HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Can Anyone Post A Negativ...

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:24 AM

Can Anyone Post A Negative Ad From Bernie That HRC's People Are Saying He Is Running....

I keep hearing that Bernie is negatively attacking Hillary and he is running negative ads. I've never seen a Bernie attack ad. He is taking on Hillary based on the issues and her public record. Hillary is basically running against herself. In case I missed a Bernie attack ad - would someone post it here.

146 replies, 6659 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 146 replies Author Time Post
Reply Can Anyone Post A Negative Ad From Bernie That HRC's People Are Saying He Is Running.... (Original post)
global1 Mar 2016 OP
hobbit709 Mar 2016 #1
dchill Mar 2016 #28
Baobab Mar 2016 #99
Red Oak Apr 2016 #136
840high Mar 2016 #76
Jitter65 Apr 2016 #122
Baobab Mar 2016 #83
Oilwellian Mar 2016 #86
Baobab Mar 2016 #92
bobbobbins01 Mar 2016 #89
Baobab Mar 2016 #93
ViseGrip Mar 2016 #85
Baobab Mar 2016 #96
Baobab Mar 2016 #97
FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #87
hobbit709 Mar 2016 #88
eridani Mar 2016 #106
Baobab Mar 2016 #98
JackInGreen Mar 2016 #2
Ed Suspicious Mar 2016 #3
berni_mccoy Mar 2016 #4
hereforthevoting Mar 2016 #5
Lans Mar 2016 #6
RiverLover Mar 2016 #7
Lans Mar 2016 #8
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #64
desmiller Mar 2016 #81
DebDoo Mar 2016 #11
dchill Mar 2016 #29
nolabels Mar 2016 #62
JackRiddler Mar 2016 #14
Kittycat Mar 2016 #37
floppyboo Mar 2016 #80
jillan Mar 2016 #41
JackInGreen Mar 2016 #51
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #65
litlbilly Apr 2016 #140
fun n serious Apr 2016 #119
lastone Mar 2016 #78
intheflow Mar 2016 #9
polly7 Mar 2016 #10
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #12
Agschmid Mar 2016 #13
JackRiddler Mar 2016 #15
MrMickeysMom Mar 2016 #16
Agschmid Mar 2016 #19
MrMickeysMom Mar 2016 #21
Agschmid Mar 2016 #49
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #67
quantumjunkie Mar 2016 #116
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #26
Agschmid Mar 2016 #50
NWCorona Mar 2016 #70
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #71
arcane1 Mar 2016 #57
Kittycat Mar 2016 #39
global1 Mar 2016 #18
ThePhilosopher04 Mar 2016 #31
Baobab Mar 2016 #101
Agschmid Mar 2016 #102
Baobab Mar 2016 #103
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #17
global1 Mar 2016 #20
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #25
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #30
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #33
Gwhittey Mar 2016 #44
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #46
Ed Suspicious Mar 2016 #53
Gwhittey Mar 2016 #54
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #56
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #109
Post removed Mar 2016 #108
Orrex Mar 2016 #110
rachacha Mar 2016 #22
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #27
Marr Mar 2016 #34
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #43
bobbobbins01 Mar 2016 #91
uponit7771 Apr 2016 #134
bobbobbins01 Apr 2016 #137
thesquanderer Apr 2016 #133
uponit7771 Apr 2016 #135
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #48
Kittycat Mar 2016 #40
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #42
Gwhittey Mar 2016 #45
Kittycat Mar 2016 #47
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #104
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #73
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #107
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #23
Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #24
The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2016 #32
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #74
Chezboo Mar 2016 #84
Vinca Mar 2016 #35
Jennylynn Mar 2016 #36
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #75
Jennylynn Mar 2016 #82
MisterP Mar 2016 #111
Jennylynn Mar 2016 #112
Jennylynn Mar 2016 #113
jillan Mar 2016 #38
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #77
bkkyosemite Mar 2016 #52
Ed Suspicious Mar 2016 #55
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #58
Mike__M Mar 2016 #59
bunnies Mar 2016 #60
Uncle Joe Mar 2016 #61
Karmadillo Mar 2016 #63
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #79
GreenPartyVoter Mar 2016 #66
dchill Mar 2016 #68
frylock Mar 2016 #69
Lans Mar 2016 #72
pantsonfire Apr 2016 #126
NWCorona Mar 2016 #90
Rosa Luxemburg Mar 2016 #94
Baobab Mar 2016 #105
AzDar Mar 2016 #95
Matariki Mar 2016 #100
quantass Mar 2016 #114
quantass Mar 2016 #115
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #117
ucrdem Apr 2016 #118
morningfog Apr 2016 #120
unapatriciated Apr 2016 #127
Sancho Apr 2016 #121
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #123
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #124
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #125
global1 Apr 2016 #128
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #129
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #130
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #131
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #132
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #138
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #139
global1 Apr 2016 #141
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #142
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #143
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #144
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #145
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #146

Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:27 AM

1. On Planet Hillary, facts are an attack. Lies are a good thing coming from them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:29 AM

28. That pretty much wraps up the meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dchill (Reply #28)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:49 PM

99. She is her own negative ad

No more liars and their lying for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #99)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 05:26 PM

136. +1 She is her own negative ad - Funny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:51 PM

76. Yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #76)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 07:12 AM

122. Yep. Just post his latest stump speeches and his surrogate's interviews. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:03 PM

83. I have provided information to their campaign which would make a mind blowing negative ad and

its all true and literally world changing important, and they have not used it.

I would not be surprised if they have TONS of stuff which would make an endless stream of negative ads and they simply have decided not to use them.

the man is a saint, he's got a level of self-control which we need in a president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #83)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:57 PM

86. Send me the information...I'll make the ad nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oilwellian (Reply #86)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:39 PM

92. Everything they have told us about health care is wrong, the real reason its so screwed up is

bad trade policy, bad trade ideology, that nobody would agree with.

hows that one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #83)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:03 PM

89. Damn, now you have me curious.

You can't drop a teaser like that and not make with the goods!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #89)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:43 PM

93. GATS and education

hows that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:29 PM

85. if there were any, they'd be out there with the accusation. That would make MSM $$$

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #85)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:39 PM

96. The MSM doesnt report it because they are involved

But the agenda pushed by Hillary and Obama too unfortunately is bad news for almost all of us. Corporations want it, for example, lower US wages, higher prices on drugs, no or far less available generics, reducing global environmental standards to the lowest common denominator, exporting natural gas even if huge amounts of urban housing is lost because of the half assed excuse that its become too expensive to heat. liberalisation of services so that corporations can move workers around at will, which will result in a lot of jobs lost, trade deals that make New Deal type "local sourcing" FTA-illegal, globalization of government procurement bid tendering.

All of those things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #85)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:45 PM

97. They want to change more than they want to leave alone.

There is almost nothing left after all the changes they want to make. Many many people certainly won't be able to continue to live in the US. But there really isnt any other place for all the "losers" of globalization to go, given that most of the people on the planet are the "losers" of their game.

No, a thousand times no to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:01 PM

87. It is the right of royalty. They see themselves as royalty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FlatBaroque (Reply #87)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:02 PM

88. I come from a long line of surly peasants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #88)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:13 AM

106. They are repressing you! I saw it! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FlatBaroque (Reply #87)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:46 PM

98. Isnt that what our country was founded to get away from?

NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:27 AM

2. In my crystal ball I see....

CRICKETS! The cacophonous hum of CRICKETS everywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:27 AM

3. Bernie is like a photo negative of the bad shit Hilly has done.

Exactly opposite.

There is yor negative campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:29 AM

4. Brock-O'Keefe hasn't released the Talking Points yet to 'splain it.

The Hillary fans won't respond until they get today's memo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:29 AM

5. I cannot

Maybe something will come up in the debate in NY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:34 AM

6. Below is just one of the many hurtful attack ads Sanders has run

[img][/image]

The Problem another ad Hillary probably feels is an attack on her - even though her name is never mentioned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:37 AM

7. Above is just one of the many truthful ads Sanders has run. No attack, just truth.

Too bad in Hillary's case, when you say the truth it naturally reflects poorly on her & feels like an attack to those who cling to the made-for-tv version of Hillary.

