in film. In addition to her roles as an actress, she has also served as a narrator for films and documentaries. She’s been in the spotlight for more than four decades now, and Sarandon often uses her celebrity to promote causes that help the poor, feed the hungry and empower women. Find out what the top Susan Sarandon charities are below. Heifer International Heifer International is a nonprofit organization dedicated to putting an end to world hunger and poverty. Sarandon has worked with them for years, and in 2012 did an in-person stint in Cambodia with Heifer International. There, she discovered that the women are the glue that holds families and communities together, especially when it comes to food. They both grow and prepare food and are the first line of defense against hunger. In September 2013, Susan Sarandon’s charity work was recognized by the organization when they made her the guest of honor at their latest benefit. UNICEF Since December 1999, Sarandon has dedicated much of her time helping UNICEF fight hunger, empower women and help people with HIV/AIDS. She became the UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador during that year. She helped launch the organization’s publication called “The State of the World’s Children,” a publication that focuses on childhood poverty. She has also done a number of PSAs for UNICEF to help promote their causes around the world. Amazon Conservation Team A favorite Susan Sarandon charity is the Amazon Conservation Team (ACT), a nonprofit that works to conserve the Amazon Rainforest and the culture of the people that live there. It was founded in 1996, and Sarandon has served on both the Board of Directors and the Advisory board for the organization. She has also narrated two award-winning films for ACT. Yele Haiti The Yele Haiti Foundation started by Wyclef Jean is another top Susan Sarandon charity. She serves on the board of advisors for the organization, which works to promote education, health, and community development in Haiti. Haiti is a poor nation, so Wyclef Jean’s objective is to give the country hope, strength, and optimism about the future. One of the organization’s biggest campaigns was for relief for the victims of the 2010 earthquake that ravaged the country. ---------------------------------- http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/271722-susan-sarandon-hollywood-stars-afraid-of-backing-sanders “There is only one candidate who cares about the environment in a real way and has not accepted money from the very people we’re trying to protect ourselves from,” Sarandon added of the independent Vermont lawmaker. “I am very enthusiastic about having a candidate who lives and professes a progressive platform because I care about the environment, and I care about women and children and the middle class.” Sarandon additionally derided the media for boosting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s credibility with voters. “The press is responsible for making Trump who he is,” she said. "Things have just not stuck on him, and I blame a lot of the circus that was created by the press and not treated seriously for allowing him to get as far as he has. “We’re just not reporting in-depth, responsible, grown-up kind of journalism. For being such a powerful country, we need to be better informed and more responsible in how we go about choosing candidates.” |
Response to Armstead (Reply #17)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:54 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
82. That's admirable. It's not nearly as much good work as the Clintons have done for people all over
the world, but still, I commend her for her efforts.
However, when she goes on national TV and justifies people helping Trump win on the grounds that it would hasten "the revolution," she deserves to be called out on it. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #13)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:36 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
97. Cloney doesn't think there's anything positive about Trump, Susan does though
Response to uponit7771 (Reply #97)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:38 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
100. That's irrelevant to the point of whether they both are privileged rich celebrities
Response to Armstead (Reply #100)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:43 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
108. It's relevant to your post I'm replying to, Cloney isn't stating anything positive about Trump
... Sarandon is and that's the pity here.
Continue to excuse her, I'm sure the ussual "no one ever defended Sarandon" post will show up in a month or two |
Response to DanTex (Reply #10)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:44 AM
astrophuss42 (290 posts)
16. Nope
HRC is doing a bang up job of that on her own.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #10)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:09 PM
anothergreenbus (110 posts)
155. Hillary and company are doing the most for Trump.
Instead of bringing the party together they are binge-flaming the progressive half of the base.
It's a dumb idea but they can't seem to stop. Too arrogant. Or maybe they really want Trump and Supreme Court, and etc.... |
Response to anothergreenbus (Reply #155)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:10 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
157. "Binge-flaming". Never heard that one before.
I'm part of the progressive half of the base. People who are considering helping Trump become president aren't progressives.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #157)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:34 PM
anothergreenbus (110 posts)
179. "People who are considering helping Trump become president aren't progressives."
Precisely. Why is the Clinton campaign doing that? It's so dumb to binge-flame the progressive base. It's going to let Trump win!
|
Response to Armstead (Reply #8)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:35 AM
TheCowsCameHome (40,072 posts)
11. Hey, HRC was dead broke when she left the WH.
But she pulled herself up by her bootstraps, evidently.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #11)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:13 PM
anothergreenbus (110 posts)
159. She was out sleeping on the (wall) street,
willing to sing whatever song they called, for a small donation.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:53 AM
BeyondGeography (38,561 posts)
20. She's a repeat offender
Couldn't tell the difference between Bush and Gore. After that disaster, it's hard to believe she's doubling down.
|
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #20)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:03 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
24. If Nader had never run for President, he'd have been a DU hero
His message and life's work is exactly what many DUers have claimed to want over the years. But since he had the effrontery to run as a minor candidate in what should have been a landslide for the Democrats, but which was stolen by the Supreme Court he is now a demon.
Same thing is being done to Sanders and his supporters by some people on DU for having the effrontery to run against Clinton in the primary. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #24)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:54 AM
BeyondGeography (38,561 posts)
63. Two different galaxies there, Armstead...He said the differences between Bush and Gore were nothing
compared with their similarities.
