2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumk8conant
(3,038 posts)Where are they getting their stupidity?
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)(WTO) GATS is the real reason they won't fix this.
See the following:
https://www.citizen.org/documents/Memo%20-%20Unanswered%20questions%20memo%20for%20Geneva.pdf
http://www.citizen.org/documents/That%27sAllTheyGot.pdf
https://www.citizen.org/documents/memo-gats-conflict-with-bank-size-limits-may-10-2011.pdf
http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1402116/tacd-finance-resolution-on-trade-rules-and-financial-regulation-green.pdf
https://www.citizen.org/documents/Memo%20-%20Unanswered%20questions%20memo%20for%20Geneva.pdf
http://www.citizen.org/documents/IntroductionToWTODeregulation.pdf
Jeffersons Ghost
(15,235 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Just a song (a good song I'll grant you) that has not a fucking thing to do with the topic and a fucking obscure name-calling attempt at _____?
Strong fucking post you've got there.
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)Hillary or her campaign... TO ACTUALLY TELL THE FUC**** TRUTH ABOUT ANYTHING!
This young man NAILED IT! GREAT OP!
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Shows how empty she is.
Jeffersons Ghost
(15,235 posts)you criticize both candidates!
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Sanders --> GOOD
Clinton --> BAD
That should be clear enough for anyone to get no matter what the comprehension level.
monmouth4
(10,708 posts)Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)No substance and easily debunked by linking to the legislation that he introduced last year.
BainsBane
(57,751 posts)You haven't read the NY Daily News interview have you. I've heard these claims about something about Sanders having been debunked more times than I can account, and people can never say what is factually wrong. "Debunking" seems to mean nothing more than a Bernie supporter told other Bernie supporters something they wanted to hear.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)BainsBane
(57,751 posts)to keep it simple. Here's the exact quote used in the ad, in context.
Daily News: Okay. You saw, I guess, what happened with Metropolitan Life. There was an attempt to bring them under the financial regulatory scheme, and the court said no. And what does that presage for your program?
Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2588306
beedle
(1,235 posts)Ask Hillary what she thinks of next week's NYT headlines. What??? It's something she had not studied?
My Gawd you people will make any fool stupid accusation won't you.
Anything else you want to ignorantly throw out there?
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)This interview published the 4th, now here is an article saying the details of that ruling were just released on the 7th.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/business/dealbook/ruling-behind-metlifes-too-big-to-fail-reprieve-unsealed.html?_r=0
"A federal judge ruled on March 30 that regulators failed to properly name the countrys biggest life insurer as systemically important. But the decision itself was under seal until it was made public on Thursday."
That is why he didn't know the details.
Next?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Or, if you do not have reading comprehension, you'll think the NYDN understands the difference between the Treasury and the "Fed"....
Again, the truth is actually brought out in that long interview, in SPITE of the dullards thinking it hasn't.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)BainsBane
(57,751 posts)in his interview with the NYDaily News.
This is about the core issue he runs on, but even that he hasn't bothered to think about beyond campaign slogans.
Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2588306
Expect a lot more ads directly from that interview.
beedle
(1,235 posts)The decision had only just been announced, and the written decision (with all the details of why the judge decided they way they did) was not released as yet.
Why don't you ask Bernie to comment on the content of Hillary's Wall. St. Transcripts. Oh, right, they've not been release yet.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Hillary is still running a campaign that doesn't realize that people can instantly fact check now.
This won't play well in NY
alan2102
(75 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)Response to jfern (Reply #8)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to alan2102 (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You are RIGHT.
k8conant
(3,038 posts)Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.
Response to k8conant (Reply #10)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to alan2102 (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)It is so chopped that it looks like a ransom note made out of letters cut out of different magazines and put together to make words. I knew Hillary was tone deaf but could not have imagined that she would think defending the big banks was a winning issue.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)BainsBane
(57,751 posts)And is a perfectly legitimate ad. He is campaigning on issues for which he hasn't bothered to consider the details of implementation or consequences.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)you didn't watch it.
Oh boy, you don't care.
BainsBane
(57,751 posts)Daily News: Okay. You saw, I guess, what happened with Metropolitan Life. There was an attempt to bring them under the financial regulatory scheme, and the court said no. And what does that presage for your program?
Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2588306
I watched the ad part. I don't need to watch the Bernie media guy's spin to know the ad is truthful. I read the interview last week. That's not something one forgets.
surrealAmerican
(11,872 posts)They are matching his answer to a very specific question about "what happened with Metropolitan Life" with a question about "breaking up the big banks".
He answered the "big banks" question before they asked him this, and his answer was not any variation of "I don't know".
thesquanderer
(13,001 posts)That's a huge misrepresentation that Kyle didn't even touch on.
beedle
(1,235 posts)Like Hillary's Wall St. Speech transcripts, Bernie can't comment on their content because no one has seen them yet.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)BainsBane
(57,751 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 10, 2016, 10:50 AM - Edit history (1)
Sanders: It's something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2588306
Pinocchio's, or lies, are not defined by your discomfort at being exposed to information you don't want to believe but rather by a factually false statement. That ad is accurate, as the transcript of the New York Daily News interview shows very clearly.
Your post is false. Clinton's ad is not.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I just wanted to post the Pinocchios.
BainsBane
(57,751 posts)To Sanders. A couple of three Pinocchio ratings. One was about his claim she took money from the oil and gas industry.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Not the Clinton supporting Washington post
beedle
(1,235 posts)The written decision details were not released at the time.
I know, I'm 'stalking' you with the truth.
BainsBane
(57,751 posts)after people here insist Bernie doesn't need to release his tax returns?
beedle
(1,235 posts)Oh, No one said he doesn't need to release them, we're saying you're not going to find anything. Release both. I would more than welcome that.
Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)bjo59
(1,166 posts)Totally misleading and disingenuous. Take a quote out of context, play some dramatic music, imply, imply, imply. It says a lot about her estimation of the intelligence of the US population.
jillan
(39,451 posts)I think people will watch that and say - I agree with Bernie.
Clueless.
Marr
(20,317 posts)incompetent, but it makes him look like a man on a mission, while making HRC look like a stooge for the big banks, telling the world it's impossible to fight her big donors.
This is just an incompetent campaign. Maybe that's what happens when you have it too easy for too long.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)and Clinton will look like the rabid wolverine from hell that she is.
Bernie calmly and intelligently explained his plan to break up the big banks at a town hall on Good Morning America yesterday.
Let her run her negative ad.
This is what Hillary does when things don't get handed to her and her opponents start gaining (she did this with Obama).
She gets scared. And when she's feeling fear, she thinks the answer is to attack. Or to use her campaign's own words, "Disqualify and Defeat."
I welcome this attack add. Let her continue to run off the rails, while Bernie campaigns the hell out of New York talking about the issues.
We're in the cat-bird seat with Princess Inevitable melting down.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)They just don't get it! What do you think is the net effect of showing Sanders consistently saying: BREAK UP THE BIG BANKS!
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Do these totally corrupt scumbags even know what truth is?