Thanks for posting!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:40 AM

8. Very much so

Bernie's "attack ads" are just correcting the record, because Hillary has been running the most negative campaign on the democratic side this election cycle. It is sad, but she can't win if they had to run on their records.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:26 PM

64. Yes, just like the Republicans they always accuse you of what THEY are doing.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #64)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:58 PM

81. my thoughts exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:18 AM

11. The truth hurts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebDoo (Reply #11)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:30 AM

29. So it's an attack then, right?

Ouch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dchill (Reply #29)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:19 PM

62. You can live in fantasy land or live in reality with the truth

It's not a wonder why people hate truth so much, cold hard fact does not fit well with others who wish for you to live in their illusions with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:38 AM

14. That's it, really? An accurate statement

 

about TARP and the auto bailout? In response to untrue statements about Sanders' record?

Really, that's a "hurtful" personal attack?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:44 AM

37. The Big Short, have you seen it?

I watched it last night. The Good, sad, bad, ugly and depressing. Do you know what is worse? Being old enough to watch it play out in real life on TV, in the economy, in my community, in the lives of friends and neighbors. Especially living in what was once ranked the nation's #1 fastest growing county, after seeing a solid decade of rapid growth prior to the crash.

So, while politicians dip and repay fovorsnto lobbyists, while Hillary hosts her 33k dinners, and gives 225k speeches that she refuses to release, and Wall Street, pharma, special interests and speculators take us for a free ride - Under bail out and regulation rules that they benefit and we suffer under, I would easily call that a rigged economy. An I hold those that catered to them accountable. Chief among them, Hillary.

The add is truth, but not brutal enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kittycat (Reply #37)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:56 PM

80. I watched Bullworth and Primary Colors last week- does that count? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:48 AM

41. Facts are negative? Just wait until Trump runs an ad about how he bought her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:07 PM

51. If you can be 'attacked' with truth

Then the problem is you, not the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackInGreen (Reply #51)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:27 PM

65. Well said!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #65)

Fri Apr 8, 2016, 02:43 PM

140. ditto

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackInGreen (Reply #51)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:28 AM

119. The problem is that you can not prove it's true..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:52 PM

78. Attack ad?

 

You've got to be kidding - get a fucking grip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:10 AM

9. Yes, please! Where are all the Clinton people, why aren't they posting those ads?

I know it's because there are no ads, but the truth never stopped some of her supporters from posting BS before. I mean, they're not even trying! Where's the clip of Sanders dissing his wife? Where's the clip of Sanders saying he won't be asking advice from Kissinger? These are HRC supporters shining Sanders-shaming moments!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:12 AM

10. Bump!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:18 AM

12. I'll bet this OP has already set all-time records for clicks on...

 

"Send to my Thread Trash Can".

When I went to my outside door just now, I heard the distant stamping of feet and repeats of "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!". Lotsa earwax on lotsa fingertips at the moment... keeping those Hillary Clinton supporters who haven't already trashed the thread from responding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:18 AM

13. His crowds are booing her, he used to stop the boos.

Now he doesn't seem to try/care.

He knows what he needs to do to win, and he is doing it.

Now we will see if it works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:39 AM

15. Those damn crowds. Hundreds of thousands of them.

 

Wait, no, such tiny terrible crowds!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:44 AM

16. His crowds are booing corruption and dishonesty set up to disadvantage the working/povery class...

You must be confusing this outcome with who she represents...

The issues, which she seeks to avoid addressing by refusing to DEBATE the issues, are driving those boos.

You aligned that with her. That's very interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #16)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:56 AM

19. So why did he stop them at first?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:59 AM

21. Apparently, that's YOUR issue...

The one you are using to side step WHY she's being boo'd is, "well, why didn't he do more to stop that?"

Have you ever seen his stump speeches throughout the country? It's the same body language. It hasn't changed, but your desperation to blame what people think as his problem shows how frightened you've become.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #21)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:04 PM

49. ...



Yes I've seen his speeches, yes I voted for him for Senate, yes I helped him win that election against Tarrant.

No I'm not afraid.

Either of our candidates would be MUCH better than Trump.

No matter who the nominee is we need to beat Trump, that's the bottom line. We will all need to work together to do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #49)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:32 PM

67. Then I don't see how you cannot understand such a simple statement.

 

They are not booing HER, they are booing the bad issues. . .they boo high college costs, etc.