Here's what Bernie said: "Yes, we do agree on a number of issues, and by the way, on her worst day, Hillary Clinton will be an infinitely better candidate and President than the Republican candidate on his best day."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-candidate Bernie is a good man who will help us beat the GOP in the fall and go back to a productive life on behalf of the people in the Senate. Nader outlived his usefulness a long time ago. |
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #63)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:00 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
66. On issues of coporateate power and encouraging citizen involvement to balance that.....
Nader was right. And he and the network of organization have done a great job of einvestigating and trying to expose corporate malfeasance and abuse of power over the years.
Yes he was a moron in the political sphere, and he let his ego get the better of him. But his underlying message is still right on. I think Gore had the right instincts. I remember his convention acceptance speech was great....but the corporate centrists subsequently muzzled him, and he lost his populist edge. Gore has been much better as a private citizen where he could unleash his inner progressive. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #66)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:13 AM
BeyondGeography (38,561 posts)
72. Gore figured it out too late
The election wouldn't have been that close if not for the last week/10 days of his campaign when he shelved the canned stuff, started speaking from his heart and turned out the base. But who couldn't tell that W. was a smirking, incurious angryman who would do significant damage to our country? That was right there for everyone to see. And now, faced with Trump, an even more obvious disaster, we see otherwise intelligent people making the same dumbass mistake.
|
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #72)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:21 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
73. I had hoped Nader would drop out towards the end and endorse Gore
He was a fool for not doing that.
I'm not defending his personal failings. But Nader was voicing the frustration of many who were (and are) worried about the systemic corruption of our government and politics. I think, if one removed the politics and personal animosity, if Naders achievements and message over the years were presented to Democrats, I think many -- even those who support Clinton for pragmatic reasons -- would totally agree with his positions. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #66)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:31 PM
brush (46,895 posts)
165. A man's gotta know his limitations. Nader didn't in politics.
Too bad as he ended up helping Cheney/Bush devastate the Middle East — still being felt today with ISIS and the like — and not to mention our own economy.
|
Response to brush (Reply #165)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:33 PM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
166. I agree. he should have kept to what he did best
But his campaign did represent the same frustrations that are now being expressed on a more widespread basis by the movement behind Bernie
|
Response to Armstead (Reply #166)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:07 PM
brush (46,895 posts)
170. I feel many of those same frustrations but have not gotten anywhere near . . .
the misguided, IMO, tunnel vision of the "Bernie of Bust" crowd.
I vote blue no matter who, which would seem to be a no-brainer to sentient, progressive beings considering the alterative possibility of a Trump or Cruz presidency. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #24)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:39 AM
Dragonfli (10,622 posts)
74. "His message and life's work is exactly what many DUers have claimed to want over the years."
Time goes by so quickly, often we don't fully Grok the entirety of the changes along the way. There are many newish posters that are not at all representative of the DU we joined years ago. You earlier than I (I didn't officially register until '04. but did read the site along with Bartcop and a few others. previous to joining)
Back then and indeed for quite a while after, we were almost unanimously anti war, pro liberal and unapologetically against a corrupt system. Now we are over run with people that favor war and hawks, defend corruption and embrace the corrupt system and write apologetic screeds in favor of such corruption and rather than being pro liberal, many are rabidly neo-liberal, I see it all the time coming from prolific posters with post counts triple my own that have only been here a year or two. Where once I saw unity, I now see the seeds of division sown in an effort to promote a neo-liberal agenda and Rovian tactics being employed in such an obvious way that it appears the site we once knew has gone half circle (180°) and promotes so much of what Bush stood for as to be unrecognizable from the liberal haven it once was. Those that would applaud the man's life work, many of whom did not agree with his run, but were aware enough to know it was election fraud and a corrupt SCOTUS that installed an un elected hawk that favored the interests of the wealthy into the WH, are fewer now than ever, having been slowly replaced with those that not only favor War and it's chief current hawk, but also the interests of the wealthy and elite corrupt system that was at one time universally opposed here. My dear friend, this is no longer the site we joined and those of us that still believe in such principles as were once common here are being slowly, but efficiently replaced by what we joined together here to fight against over a decade ago. The same has happened to the party, which is why those registered as Democrats are shrinking at an alarming rate. The entire dynamic is unstable, and so the only thing certain is uncertainty regarding both the party and the site. Perhaps both will implode or both will return to saner, more equitable and just ideals, only time will tell. One thing has however become apparently certain, the underground aspect of the site is nearly now non-existent for it is fast becoming just another extension of a party corrupted as surely as it's chair DWS. |
Response to Dragonfli (Reply #74)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:43 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
76. The increase in anti-liberal posters is disturbing
There's always been a similar division on DU, and I think there are still a lot of progressives here.
But overall, I agree that the increase in outright conservative nonsense seems quite contrary to what the majority here were once about. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #76)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:28 PM
bettyellen (47,209 posts)
135. I think those promoting scorched earth fantasies are disturbing-
and that Sanders says totally different things than his most famous surrogate? she is way off message with this "things will really explode" bullshit. That is nothing to smile and laugh about. Bernie cannot be happy about this.
|
Response to bettyellen (Reply #135)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:53 PM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
137. I agree with her statement afterward....
When Chris Hayes said "But isn't that dangerous?
