2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy did Bernie vote against the amber alert and against outlawing certain types of child porn?
I know he had reasonable reasons like Hillary did on some of her questionable votes, but can you imagine how the Republicans would use those votes if Bernie was the nominee?
This sort of issue would pale in comparison to the manufactured email scandal if the Republicans ran with it, but give the Hillary campaign credit for not drawing the public's attention to Sanders' strange votes.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Families_+_Children.htm
Voted NO on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids.
Vote to adopt the conference report on the bill that would assign a national coordinator for AMBER alerts. AMBER alerts is an alert system for missing children, make available additional protections for children and set stricter punishments for sex offenders. Two-time child sex offenders would be subjected to mandatory life sentence. The measure would make it a crime to pander visual illustrations of children as child pornography. It would increase maximum sentences for a number of specified crimes against children. It would also make it a crime to take a trip to foreign countries and engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. It also would enlarge law enforcement's wiretap and electronic surveillance abilities in investigations of child pornography.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)surface, Sanders has not been vetted and surely not vetted by Trump. Sanders is going to be saved by the fact he will not be the nominee.
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)Why does Bill Clinton have a history of mistreating women? Moreover, why did Hillary put up with it for so many years?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Is that what we're calling affairs these days? And the why she fought for her marriage instead of divorcing him is none of your business.
synergie
(1,901 posts)Smears about the candidate's spouse and lies you have been told about consenting adults and their personal life?
Fine, why does Jane have a history of committing fraud and other financial improprieties, moreover why did Bernie participate in these illegal diversions of campaign funds, and defrauding the Catholic Church, Burlington College and how often did he participate in Jane's fraudulent activities?
There is plenty of dirt on this couple that no one has bothered with since Hillary has never gone negative on him and the RW has been saving up, thus far they have been spending their money supporting Bernie, because they can destroy him easily.
Bernie has a history of publishing some rather nasty things about women, young girls and truly nasty beliefs. You can pretend that his actual published essays are somehow "smears" but, the facts are facts and he admits to writing these things, hiding any mentions with based juries will not magically erase his published works written in his 20's, that numerous organizations have printed in entirety, including CNN, Mother Jones etc.
cali
(114,904 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)someone on my facebook feed just threw this at me. The smell of desperation. And mailed talking points.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)I was very disturbed by it until she explained that in a town with a college, the chances of having a "John" Smith" of the same age was too much of a risk to the student.
The Iraq war vote has only 2 possibilities. HRC was too dumb to see through Bush or she thought it would be good for her ambition for people to die in a war. I don't think she is dumb.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Or what poison pill was inserted.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)and he merely stomped out of the room when his constituents tried to get an answer from him? Tell us, since you all claim to have done so much homework about Bernie's record, what was hugs rationale, and remember your citations.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)from the OP:
From the (passed) bill:
`(b) TRAVEL WITH INTENT TO ENGAGE IN ILLICIT SEXUAL CONDUCT- A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States, or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce, for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
`(c) ENGAGING IN ILLICIT SEXUAL CONDUCT IN FOREIGN PLACES- Any United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who travels in foreign commerce, and engages in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
Different countries define the age of consent differently. Beyond the constitutional questions, this doesn't really make much sense as a criminal statute.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)... whether using private email (which was legal), voting for one version of the bankruptcy bill, or even voting for the Iraq War. If you look into people's reasoning, even if you disagree with them, you come up with a more balanced view. Bernie certainly isn't for child porn anymore than Hillary was for marching into Baghdad (as her public statements made clear), but used as political fodder you can fool some of the people some of the time.
Blue Meany
(1,947 posts)to be attacked for. For example, Hillary could (and probably will) be attacked for voting against a ban on "cop killer" bullets if you didn't know it was part of a bill to undue existing gun regulations. Unfortunately, she has no such excuse for vote against banning land mines and cluster bombs, as she spoke out affirmitively for them.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)even for "two-time child sex offenders". I don't want to see a 20-year old going to prison for life because he sexted his 16-year old girlfriend when he was 18 and then had sex with her, which is exactly the sort of thing an overzealous prosecutor might do. The problem, of course, is that principled votes like this can look awful when placed in 30-second soundbites.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Another panic OP from a Hillary supporter
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)He voted against the Amber alert bill, which also would have outlawed certain kinds of child porn (digitized visuals that mimic actual photographer, from what I understand). Apparently, you oppose Bernie on this issue. Good for you.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I guess like brock even child porn has a home with them
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)him on his weird record. As you've just hinted at, there is a long series of stuff about children that is weird. That Hillary did not personally go after him on this stuff makes her vulnerable to Trump without a good explanation. Any of the Republicans would have gone after a first, second or third placer with these kinds of positions.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)... she has some respect for him, in the same way he has respect for her. Neither of them ever went into the gutter, though Sanders supporters certainly did more than Hillary supporters. While Hillary may not be as left wing as Sanders, she is in fact pretty liberal, and my guess is that she really does have some admiration for him. We'll find that out after he concedes, I think.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)- Benghazi
- email server
- smearing women who accused her husband of misconduct
- Donations to the Clinton Global Fund possibly influencing her State Dept.