The fact that Hillary is on the wrong side of these issues is HER fault. Bernie can do nothing about that. It is not his duty to defend her lack of judgement for being on the wrong side of every issue. It is HER responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #67)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:26 PM

116. Well said....

 

My guess is no HRC supporter can have a come back to that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:27 AM

26. How you expect him to stop people from booing?

Really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #26)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:05 PM

50. Easy he used to do it so clearly he can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #50)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:35 PM

70. Actually if you watch the clips that were played

Bernie corrected the crowd when they booed her name. I agree with that. The later clips show the crowd booing when he mentioned a policy of hers or when she took money from Wall Street.

There is a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #50)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:38 PM

71. That is a ridiculous position. . . . ridiculous

 


When he mentions a good position they cheer,
when he mentions a bad issue they boo.

If the crowd doesn't like low wages and boo, why is it Bernie's responsibility to stop them from booing low wages? Why should he tell them not to boo low wages? What you are saying makes no sense.


That is ALWAYS the case with audiences.

YOUR PROBLEM is that YOU are associating Hillary with the BAD side of the issue and therefore think they are booing Hillary. They are booing the issue. The fact that YOU MISINTERPRET it is no ones fault but your own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #26)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:50 PM

57. Hillary stops them from booing by being unappealing to large crowds in the first place.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:45 AM

39. Should we applaud Wall Street?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:55 AM

18. When He Stopped The Boos Was When He Just Mentioned Her Name And His Crowds Booed Her.....

Now when he mentions the contrasts on the issues and people boo - they are booing Hillary's positions on the issues. There is a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:32 AM

31. If she's that sensitive she needs to look for another job

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:01 PM

101. Why I am quite pofoundly distressed by the prospective Presidency of Ms. Clinton

Last edited Sat Apr 2, 2016, 02:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary is divisive. She is no friend of the working people of this country, or women, or the poor, she is just taking advantage of many failures of the US corporate media- and the subsequent fact that too many (of both parties) but specifically it seems many of the Democratic Party's good people who are less news aware - she is taking advantage of their ignorance on issues like trade deals (they wont be good for practically any of us, nor will they create jobs) She cultivated an illusiuon of inevitability - and pretended to be things she's not.

if she were to tell Democrats her real agenda, most would not vote for her.

the poorest Americans likely are the ones who will be hurt by her policies the most.

Why is she the way she is? because she wants to prevent the democratic process which is inherently one that adapts and CHANGES.

We should not blindly lock our policy in with trade deals- preserve BAD business models AT ANY COST. For example, preserve the bad health care system, BY THROWING OUT THE DOCTORS AND NURSES who have done their best to keep Americans healthy DESPITE bad policy, and replacing them with the doctors and nurses who are desperately needed in the developing world. And paying them minimum wage .

They have been promising other countries that for 20 years, ever since Bill Clinton was president. That's why our own health care system is still SO screwed up, to provide a fake, avoidable "crisis" to justify this.

The same goes for education.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #101)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:03 PM

102. ...

she is just taking advantage of the Democratic Party's good people who are less news aware


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #102)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:05 PM

103. Read this - this is a compilation of economic descriptions of 'labor mobility'

Last edited Sat Apr 2, 2016, 02:53 PM - Edit history (2)

provisions in trade in services agreements- This one is about GATS which was signed in 1995.

This would be a disaster for US working people .

The falling wages described would not even go to them.

------

Which Like trade in goods, labor mobility can create losers as
well as winners. In the overall balance, gains usually
exceed losses by a wide margin, but political sensitivities
focus on those who lose. In simple theoretical terms,
migration can be modeled as an increase of supply in the
labor markets of developed countries and a decrease of
supply in developing countries. Here, we use that frame-
work to examine the effects of those supply changes on
the incomes of capitalists and workers, in both the send-
ing and the host countries, and on the incomes of the
migrants themselves.