She responded (slightly paraphrased) "If you don't think it's dangerous to prop up the present status quo then you're not paying attention." I agree. If we keep going in this direction, we'll soon either be mired in dystopia or experience a series of not very pleasant reactions to a system that is depriving people of opportunity, decimating the middle and working class, ignoring the poor.....All while the upper 10 percent keep siphoning obscene levels of wealth upward....And if the political system continues to be in thrall to Big Corporations and the Billionaire Class......well, it won't be pretty. I realize those are sweeping statements but there are specifics of that everywhere. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #24)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:42 AM
redstateblues (10,559 posts)
75. Seriously? "not a dimes worth of difference" between Gore and Bush? What a fool
he is- and those that followed him. Thanks for Bush/Cheney
|
Response to redstateblues (Reply #75)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:46 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
78. Have you ever looked up the network of public interest groups he built?
Have you ever bothered to read what he has said and written outside of the two-party political frame?
I could find links but i won't bother. |
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #20)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:36 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
99. +1, rich and doesn't have to give a shit what happens to the others
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:58 AM
onehandle (51,122 posts)
21. Tinfoil Naderite that clearly illustrated the reasons that her 'side' can't win last night.
That interview should be broadcast nationwide.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:59 AM
My Good Babushka (2,710 posts)
22. From the same group
who wants to preserve every tax break for people who make a million dollars a year because that's really only middle class.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:00 AM
Starry Messenger (32,335 posts)
23. Someone on Twitter described her as an issues tourist.
About sums it up for me.
|
Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #23)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:12 AM
obamanut2012 (23,829 posts)
29. Yes, perfect!
Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #29)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:21 AM
Starry Messenger (32,335 posts)
35. Good morning!!
Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #23)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:22 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
37. Unlike that well of profundity Lena Dunham
Response to Armstead (Reply #37)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:23 AM
Starry Messenger (32,335 posts)
38. She's smart enough to not advocate for letting Trump win because revolution.
Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #38)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:26 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
39. Sarandon is not advocating for a Trump win either
Response to Armstead (Reply #39)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:28 AM
Starry Messenger (32,335 posts)
41. I watched the interview.
Go blow smoke somewhere else.
|
Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #41)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:31 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
42. So did I. and if you want to interpret it that way be my guest
And if you want to go blow smoke I can suggest where
|
Response to Armstead (Reply #42)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:32 AM
Starry Messenger (32,335 posts)
45. You guys would love this to go away. So adorbs
Her shit post trended for hours last night. Feeble efforts to hand-wave it noted.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:03 AM
Darb (2,807 posts)
25. Nailed it. But watch out, your post will get pulled.
All the anti-Hillarys are in cahoots to ban alternative opinions on the StopHillary Underground.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:04 AM
dchill (34,938 posts)
26. DanTex is the perfect face of the Hillary or Else movement.
Or, perhaps not?
![]() |
Response to dchill (Reply #26)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:44 AM
redstateblues (10,559 posts)
77. that is a smear-DanTex is voting for the Democrat
Response to redstateblues (Reply #77)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:46 AM
dchill (34,938 posts)
79. Oh, sorry.
Thought he was a Clinton supporter.
![]() |
Response to dchill (Reply #79)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:59 PM
noiretextatique (27,274 posts)
138. Lol eom
Response to dchill (Reply #26)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:38 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
101. DanTex promote Trump in any way? No?! well, I'll take that over what Susan did
Response to dchill (Reply #26)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:47 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
112. I'm voting for the Dem nominee, no matter who it is.
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:10 AM
Firebrand Gary (5,044 posts)
27. Just say no to BOB the buster!
![]() |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:12 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
30. The face of white privilege. nt
Response to LexVegas (Reply #30)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:21 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
36. And George Clooney isn't?
Response to Armstead (Reply #36)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:32 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
44. Does Clooney attack civil rights icons outside polling places? nt
Response to LexVegas (Reply #44)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:34 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
47. CR leaders who launch spurious wrongheaded attacks on the supporters of another candidate?
You mean that kind of civil rights icon?
No I don't think Clooney has done that. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #47)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:38 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
50. How has that worked out for capturing the AA and Hispanic vote?
![]() |
Response to LexVegas (Reply #50)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:43 AM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
55. Like last Saturday?
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #55)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:45 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
57. Scoreboard. nt
Response to LexVegas (Reply #57)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:48 AM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
58. It's not even Half Time.
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #58)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:49 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
59. Uh huh. Have your fun and fall in line in November. nt
Response to LexVegas (Reply #59)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:51 AM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
61. Are you trying to "Bring me to Heel"
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #61)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:52 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
62. Thats another one that helped Bernie get to low double digits with African Americans.
![]() |
Response to LexVegas (Reply #44)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:36 AM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
48. No Bill does
![]() |
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:38 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
49. Which civil rights icon? nt
Response to LexVegas (Reply #49)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:40 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
51. Senator Obama
Response to Armstead (Reply #51)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:44 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
56. Keep trying. Maybe you can get your guy to 20%.
![]() |
Response to LexVegas (Reply #56)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:06 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
70. A new national poll has him at 49 percent to 48 percent for Clinton..
and other polls show her losing support and him gaining too.
