Did Bernie Sanders Just Win The Election?

[cal04]

No one will dispute that Barack Obama’s historic win in 2008 was due in large part to the collapse of Wall Street and the devastating effect it had on the American economy. Republicans ran the country for almost a decade and told us that less regulation on the banks was good for everyone. And then we had to give them trillions of dollars in taxpayer dollars so they could pay their CEOs enormous bonuses while we got the shaft. The resulting, and entirely justified, anger at the the banks was both bipartisan and still simmering right below the surface to this day.

Should there be a repeat of 2008’s bailout debacle, the American public will be out for the blood of the banksters. They will look to whichever candidate promises them the heads of Wall Street fat cats, and that candidate is Bernie Sanders. Whatever you think of him as a politician, Sanders has always been crystal clear that the Big Banks are a clear and present danger to the country and that message will resonate across party lines if the greedy pricks at the banks screw us all again.

So, could we see another Wall Street implosion? It’s already in the early stages:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/25/business/dealbook/daily-stock-market-activity.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=span-ab-top-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

(snip)
Barack Obama rode into office on a wave of discontentment with Republican incompetence. Bernie Sanders would easily be able to harness the renewed rage at the banksters to take the White House and finally put a muzzle on the rabid greed of Wall Street.

AUTHOR: JUSTIN ROSARIO
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/08/24/did-bernie-sanders-just-win-the-election/


Bernie on Wallstreet today
For the past 40 years, Wall Street and the billionaire class have rigged the rules to redistribute wealth to the richest among us.
https://twitter.com/SenSanders
https://twitter.com/berniesanders/status/635811305815805953
The results are in. Unfettered free trade has been a disaster for working Americans. It is high time we ended our disastrous trade policies.

[FloridaBlues]

1. Reality ...he must get over 30-33% in primary

Before swinging on this chandelier .
Just saying.

[daleanime]

2. And nothing in the 'real world'.....

will affect voting decisions?

[SoapBox]

4. I have 100% confidence in his campaign team.

They have been very, very smart thus far.

I'm sure they are looking at all scenarios.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

10. me too!

[jeff47]

5. We don't have a single national primary.

So no, he doesn't need 30% nationally. He needs to win some early states, which converts him from "Bernie who?" or "I like him but he can't win" into a major candidate while also putting big dents in Clinton's inevitability strategy.

Right now, Team Clinton has put out statements all but conceding NH to Sanders. Which isn't terribly surprising - Sanders should be very familiar with NH. Team Clinton has also started lowering expectations for Iowa.

You don't do either of those this early unless the internal polling looks really bad.

Basically, South Carolina will decide if Clinton wins or not. If she loses that after losing IA and NH, she's done. It's also why Team Clinton is spending such an enormous amount of effort forgetting their 2008 campaign...er...pushing the Sanders supporters are white racists...er...reaching out to PoC angle.

Win SC and she can stay in the race. Lose SC and her poll numbers tank. Sanders just started seriously campaigning there, so we'll see what happens.

[sabrina 1]

6. He's already getting that in several different polls. In just three months he has gone from zero

recognition to 29% in a recent poll, beating the Front Runner in NH and over 30% in a variety of other polls.

Iow, he has been steadily trending upwards coinciding with people getting to know who he is. We have several more months to go and if he continues his upwards trajectory, he won't need a Wall St collapse, he will win the nomination, unless of course those in power with so much to lose from a President who is actually on the side of the people, don't let that happen.

I have no doubt he can win, IF nothing is done to prevent that.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

7. What other earth-shattering news do you have for us.

[L0oniX]

11. -

[merrily]

17. .

[CountAllVotes]

3. Not now

but he will be the nominee in 2016, that you can believe in!

SANDERS 2016!!!!!

[Lucky Luciano]

8. Careful what you wish for re a crash.

A crash will be blamed (unfairly) on Obama and the democrats in general. When the economy is in the tank, the opposition could win and that is

[randr]

9. I could not agree with you more

Any problems in the economy will be laid directly at the feet of Democrats.
I do not understand how people on this site do not understand some of the basic fucked up "rules" of American politics.
The current economic problems are serious regardless of the politics.

[merrily]

19. Not wishing for a crash. However, if there is one, Bernie better be the nominee.

Bernie can explain it to voters better and with cleaner hands than any other Democrat.

And gosh darn it, people like him. And trust him.

[SheilaT]

12. No he did not just win the election.

We're still well over a year from it. And it's too early to know for sure what this current market behavior will really mean.

I hope he is our next President, and I'm cautiously optimistic about that. But very cautiously.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

13. As the primary has yet to happen...

My sources say no.

[eridani]

14. No--not unless we can organize well enough to fight off the huge onslaught by the 1%

They could live with Obama, who more or less had a clean slate. They will find it much harder to live with Sanders, who has a very extensive pro-99% record.

[merrily]

20. Please see Reply 18.

[jfern]

15. No, of course not

Let's stay grounded. There's 14 1/2 months until the election.

[merrily]

21. Only five months until the first primary, though.

[Motown_Johnny]

16. Way to early for this.

Odds are the market is just in a correction. This is also happening over 5 months before Iowa.

[merrily]

18. Let's be clear: in 2008, the Party's PTB were against Hillary; this time they are for her.

We need to stop acting so brand new. It's NOT a level playing field. Maybe it never was, but it sure isn't today and it wasn't in 2008.

Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and a group of other senators who would back Hillary Clinton’s candidacy encouraged Obama to run for the White House as early as 2006. The concern over Clinton was that she would be a weak Democratic standard-bearer while Obama could energize the party. In late summer 2007, Schumer – using an Obama ally, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), as a back channel – pushed the candidate to “take a two-by-four to Hillary,” as the authors put it.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31302.html


Even as an Obama supporter then, I saw the difference between how media treated Hillary and how media treated Obama. Media's doing by far worse to Sanders now than it did to Hillary then. The differences between Obama 2007-2008 and Sanders 2015-2016 cannot be overstated.

We have to make up the difference. WE have to.

[Robbins]

22. Here Is the thing

Is stock market continues to had days like yesterday dems only hope to keep white house may be Bernie.

people want real change.Bernie can provide.between a republican and corporate dem public may say well corporate dems are not doing well enough let's try a republican again.

[olddots]

23. can Bernie save us from ourselves ?

or our selfishness ? No. but he can teach us all some simple math about commerce instead of scams built on ignorance .

Did he win the election ? he did if he made some people think .