Effect in developed countries. Given the restrictions on
labor mobility, the equilibrium in the labor market is at
point A in figure 13.2. After liberalization, the equilibrium
moves to point B, reflecting an increase in the number of
hours worked and a decrease in the wage per hour. The loss
for native workers is shown by area ACDE. The gain for
capitalists is shown by area EABD, with most of this gain
coming from the loss for native workers. Since the gain for
capitalists is larger than the loss for native workers, the lib-
eralization of mode 4 leads to an overall gain, shown by
area ABC.
Effect on developing countries. The effect of the liberal-
ization of mode 4 on developing countries is the exact
opposite to that for developed countries. With restrictions
on mode 4, the equilibrium in the labor market is at point
B in figure 13.3. After liberalization, the equilibrium point
moves to point A, reflecting an increase in the wage per
hour and a decrease in the number of hours worked.
As will be apparent later, the gains for migrants in
developed countries are much larger than the loss that
their departure inflicts on developing countries. Nonmi-
grant workers also experience gains, shown by area ACDE
in figure 13.3, since the wage rate has increased in devel-
oping countries. But nonmigrant capitalists experience a
very large loss, shown by area ABDE (most of the loss cor-
responds to the wage gain for nonmigrant workers).
Because the loss for nonmigrant capitalists is larger than
the gain for nonmigrant workers, the group of nonmi-
grants as a whole experiences an overall loss of income,
shown by area ABC. In other words, the effect on total
welfare of liberalizing mode 4 is negative for nonmigrants
in developing countries. Income per capita, however, is
likely (although not guaranteed) to rise as marginal pro-
ductivity increases.
Overall outcome. Migrants lose their erstwhile wages in
developing countries but enjoy larger wages in developed
countries. They therefore experience a gain, measured by
the wage difference between the destination and source
countries.
------

Box 13.2. Quantitative Estimates of Overall Gains from Greater Labor Mobility
Complete liberalization of mode 4 would result in very large gains.
Hamilton and Whalley (1984) use a partial equilibrium (PE) model and 1977 data to estimate the benefits from the complete
elimination of all immigration restrictions, for skilled and unskilled labor alike. The potential gains are enormous, ranging from 60
to almost 205 percent of world gross domestic product (GDP). Millions of workers would move from low-productivity to high-
productivity jobs in countries with high salaries, until wages in labor-sending and labor-receiving countries equalized. Iregui (1999)
revisits the question using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model and more precise measures of elasticities and population
characteristics. Here again, the gains are large, ranging from 15 to 67 percent of world GDP. Moses and Letnes (2004), using more
precise values for productivities, confirm large gains, ranging from 4.3 to about 112 percent of world GDP in 1977. According to
these authors, the ‘’most reasonable’’ gain would be 7.5 percent of world GDP.
The large differences between these estimates, both within and between studies, can be explained by the differences in
modeling frameworks (partial versus general equilibrium) and assumed parameters. Some estimates assume that migrants can
achieve the average productivity of workers in the destination country; others assume that additional education and training will be
needed.

Gains from less than complete liberalization of mode 4 are still large.
Because full liberalization is politically unacceptable, some economists have estimated the potential outcome of more modest
liberalization of mode 4. Moses and Letnes (2004) estimate the gains from eliminating 10 percent of the wage inequality between
countries and find that potential gains would still be large, corresponding to around 2.2 percent of world GDP. Walmsley and
Winters (2002) estimate the potential gain from a 3 percent increase in the workforce in developed countries, a movement of 14.2
million workers, and a 50 percent increase in the current number of immigrants in developed countries at US$156 billion in 2002,
representing 0.6 percent of world GDP. World Bank (2006) reaches a very similar result.
Most of the gains come from the movement of unskilled labor.
According to Iregui (1999), the potential gains from the migration of skilled labor only are much smaller: 3 to 11 percent of world
GDP, in comparison with 13 to 59 percent for all skills. Walmsley and Winters (2002) show that the potential gain from the
movement of unskilled workers would account for US$110 billion, or 70 percent of the total. This reflects the fact that inequality in
wages worldwide is larger for unskilled than for skilled workers.
Source: Annex table 13A.1.

--------------

According to the theoretical model, the liberalization of
mode 4 has the following distributional consequences:

• In developed countries, most of the gains for capitalists
are balanced by losses to native workers.

• In developing countries, most of the losses to capitalists
are mirrored by gains to nonmigrant workers.

• In developed countries, the gains for capitalists are
larger than the losses for native workers. Therefore, total
income in developed countries rises.