(Insert dismissive little smiley snark here) |
Response to Armstead (Reply #70)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:08 AM
LexVegas (5,394 posts)
71. The beautiful thing about it all is that we shall see who the better candidate is.
The candidate that wins the nomination. And then we can all come back and see who was right.
![]() |
Response to Armstead (Reply #51)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:39 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
104. Obama's a civil rights leader? tia
Response to uponit7771 (Reply #104)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:40 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
106. In a sense yes
If I have to explain it to you....it's not worth explaining
|
Response to Armstead (Reply #106)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:44 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
109. No Armstead, there's much more to being a civil rights leader than just speaking about what's right
... and having power to change it and being a minority of some type which everyone in the country falls into that category during their life.
|
Response to LexVegas (Reply #49)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:42 AM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
52. All Voters deserve the right to Vote, without that shit going on.
Response to LexVegas (Reply #49)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:43 AM
JackInGreen (2,975 posts)
54. Glad you've ejected Sister Souljah from civil rights activism
![]() The more things change, the more they stay the same. |
Response to Armstead (Reply #36)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:38 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
102. Nope, he's not promoting Trump in any way in this context
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:13 AM
Motown_Johnny (22,308 posts)
31. Intelligent, accomplished, hard working...
Gosh, why did those qualities of hers not make the list?
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:14 AM
Gothmog (126,611 posts)
32. Sarandon is the face of the bernie or bust movement
Her appearance on the Chris Hayes show was disturbing
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:19 AM
hellofromreddit (1,182 posts)
33. Five Thirty Eight says
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/714636508880363520/photo/1
The BoB movement is almost nonexistent. So it appears to be a nonissue. |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:21 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
34. Going to keep going with the blackmail theme?
Is all you've got for why we should vote for Hillary is that she'll continue to destroy democracy and disenfranchise people of color, not to mention the middle class, much more discretely than a crazy person like Trump? Fuck, at this point I'd rather somebody step on the gas and wake people up than to continue this sleepy cruising speed towards the cliff. That isn't white privilege speaking. It's looking long term. If I thought that Clinton didn't work for the very interests that are literally pilfering the American Dream, which is disproportionately hurting minorities, and then buying our democracy with the spoils, I wouldn't be so conflicted about whether or not to vote for her in the general. But I'm not going to be manipulated into voting to the right of Eisenhower because the alternate choice is "armageddon." That's a staged narrative. Hell, given that we have such a disaster on the Republican ticket, Clinton could tack far left, as Bernie has shown, and still beat him handily in the general, but she won't, because we aren't who she's working for. Don't tell me it's because she needs to work across the aisle, Obama tried working across the aisle. He made concession after concession, but with the money in politics we have, and the gerrymandered districts to boot, there was literally no incentive for the GOP to compromise. If for some reason Clinton can, as she says, get legislation passed, then I shutter to think of the consequences of that legislation. By the way, as a rich person, Susan actually does stand to pay more in taxes under a realized Sanders tax plan. I have no problem with people voting their self interests, but when insiders and CEOS, basically anybody making over 200,000, get behind Clinton, that's far more predictable, because it's actually good for them. It doesn't mean its the reason, but it's a hell of a lot more convenient. To pretend that its them that's looking out for everyone else and its people like Susan who are in an insular bubble, is kind of a hard sell to me when their politics just happen to align with the lining of their pockets, or with the health of their particular cause through access. It's just kind of silly that people keep pointing out every single Bernie supporter who's a millionaire, because these people are either fundamentally misunderstanding what it is we are objecting to -- money in politics -- not to having money, or they are intentionally misrepresenting it for the easy zinger. I look forward to future memes of "it snowed here in Arizona, so much for climate change." |
Response to JCanete (Reply #34)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:59 AM
Nonhlanhla (2,074 posts)
64. The major blackmail I see here comes from the Bernie side
from those who say, "see, many Bernie supporters won't support Hillary, so give up on her and vote for Bernie instead, otherwise we'll make sure that the Dem base is split and the Republican wins."
I won't be blackmailed into not supporting Hillary by a bunch of people who are too immature, too pure, or too privileged to see or care about the difference between Trump and Hillary. |
Response to Nonhlanhla (Reply #64)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:02 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
83. You spoke past almost my entire post.
By the way, I agree, nobody should be trying to convince you to vote for Bernie because enough Bernie supporters wont vote for her in the general. I think she's almost a shoe-in to win, even without my vote, and I don't feel like that tactic is worthy of Bernie supporters, who in general, should be more interested in the issues and the ethics than being on the winning team for the sake of winning. Of course there are even more posts daily about how, a little over 50% through the primaries, Bernie should drop out, as if getting as many delegates as Clinton did in the first half, would be impossible in the second. THATS JUST MATHEMATICAL REALITY!!! For the record, I'm not giving ultimatums. If I don't vote for Hillary, it will be because I think this pretend democracy is ruining our nation and our environment, and I'm not going to simply push the blue button because the red one is obviously covered in shit. I'm pretty sure there's fecal matter on both, and at least the red one reminds us to sanitize. so am I one of those "immature", "too pure", or "too privileged" voters? |
Response to JCanete (Reply #83)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:26 AM
MoonRiver (36,926 posts)