I'm not saying that those would have been valid attacks. I'm just saying that if you're going to ask why Hillary Clinton didn't use every attack no matter how invalid, then it's fair to ask the same thing about Bernie Sanders' restraint in attacks.
I guess they showed restraint in attacking each other because they both want the Democratic nominee to win.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)we shall see what Trump does.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)not his supporters- but people he shared the stage with.
At this point I think he is staying in partially because he is afraid of the unhinged reactions he will get when he throws his support to Hillary.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...during the hundreds of introductions he's had.
I'm not familiar with an introducer mentioning the email server or Benhazi. Who did that?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)at a rally. I think when anyone looks into either of those two, it mostly hurts their cause for bringing them up.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)But it's likely it was one of those votes for "freedom", because Ron Paul voted the same way. If Hillary Clinton had voted against either of these measures, you know that Sanders people would be attacking her for it.
Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)otherwise this justs smells like desperation on the part of the window lickers who fawn over Corporate America's anointed one.
Or maybe you're just projecting... IDK. Pathetic regardless of your motivation.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)... Like Hillary, Bernie had good, principled reasons for some votes we may disagree with -- whether we're talking about the stealth bomber, for regime change in Iraq, for giving special liability protection go gun manufacturers, for the Minutemen, against the Amber alert, etc. No one's saying Bernie acted with the intention of doing harm. It's just that political votes are sometimes fairly complicated, between representing their constituents and representing their moral values in difficult situations. The frame of Hillary as being some sort of evil person can be easily applied to Bernie as well if both sides choose to play the same game. No doubt, if Bernie is the nominee, Donald Trump would bring up Bernie's positions in the same ignorant way that Bernie supporters bring up some of Hillary's positions.
That you thought I was suggesting that Bernie is a "kid toucher" or that I'm projecting speaks more about you than anyone else.
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)while abhorrent, is the fastest growing felony offense in the country. It is such a numbers problem that some states are in the process of decriminalizing it and classifying it as voyeurism. (note: NOT distribution or creation) Perhaps Sanders believes in a rehabilitative society and not a perpetually punitive one.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Barbara Lee., Maxine Waters.....many of those people are considered to be heroes on DU. So what is it you are implying about them, onlooker?
http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2003-127.htm
G_j
(40,366 posts)that this information was not included...
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)malicious motives as the OP does. Obviously the opposition to this bill came from mostly minority Congresspersons, gay and African American to be specific. Obviously today the Clinton Camp does not care about that particular alliance. Will onlooker call for Hillary to denounce John Lewis' endorsement? He should. But he won't. He just proudly smears John Lewis because John is standing near Bernie on this.
hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)What a great way to sow support for Hillary Clinton.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)This primary has caused me to re-evaluate that position.
Disorganized and haphazard doesn't even begin to describe the Clinton campaign. It seems as though even the people she pays don't want her to be President, either.
hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)Must have hit too close to home for some of them.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)You cannot compare what they would try to bring against Bernie to what they will try to bring against Hillary.
Not even close. And easily dis-proven...whereas Hillary's baggage is not so easily dis-proven.
dr60omg
(283 posts)whole bill and read the letter from Renquist declaring it unconstitutional etc etc http://archive.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2006/09/21/sanders_vote_on_amber_alert_emerges_as_key_campaign_issue/
Blue Meany
(1,947 posts)conference report, presumeably because he wanted revisions to it.
But it passed by unanimous acclamation, so he obviously did not vote against it on the floor.
mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)CTHULHU FOR PRESIDENT!
Why choose the lesser evil?
Vinca
(50,261 posts)find you have to vote for or against something else. I guarantee you can find something horrendous in the records of anyone who has voted numerous times in Congress. It would be nice if we had "stand alone" bills, but that isn't the case. That said, you imply Bernie is some kind of perv and that's really, really nasty. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)... anymore than the Bernie supporters imply that Hillary's vote for the Iraq War makes her a neocon.
Apply your own standard to Hillary as well as Bernie, and Hillary will not look so bad. Her vote for the Iraq War was qualified by her statements, her vote for the bankruptcy bill (the one sort of pro-Wall Street bill she voted for) was explained by her statements and her later votes, etc. But, she's a woman, so hold her to another standard, while Bernie gets away with voting against the Amber alert. To my way of thinking, his opposition to the Amber alert is as bad as Hillary's vote for the Iraq War.