• In developing countries, the losses for capitalists are
larger than the gains for nonmigrant workers. There-
fore, total income in developing countries falls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:46 AM

17. In a world were birds land on podiums and that's supposed to really mean something to delegates ...

... Sanders can impugn Hillary's integeraty by intimating a quid pro quo between her and Wall Street all day long

and

that's "positive" campaigning

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:58 AM

20. She Can Clear This Up If She'd Only Release Her Transcripts.....

If she has nothing to hide and she is not telling Goldman and the Wall St bunch something different than she is telling the People - then maybe that's what it will take.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Reply #20)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:24 AM

25. Yeah that's true, If Clinton says in those transcripts she'd cut the legs off All bankers Sanders...

... camp would call her "the castrator"

The Hillary hate is tangible, no one who's been paying half ass'd attention believes releasing transcripts would be anything positive for her

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #25)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:31 AM

30. Hate is not her problem: People hate what she stands for

Like the TPP, fracking and regime change. Frankly, people SHOULD hate those things. Meanwhile, not a bit of "hate" is directed at Sanders It's tough to be both a victim and a hypocrite at the same time, but Clinton leads the way!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #30)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:36 AM

33. It is, its hip and trendy to hate Hillary (see GD:P) so there's nothing she can do to please that...

... crowd other than just going away.

Sanders can't throw stones no matter what Bridiebro thinks and Sanders hasn't had millions of tax payer dollars spent by an opposition part in government to lower his poll numbers.

whatever, I wouldn't realease em either... fuck the haters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:59 AM

44. So no links to a negative ad?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gwhittey (Reply #44)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:01 PM

46. yes, would it change your mind if I posted them?! tia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #46)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:10 PM

53. Just post the dang ads.

If you have them post them, or they don't exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #46)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:11 PM

54. It might not change my mind on Sanders

 

But it would change my mind on what I think you are if you care and I am assuming you care what I think because you asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #46)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:13 PM

56. Post the ads and I'll let you know. Tia!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #56)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:41 PM

109. What would change your mind on the position of Sanders negative adds? tia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #46)


Response to Post removed (Reply #108)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:42 PM

110. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:40 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

It would change my mind about
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1616551

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Uncalled for ad hom

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Mar 31, 2016, 04:50 PM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: In point of fact, the replied-to post does appear to be peddling bullshit.

Leave it.

Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: meh
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Name calling. hide it.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:02 AM

22. She said she'd look into releasing the transcripts, then didn't. Is that integrity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rachacha (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:28 AM

27. She didn't "look into it" at all?!!? tia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:37 AM

34. She's been paid millions of dollars by Wall Street for a few hours of schmoozing.

 

Of *course* they're getting something for their money. Who do you think you're kidding?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:55 AM

43. She's being under paid for one and 1 / 30th of her one year salary does not a bribe make

... believe what you want about her.

Not sure facts change minds any longer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #43)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:12 PM

91. Because she's already rich its ok!

but if one of us poor people took it, then it would be a bribe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #91)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 05:24 PM

134. Only if you're going to call it a bribe, but you know that already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #134)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 08:45 PM

137. I am calling it a bribe...

so that means I'm right? Bribes are only for poor people? I guess rich people can just claim the affluenza defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #43)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 03:51 PM

133. If 30 firms each provide 1/30th of her income.....

...does that mean she's beholden to all of them or none of them?

What it really comes down to, though, is not, as you said, "a bribe." It's more subtle than that. It means that when the chairman of one of these firms wants to talk to the likely future president, she'll probably take the call. It gives them an opportunity to have her ear, to have influence, at critical times about issues that are important to them. If there is a call that can go either way, this kind of influence can tip the balance. Even without specific conversations, the relationship probably makes her pre-disposed to see things from their point of view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #133)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 05:26 PM

135. None, if 12343 people privide a homeless person with 24 cents over 2 years that's not a bribe and

... there's no reasonable person who's going to believe the homeless person is beholden to anyone.

But again, believe what you'd like... facts no longer are involved any longer with the bird on podiem people

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:02 PM

48. They want us to believe money doesn't buy influence in Washington.

No one is THAT fucking naive, DUers have been demanding we get money out of politics since this site was created.

But now her supporters are fine with it as long as it's her bank account.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:48 AM

40. LOL. Like Obama said in 2008. She will say and do anything to get elected

The Clinton's are a well-honed political machine. This isn't even about needing to toughen up, it's a tactic, because she's running scared. She doesn't want to defend herself, or her false smearing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kittycat (Reply #40)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:54 AM

42. and he chose her... not Sanders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:00 PM

45. Well he picked her because

 

She was threatening to go to a contested convention. So he promised a cabinet position if she would not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:02 PM

47. He hasn't endorsed

Maybe in Hillary land, but not in real life.