93. So, is this yet another 'I will not vote for the Democrat, if...' posts?
Response to MoonRiver (Reply #93)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:05 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
115. Sure, why not. I won't vote for the Democrat if
I feel like the game is rigged, and that both teams are playing for the same side. How will I determine this? By the policies and bills they support, and not just the ones they do publicly. I voted for Obama twice and I voted for Kerry, and in fact, to date, every down-ticket vote I've ever made has also been for a democrat. I've been very forgiving of their voting records and policy alignments, because I held out hope that they had good intentions but were hamstrung by a corporate media and huge money that could clobber them. That was true to some extent, but I've always had that sinking concern that we just keep getting good cop bad copped, and that our mainstream democrats don't necessarily dislike this machine as it runs. In a year when Hillary could go left and clobber Trump(as I've already stated), it feels clearer to me than ever that this is actually the truth. In a year where the DNC and the politicians it shepherds have been outspoken in anywhere from support to shilling for Hillary, it's never been more clear to me just how corrupt with money even this side of the aisle is.(and no, I don't think every politician going for Hillary is doing it because they are corrupt, or because of quid pro quo, but some of the rhetoric from respectable public figures has been pretty disingenuous. So there's my answer. How about you counter with a "I will vote for the Democrat, even if..." thread. |
Response to JCanete (Reply #115)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:22 AM
MoonRiver (36,926 posts)
117. I will vote for Bernie Sanders if he is the nominee.
Is that what you're asking for? And, yeah, unlike you, I completely believe the Democrat is always better than the Republican, particularly regarding this election. Btw, this site is for Democrats.
|
Response to MoonRiver (Reply #117)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:32 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
119. thanks for replying and I agree, a democrat is always better.
The difference between us is that I feel like this is a false choice that's part of a con, especially now with all the money in politics going to both parties. You apparently don't, and I wish I had your optimism. As to your point about this site being for democrats, I am a registered democrat. if I abstained from a Presidential ticket vote for a democrat, and voted mostly democrat down-ticket(with rare abstentions), would I or would I not still be a democrat? |
Response to JCanete (Reply #119)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:37 AM
MoonRiver (36,926 posts)
121. The site is for dedicated Democrats, not those who will sometimes, but not necessarily always,
vote Dem. If you doubt me, just look at the TOS. You're new so maybe you are not aware how seriously this subject is taken here.
|
Response to MoonRiver (Reply #121)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:09 PM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
130. My understanding is this is fair discussion during the primaries,
particularly on the primary board. Thanks for looking out for me. |
Response to JCanete (Reply #130)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:28 PM
MoonRiver (36,926 posts)
136. Except for advocating not voting for the Democratic nominee. That crosses a line.
You're welcome!
|
Response to Nonhlanhla (Reply #64)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:08 AM
asuhornets (2,405 posts)
84. Many are not even Democrats....n/t
Response to asuhornets (Reply #84)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:39 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
103. I'd be interested to know if you even have a set of platforms by which
you would define democrat. Oh, are you talking about wearing the jersey with the D on it? I guess in that case a democrat just goes where his team goes. "Come on, be a team player." "It's not wrong when a Democrat does it." WTF |
Response to JCanete (Reply #103)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:46 AM
asuhornets (2,405 posts)
110. Oh God....Help me now...n/t
Response to asuhornets (Reply #110)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:23 AM
JCanete (5,272 posts)
118. Serious inquiry. I'm a registered democrat and have been since 2004.
But defining myself as a democrat almost says nothing about me except that I'm less a republican than some independent voters. What then, is your litmus test for being a democrat? All I could come up with was that it was proudly displaying the D, but maybe you actually have an idealogical metric. What does it mean to you, when you say somebody isn't a Democrat, if its not about rooting for the home team? |
Response to JCanete (Reply #118)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:38 AM
asuhornets (2,405 posts)
122. Sanders is an independent..
Many independents are voting for him. This a democratic website with many independents and Bernie supporters. I am voting for the Democrat in the race who happens to be Hillary Clinton. Democrats get to pick who they want the Democratic nominee to be. It seems as if Bernie supporters say all this negative stuff about Hillary in hopes of changing our minds into not voting for Hillary. But she is the Democrat in the race, and she should be winning and she is. Sure Bernie is a Democrat for now, but after it is said and done, he will return to being an independent (I). And that's not a Democrat.
|
Response to JCanete (Reply #34)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:53 AM
redstateblues (10,559 posts)
81. she's a privileged Naderite. That says it all. "not a dime's worth of difference"?
Voting for a third party has consequences. Thanks for Bush/Cheney
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:31 AM
alcibiades_mystery (36,437 posts)
43. The "Heighten the Contradictions" crowd
The truest dumbasses of our political discourse.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:42 AM
EdwardBernays (3,343 posts)
53. Creating more Bernie of Bust-ers
Every day Dan.
If Sarandon was pro-Hillary you'd be proudly waving her around as proof of Clintons progressive bona fides. |
Response to EdwardBernays (Reply #53)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:01 AM
polichick (37,151 posts)
67. True, on both counts.
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:00 AM
Nanjeanne (4,081 posts)
65. Well she certainly is prettier and more talented than David Brock
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:52 AM
RandySF (43,158 posts)
80. She and Trump probably run in the same Manhattan circles.
Response to RandySF (Reply #80)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:40 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
105. DING DING DING!!
Response to RandySF (Reply #80)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:07 AM
Armstead (47,803 posts)
116. So does Clinton
Response to RandySF (Reply #80)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:50 AM
frylock (34,825 posts)
125. Do you guys ever stop and think before posting your nonsense?
![]() |
Response to frylock (Reply #125)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:00 PM
tonedevil (3,022 posts)
178. Especially...
since Saturday it's like Secretary Clinton supporters stopped to think and never started again.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:10 AM
Kelvin Mace (17,469 posts)
85. So, we are only supposed to complain about problems that affect us?
One more time: If Trump gets elected it is NOT the fault of people HRC alienated by associating with war criminals and being owned body and soul by Wall Street.
|
Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #85)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:12 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
86. Quite the opposite. I would expect progressives to care about problems that affect other people
as well. But the Bernie or Busters don't.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:13 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
87. Whereas, Hillary is rich, white, and doesn't own a trendy night club.
But, maybe she'll look into buying one to give performances for her bankster pals.
But, nothing will happen to her if Trump is elected. |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #87)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:15 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
88. And she's not advocating for Trump.
Response to DanTex (Reply #88)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:18 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
89. Neither is Sarandon.
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #89)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:20 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
90. Yes she is. Did you see the Chris Hayes interview? She thinks Trump would be better because
he would bring about "the revolution."
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #90)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:22 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
91. She's voting for Sanders, not Trump.
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #91)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:24 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
92. In the primary, sure. In the GE, not voting for the nominee is helping Trump.
She's not dumb, she understands that. Which is why she justified it by saying that she thought Trump would be better.
Anyone who believes that or acts to facilitate Trump is morally bankrupt. |
Response to DanTex (Reply #92)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:42 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
107. How does that help Trump?
If she doesn't vote for Trump, how does Trump gain a vote?
Kinda like saying if someone buys a Toyota rather than a Ford, Chevy makes a sale. 0 - 0 = 0 |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #107)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:32 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
120. It's a zero sum game. There are two options in the general. Hillary's loss is Trump's gain.
Response to DanTex (Reply #120)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:42 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
123. Not on my ballot.
Trump will not gain a vote if I don't vote for him. Hillary won't lose a vote if don't vote for her.
0 - 0 = 0 |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #123)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:44 AM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
124. Third party candidates are a wasted vote. It's either D or R. Not voting D is helping the R.
Response to DanTex (Reply #124)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:59 AM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
127. How?
0 - 0 = 0
I consider voting for either a "wasted" vote. |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #127)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:00 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
128. Because they can't possibly win. Not voting D is one net vote for the R. Voting R is two.
Voting R is twice as bad as not voting or voting 3rd party.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #128)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:03 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
139. You need to retake 2nd grade arithmetic.
I'm glad you're not in charge of my checkbook.
If you used the same logic I'd be rich....on paper. But, broke in real life. If I don't pay my electric bill doesn't mean that my doctor gets paid. 0 - 0 = 0 If I vote 3rd party in November, Jill Stein gains 1 vote. Hillary gets 0. Trump gets 0. If you vote for Hillary in November, Hillary gains 1 vote. Jill and The Donald gets 0. If both of us choose not to vote all of them get 0. Not - 2 or + 2. |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #139)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:08 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
140. The math is simple. The effect of a non-vote is one more net R vote than a D vote.
The effect of an R vote is two more net R votes than a D vote. Voting third-party, which is a non-vote, is exactly half as harmful.
And the Bernie or Busters and Naderites know this, which is why they are trying to encourage Ds to vote third party, with the objective of throwing the election to the GOP. Some of the people who buy into the rhetoric are too mathematically illiterate to understand, but the people running the propaganda know what they are doing. |
Response to DanTex (Reply #140)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:21 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
142. A non-vote?
0 + 1 = 0? Your mathematical literacy would give you a F in any math class.
I'm not trying to encourage anyone to anything. I'm simply stating how I plan to vote. I'm not encouraging you to vote for Bernie or Jill but you seem to think you can convince me to vote for Hillary. Query: Do you think your vote for Hillary will decide the outcome of the election? Do you think mine will? If yes, please give an example of a past presidential election in which my vote, or your vote, was he decisive vote. |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #142)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:25 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
143. Net votes are what matters. And you have every right to try to help Trump win.
But I'm not going to stop pointing out that that's exactly what you are doing.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #143)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:30 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
145. Go right ahead. I will continue pointing out how wrong you are.
I notice that you failed to answer the questions in my previous post. Your demands for purity fall on deaf ears among many here.
|
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #145)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:32 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
146. Funny you're accusing me of demanding purity of all things. While at the same time throwing
the election to Trump because Hillary isn't "pure enough."
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #146)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:54 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
148. Yes, I am.
You're demanding that we be pure Democrats and vote for the (D) no matter how corrupt and unfit that (D) is.
|
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #148)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:08 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
154. I'm saying that not casting one's vote to thwart Trump's ascendancy is idiotic.
It has nothing to do with purity.
|
Response to DanTex (Reply #154)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:13 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
160. So, demanding that people vote for Hillary is not based on any beliefs? Just a hunch?
Maybe you should try being a marine drill instructor....just avoid saying Left!
|
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #160)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:16 PM
DanTex (20,709 posts)
162. It's not a demand, just a comment. I've always said that you have the right to vote for Trump
or support Trump in any other way you want to. Enjoy.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:34 AM
uponit7771 (88,616 posts)
95. Amen and Amen!!!
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:46 AM
Corruption Inc (1,568 posts)
111. LOL, whites and ping pong are EVIL!
Do you realize how bizarre you sound?
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:49 AM
2banon (7,321 posts)
113. One of the most intellectually dishonest post I've seen lately
All of the Bernie Supporters I know personally within my community are:
working poor class, low to moderate middle class blue collar trades, professionals (teachers) folks my age (65 and older) majority are Women. Alternatively, the few people I know personally who are Clinton supporters are "exceedingly comfortable" and retired. (income range is over $250,000) . I do understand the Bay Area ranks fairly high in diversity, and genuine progressive values, admittedly probably the most leftist second to Seattle as well as a little town called Arcadia, Ca.. and isn't representative of the entire nation. (Although due to the Tech industry and gentrification, income demographics is beginning to shift fairly radically, unfortunately) But to say Sarandon is the "perfect face" to Bernie supporters is beyond absurd. ![]() |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:01 AM
RandySF (43,158 posts)
114. Let's not ignore Cruz
Who would take the country so far back the Taliban would be jealous.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:53 AM
whatchamacallit (15,558 posts)
126. Another flaccid fail
Keep trying!
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:03 PM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
129. Isn't it amazing how many on this board don't get it!
And we know why.
I can't wait till she wins the nomination and the Bernie or Bust crowd are not allowed to post that despicable view. |
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #129)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:12 PM
DisgustipatedinCA (12,530 posts)
131. Divine Punishment, the new blockbuster starring Skinner as God and hrmjustin as Jonah.
Kill em all, gawd! Make em stop, gawd! Fuck up Nineveh! They're sinners!
|
Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #131)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:13 PM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
133. Kudos for creativity!
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #133)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:14 PM
DisgustipatedinCA (12,530 posts)
134. I grew up in church, Justin. I know what I know when I see it. Thanks.
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:12 PM
R B Garr (16,533 posts)
132. Sarandon is the epitome of white privilege. It makes sense she would say Trump is
as good as Bernie since she bought Ralph Nader's Kool-Aid about Bush and Gore being the same. All that's important to her is her own self-involvement in being in some "historical" movement for her own self glory.
And in her own self-involved way, she definitely confirmed that Trump and Sanders' have many crossover voters. Posts get hidden here for saying that, but this interview confirms that the "revolution" is the priority, no matter if that comes through Trump. Anyone who can even say that has zero credibility. |
Response to R B Garr (Reply #132)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:50 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
147. And, poor, poverty stricken, humble Hillary is the nadir of White Privilege.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-money-drew-hillary-clinton-wedding/story?id=32936868
“Hillary Clinton, I said be at my wedding, and she came to my wedding,” the reality-star-turned-politician said at the first GOP presidential debate in Cleveland. “She had no choice because I gave to a foundation.” “I gave to many people before this,” Trump said at the debate today. “When they call, I give. And you know what, when I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them. They are there for me.” The Clinton campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said Trump’s comment “hurts [Sec. Clinton’s] feelings.” “He invited her. They’re acquaintances. This is long, long established,” she said. “It hurt her feelings, I’m sure, to hear him suggest that he didn’t actually want her there for her company.” ![]() |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #147)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:58 PM
R B Garr (16,533 posts)
149. Oh, please. Anti-Hillary spam is not the answer to everything. Hillary doesn't put herself
out as being some personal values and morality candidate the way that Sanders does. What's funny is that he constantly maligns the 1%ers, but Sarandon is a 1%er with a $50 Million net worth, but that's just fine as long as she spouts the phony "revolution" mantras.
Hillary's more than earned her place through years of building lasting relationships. Sarandon just hops on the trendy "revolution" bandwagon so she can be hip and in her own words, she wants to be part of some historical revolution thingie where apparently Trump is as good as Bernie for the "revolution". LOL. ![]() |
Response to R B Garr (Reply #149)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:02 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
150. Sarandon has been an activist for decades.
Hillary?
|
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #150)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:03 PM
R B Garr (16,533 posts)
151. Sarandon agreed with Nader that Bush and Gore were the same.
Hillary?
|
Response to R B Garr (Reply #151)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:07 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
153. She's a leftist who sees the establishment an dominance of the two parties as harmful.
So do I. So did George Washington and John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.
You? |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #153)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:11 PM
R B Garr (16,533 posts)
158. Me. Well I always knew it was bullshit about Bush and Gore being the same.
You?
|
Response to R B Garr (Reply #158)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:20 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
164. I've never ascribed to the notion that any two people are the same.
I held my nose and voted for Gore.
My nose isn't as invulnerable to injury as it once was and I try not to mistreat it for politicians. |
Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #164)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:20 PM
R B Garr (16,533 posts)
171. Wow, I really liked Gore. No nose holding for me.
It was pure admiration. Look what an iconic figure he appears to be now and all the worldly regrets that he never was our President. His ahead-of-the-curve dialogues about climate change were enough in itself to put him head and shoulders above the rest. Bernie is now copying him on climate change. It's contemptible that someone like Sarandon would denigrate Al Gore just for flippant talking points.
|
Response to R B Garr (Reply #171)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:46 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
177. opinions differ.
I saw him as just another centrist politician who definitely picked the wrong running mate. I'm not a centrist and hoped if Gore had won he would stay healthy to prevent JoeMentum sitting in the oval office.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:20 PM
bravenak (34,648 posts)
141. Nothing will happen to her!!
Us minorities and women and lgbta will suffer while she be chillin in her penthouse.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:29 PM
thebeautifulstruggle (95 posts)
144. odd, when one can thinks of the face of rich, white, and privileged
Hillary Clinton can come to mind
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:14 PM
lunamagica (9,967 posts)
161. Children labour to bring sparkle to make-up
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Children-labour-to-bring-sparkle-to-make-up/articleshow/49318509.cms
GIRIDIH (India): Her face caked in dirt and hair matted with sweat, eight-year-old Lalita Kumari hacks away at pieces of rock containing an elusive mineral that adds a dash of sparkle to lipstick and nail polish. While taking a breather in the hollow of a shimmery sand hill, Lalita says she has not known any other way of life after toiling in the mines of Jharkhand state since she was aged four. "I want to go to school but there is never enough at home for us to eat. So I have to come here and work," said the pony-tailed youngster, her blistered hands hid behind her back after laying down her pickaxe. Lalita is among hundreds of children who help their families make ends meet by spending their day collecting mica, their stomachs often hungry while the sun beats down on their heads. Two decades ago the Jharkhand government shut down the mines over environmental concerns but tonnes of scrap left behind continue to lure impoverished villagers. The mica adds glitter to powders, mascara and lipsticks of top global brands although a complex supply chain makes pinning down the exact origin almost. impossible, say activists. The families of the children who collect the mica often sell it to small traders who in turn sell it to big suppliers. In 2009, German pharma giant Merck was accused of using mica mined by children and supplying it to brands such as L'Oreal and Revlon. Merck has since implemented several measures to make sure that "all mica used for the manufacture of our pigments comes from child labour free sources," the company said in a statement to AFP. Activists however say remote areas make monitoring impossible and there is no way to guarantee the mica is child-labour free. "I think for companies the situation has become a kind of passing the buck," said Bhuvan Ribhu of Bachpan Bachao Andolan NGO whose founder Kailash Satyarthi won last year's Nobel peace prize for his work combatting child labour. "It's a collective responsibility of anyone who is procuring any mica from this region to come forward and ensure that all the children are in school," Ribhu told AFP. Major companies insist their suppliers follow good practices. "Merck, our main supplier in India, only sources mica from legal gated mines and has submitted proof that its entire supply chain is secured," a spokeswoman for L'Oreal said in an email to AFP. Repeated mails by AFP to Revlon, which is also supplied by Merck, went unanswered. Although child labour below 18 is illegal with fines and jail terms for offenders, poor enforcement means rules remain on paper. Children like Lalita often injure themselves with the pickaxes, while fine mica dust enter their eyes and chest, causing chronic health problems. During the annual monsoon, they risk snake bites and being buried alive by collapsing slag piles. "In a place where poverty is so entrenched it is difficult to convince parents to send kids to school," said Ram Bachan Paswan, a district labour superintendent. "Moreover these mines do not exist on paper so that makes our task very challenging." Father-of-four Shibu Yadav acknowledges that his children spend their days mining for mica to keep the family's heads above water. "This is the main source of livelihood for us," he said, pointing at glittering silver and red mounds outside his ramshackle house. "If it had not been for the mica, we would have starved to death," said Yadav who says his family makes about 1,000 rupees a month from mica gathering. Cosmetic giants such as Estee Lauder and Chanel have recently joined a scheme to help fund the education of children going back to schools, working alongside Satyarthi's NGO. Thirteen-year-old Seema Kumari says she can now fulfill her dream of becoming a teacher. But she is one of the lucky ones and other youngsters see no end in sight to their labours. |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:36 PM
HawkMode (25 posts)
167. I bet this is why she's ride or die
1) NAFTA 1994
2) Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 3) Telecommunications Act of 1996 4) Commodity Futures Modernization Act 2000 5) Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act(Glass-Steagall Act repeal) 2000 6) Welfare Reform 1996 A perfect legislative entree, served to the rich courtesy of the Clintons. I wonder what Hillary is serving for the main course? TPP? Keystone? Privatized SS? <-----Wall street really wants that. Long history with the Clinton's, but some in the party refuse to see it. |
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:37 PM
JackRiddler (24,979 posts)
168. Yes, she's quite pretty.
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:27 PM
Logical (22,457 posts)
172. God dan, you are looking more silly every day. Lol, seriously nutty! Nt
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:31 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
173. The establishment represents white privilege
Hillary represents the establishment
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:33 PM
DisgustipatedinCA (12,530 posts)
174. And there's not a damned thing you or anyone else can do about it.
Freedom. Learn about it--it's all the latest rage.
|
Response to DanTex (Original post)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:39 PM
BainsBane (52,574 posts)
176. Don't forget her many millions she acquired stumping for Loreal
millions she earned shilling for a corporation that profits from horrendous labor exploitation and making workers sick from carcinogens.
|