And if you're talking about SoS, look at all the trouble she was worth for him. What a train wreck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:09 PM

104. If she weren't SoS she'd have primaried him in 2012. He picked her for political reasons only.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:41 PM

73. Man, you never really seem to know what you are talking about . . you seem to

 

just come on here to rant.
All of those points you brought up were very clearly explained by people in this thread earlier.
Man, I gotta ignore you, you don't seem to be here to add anything, just to annoy.
Aloha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #73)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:34 PM

107. Sigh, ad homs in response to facts... typical no? tia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:02 AM

23. Well, they think if you disagree with Her Royal Hillary on something, you are attacking her.

 

Talk about mindless subservience.

Or maybe they are thinking about those nasty, false lies and smears that appeared all over the place yesterday about Bernie as a Monster, put out by their O'Keefe like minions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:05 AM

24. Hillary thinks calling attention to her prior views on issues is negative because it frustrates her

efforts to run to the left in the primary and then flip right if she gets the nomination.

Hillary thinks it is negative to request her Wall Street transcripts because they show she lied when she told the voters she scolded Wall Street for their fraud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:36 AM

32. I thought the whole point of primary elections

was to explain why you are a better candidate than the other ones. As far as I know Bernie has never done anything but point out the differences between his policies and Hillary's. He hasn't said anything negative about her personally at all (unless you count her lucrative speeches to Goldman Sachs, but that's sure as hell fair game). When did criticism of another candidate's policies and positions become an "attack ad"? That's politics, and, as the saying goes, it ain't beanbag. Hillary expected the nomination to be handed to her on a golden, jewel-encrusted platter but she's actually having to fight for it. Too bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #32)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:47 PM

74. While putting it so clearly about Bernie's NON-negative campaign

 

I think we should also talk about the Clinton campaign's lie and smear campaign.

They lie, distort, smear and swift boat. . . .and then have the gall to accuse BERNIE of a negative campaign.

Isn't that the way it always is with Republicans. . . they blame others for what they themselves are doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #74)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:24 PM

84. You mean like accusing the Sanders campaign

of stealing voter information?


Isn't that the way it always is with Republicans. . . they blame others for what they themselves are doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:37 AM

35. In Hillary world pointing out facts = negative campaigning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:41 AM

36. Did anyone notice that she's campaigning on $15 an hour now??

That last 'event' that she had in Wisconsin, someone posted the main talking points of it on the Hillary board, of which I didn't notice it was the Hillary board, so I mentioned that fact and they banned me! Lol
And they wonder why people don't trust her. She's stealing Bernie's ideas. One of the Hillary posters pointed out why we can't go to $15 from $12 an hour because it would throw some people off of Medicaid, etc. And I thought, well why doesn't Hillary explain it that way? People would listen to that! Instead she chooses to campaign, once again, using Bernie's platform.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennylynn (Reply #36)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:49 PM

75. If she is going to change her whole campaign to be Bernie's platform

 

why not just drop out and endorse him? I mean if she now agrees with everything Bernie is saying. . . . then he's got it covered. . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #75)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:02 PM

82. Well I was a little off on the campaigning part.

She's not exactly campaigning on it. She praised CA for going to $15 per hour. Or for trying to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennylynn (Reply #36)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:47 PM

111. the HCG can't deal with reality so it purges people who point out how their happy playpen

contradicts meatspace

it's the mode of thought that lets them cheerfully predict Sanders would lose VT, or let DWS gibber insanities without being punished: the DNC's plan would retake the Senate, it's just that those durn voters didn't respond!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MisterP (Reply #111)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:55 PM

112. Durn voters!

Yep. I think my above post is the reason I got kicked out of HCG. Either this one or the one where I called Thelma the 'dumb one' from Thelma and Louise.
Well! She was!

Geena Davis is supporting Hillary and is actually really, really smart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennylynn (Reply #112)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 12:57 PM

113. P.S.

I don't think I knew there was an exclusive Hillary club at the time that I was banned. I don't look at the tiny heading at the top of the subject matter every single time I click on it for goodness sake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:45 AM

38. This one. This is the worst!



And if that wasn't bad enough - there is this one!!!1!!1!!

c



He is sooo negative!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #38)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:51 PM

77. SEETHING with hate and negativity!!! Sexist pig!!!! Poor Hillary what she has to endure!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:09 PM

52. She doesn't want a debate before NY in NY...lol..so these stupid excuses...Bernie is bad meme

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:12 PM

55. Post the dang ads, Hillpeople. If you don't then they must not exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:53 PM

58. Looks to me like the answer is a resounding "NO". nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:40 PM

59. But this evades us, as in the night meadows

The crickets' million roundsong dies away
From all advances, rising in every distance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:50 PM

60. Still nothing eh?

 

Geez. For all the whining and gnashing of teeth, you'd think they'd have them at the ready.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:53 PM

61. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, global.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:21 PM

63. You better take their word for it. Only little people need proof.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Karmadillo (Reply #63)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:53 PM

79. I think you hit on it. . . when the cult leader says it, it must be true.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:30 PM

66. They got nuthin'!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenPartyVoter (Reply #66)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:34 PM

68. There are no negative or attack ads. Someone alert the media!

Especially that hack Karen Finney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:34 PM

69. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:39 PM

72. the silence is all they got

I want Sanders to attack Hillary for attacking him - that would be brilliant, running attack ads about attack ads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lans (Reply #72)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 04:44 PM

126. This is the closest he's come to a "negative" ad, explained by Cenk Uygur

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:06 PM

90. It not note anymore

It's, debates aren't needed.

You can't make this stuff up anymore!

Good post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:45 PM

94. Hillary's campaign directors are like big babies

this gotcha thing won't work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #94)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:10 PM

105. Just walk away

Shes just trying to get attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:10 PM

95. Those 'negative' ads are likely held in the same vault as the Transcripts...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:53 PM

100. It's negative to cite her record or who her friends are

especially when it contradicts her platform du jour.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:18 PM

114. GREAT Post -- Where are the Negative Ads?!?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:23 PM

115. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:07 AM

117. A lot of words in this thread, but no actual negative ads? Hmmm

I wonder why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:20 AM

118. Here's his infamous Michigan ad

I anxiously await being told it's not negative at all, because it doesn't say Hillary's name, and truth is not negative and everything Bernie says is true:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #118)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 06:46 AM

120. Lol.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #118)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 05:34 PM

127. So those trade deals are really good for us.....

um ok

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 07:03 AM

121. All the ads from Hillary I've seen have targeted the GOP or hint at Trump...

Bernie doesn't matter, so I doubt a lot of resources are aimed at him.

Maybe you have seen something a PAC produced.

You can see Hillary's ads on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLRYsOHrkk5qcIhtq033bLQ



I haven't seen a single Bernie produced ad here in Florida - so he isn't doing much in the sunbelt. I haven't seen any reports of "negative ads".

I think this is a link to Bernie's ads: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH1dpzjCEiGAt8CXkryhkZg

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 02:12 PM

123. Day #4 and still waiting ... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 04:37 PM

124. Day #5 and ... BUPKIS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 04:44 PM

125. Take your time. I'll just wait here quietly. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Reply #125)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 06:58 PM

128. Here's Bernie Going Negative....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Reply #128)

Sun Apr 3, 2016, 07:13 PM

129. lol nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Mon Apr 4, 2016, 02:47 PM

130. Day #6 ... and I just hear crickets ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Apr 5, 2016, 08:44 PM

131. Day #7 ... still waiting ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 03:38 PM

132. Day #8 -- Over a week now and

still waiting ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Thu Apr 7, 2016, 01:08 PM

138. Day #9 - C'mon, Don't leave me hangin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Fri Apr 8, 2016, 02:37 PM

139. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Reply #139)

Fri Apr 8, 2016, 03:20 PM

141. Thank You For Checking In On This Thread Every Day And Chiming In On The....

lack of negative ads by Bernie. They'll make accusations - but they can never back them up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:28 AM

142. Day #11 -- I'm sure those posts will come rollin in any time now ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 02:00 PM

143. Day #12 -- Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:00 PM

144. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:41 PM

145. It's been 2 weeks. My how time flies! Still waiting ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to global1 (Original post)

Wed Apr 13, 2016, 03:26 PM

146. Day #15 -- Hello? Is anybody home?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread