Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 02:28 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

As Lash could tell you the ultra conservatives are praying that the dems nominate Bernie.


Yup!

And if I were one of them...I'd certainly be praying that!

But some of these people just don't get that.

We'll see what happens.

0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 03:54 am
DNC rigging the election for Clinton. How far will they go to cheat for the cheater?
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/omalley-dnc-debate-process-is-rigged-516810819761
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 04:06 am
Wow...a career politician far, far back in the pack...claiming something is rigged against him.

Is there no end to the injustice?

What next?

Will this guy claim other politicians are lying!
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 04:16 am
This has been so exciting to watch. Facebook is wallpapered with messages like this one:

I just received a call from the DNC asking for a donation. I explained to the person I will not donate anymore money until either D. W. SCHULTZ is replaced or the Democratic debates begin which include our candidate Bernie Sanders. All of our donations are not helping our candidate as long as Ms. Schultz is the Chairperson because of her bias against Bernie or any person who isn't Hillary. Ms. Schultz should have stepped down or replaced as soon as HRC announced her candidacy. Ms. Schultz ran Hillary's campaign in 2008 and many feel she lost the election because of the debates. There's enough reason for the DNC to demand her resignation. As supporters of Bernie Sanders we have called, written and sent petitions asking for the Debates to begin and include Bernie and this hasn't been effective so I believe our Money will TALK and get actions if we keep that money in our pockets until after the Debates begin and include Bernie. As a side note I saw interview on either MSNBC or CNN a month ago where Ms. Schultz was asked point blank if Bernie would be included in Democratic debates and she was silent then stepped around and refused to answer. It was obvious she has no intentions to allow Bernie to Debate Hillary. It's wrong we all know it so when DNC calls for your money tell them why your not giving at this time. I did and I feel better having done it. I'm in this fight to get Bernie elected so my financial support will go to him only until the DNC does the right thing and I'm going to encourage Bernie supporters to let all 3 mainstream television channels we will boycott their advertisers until they include Bernie in the news and specifically when they show the recent polls. Bernie will win in Iowa but even then these channels won't mention him. It's time our groups take more effective steps to help our Candidate at least get a FAIR chance. We're large in numbers so we can effect change as long as we stay strong and United. I want to see our Bernie in the Whitehouse

_________________________________________________

I have personal friends who are life long Dems and some former-conservative friends who did the same thing; they wrote messages to DWS about why they no longer donate to the DNC - they send their money straight to Bernie because they don't trust the DNC anymore.

DWS should resign. She's actively hurting the DNC.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 05:21 am
@ossobuco,
According to Ollie she did, if he's to be believed, and then only after the atrocity. What politician in their right mind would criticise Charlie Hebdo after that?

It's not a case of understanding, it's a case of saying it's never acceptable to portray a black person as a monkey, no ifs, no buts, no extenuating circumstances or context ever makes it acceptable.

0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  3  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 07:15 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

If I had the time I could show you some posts where she attacked me and called me all manner of names. But if you have been on this site for any amount of time you already know this .


I haven't seen it either, Lash has been civil and intelligent in any thread I have been a part of.

On the other hand I could show you many posts where Izzy launched nasty personal attacks at people who dare to disagree with him... in fact it takes no time at all to find them, just go back to the previous page on this very thread (or pretty much any thread Izzy takes part in).

revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 07:20 am
This Is How Bernie Sanders Could Win

We try to say something nice about #feelthebern’s quest for the Democratic nomination.

Quote:
micah (Micah Cohen, senior editor): We’ve been pretty tough on Bernie Sanders here at FiveThirtyEight. He’s surged in the polling and drawn big, enthusiastic crowds, and yet we’ve written several articles largely dismissing his odds of toppling Hillary Clinton. Many Sanders fans have written us calm, kind notes arguing that Sanders has a chance. Not a “well, anything is possible” chance — a real chance to win the Democratic presidential nomination. So, today’s question: How can Bernie Sanders win? [This is an edited transcript of a conversation in Slack.]

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): I still think it needs to involve some “shock” (as an economist would define that term) to the Clinton campaign. Meaning, some substantially worse turn in the email scandal than what’s been reported so far. Hackers publish a bunch of top-secret documents culled from Clinton’s emails, for instance. Or a new scandal. Or a health problem.

In that event, Democratic elites would probably turn toward another establishment candidate. Most likely Joe Biden. But while I’m pretty sure that Sanders can’t beat Clinton head-to-head — he’s losing to her badly now, after all — I’m not so sure that’s true of Biden, etc.

I think Sanders vs. Biden, in a world where the Democratic establishment is in disarray because of a Clinton crisis, could be highly competitive. And Bernie’s organizational advantages — e.g., in the caucus states — could help him against a candidate who is getting off to a very late start.

hjenten-heynawl (Harry Enten, senior political writer): As I try to get on the good side of the Bernie Sanders supporters, let me start with what we know: Presidential primaries can be about momentum. You win Iowa, you win New Hampshire, and the sky’s the limit. You saw that with John Kerry in 2004 on the Democratic side. You saw that with Jimmy Carter in 1976. Carter, especially, was someone who sort of came out of nowhere — the outsider candidate, if you will. So the first thing that Sanders likely needs is to win the first caucus and the first primary.

micah: And that seems eminently possible, right?

hjenten-heynawl: Yes. Yes it is. Then — and this is the big thing — he needs to find a way to cut into Clinton’s support among African-Americans. Sanders is pulling in less than 10 percent of the black vote. Obama had about five times as much at this point. If Clinton continues to win 70 percent of the black vote, Sanders will likely get stopped in South Carolina. If, however, he can cut into that advantage, he could build a wave of momentum.

hjenten-heynawl: It’s important to remember that movement people aren’t necessarily the base of the party. Take a look at the recent CNN poll, for example: Clinton leads among self-identified Democrats 55-20 but trails among independent-leaning Democrats 39-37.

Clinton is doing very well among base Democrats, while Sanders is an outsider.

natesilver: Yeah, people need to stop confusing “the base” with “media and party elites that have big Twitter and Facebook followings.” By any objective measure, the Democratic base still really loves Clinton.

hjenten-heynawl: But let’s get back to South Carolina. There’s no party registration, so anyone can vote in the primary. It gives Sanders a shot if he can somehow pull in some of these outsider voters who might not otherwise vote in a Democratic primary.

natesilver: No way, dude. Hillary wins South Carolina even if things are going really badly for her. There was a poll that came out in Alabama the other day that had Clinton beating Sanders something like 81-10. Literally. It was like an Alabama football score against some terrible nonconference opponent.

hjenten-heynawl: 78-10. But continue.

natesilver: It’s not complicated. In a state where you have a lot of white moderates and a lot of black voters, Sanders does terribly.


0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 02:20 pm
@maxdancona,
I think Izzy gives out what he gets only one up. I have no problem with that.

He's anti-racist, antifascist, antiwar, anti-Islamaphobe, pro children, progressive..... - sounds like a wonderful man to me.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 03:05 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Max is a liar. He's completely dishonest about how he behaves. That's not a personal attack it's an observation.

Max deliberately gave someone the impression he was a single dad with 24 hour responsibility for his kid and no mother helping out.

That was a lie. Not only did he lie, he lied to make himself sound more like me.

That really is fucked up. I don't even want to think where those neuroses lead.

Again, not a personal attack, an observation, and an honest one at that. I don't wear a smiling mask.
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 03:13 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Max deliberately gave someone the impression he was a single dad with 24 hour responsibility for his kid and no mother helping out.


First of all, Izzy, that is not true. In my opinion a divorced person who lives alone and has kids at least half the time counts as a single parent. After all, such a person is single... and such a person is a parent. You disagree with this. Fine that is your right. It isn't any excuse for your personal attacks and abuse. In my opinion (and experience) I am a single father. Still no reason for your personal attacks.

Second of all it is irrelevant. The fact that you believe someone has "lied" in the past has nothing to do with later threads (when did this interaction happen any way?... last year I think.. and you keep dredging it up in completely unrelated posts). Really I am not asking to trust me on anything. I state my opinions, and defend them. You have the right to agree or disagree based on what I write... or you can ignore my opinion. All of this can be done without personal abuse.

The issue here is the personal attacks and abuse. In most threads you are a part of you end up calling someone a "liar" or a "******* idiot" or a "rape apologist".

This isn't part of intelligent discussion. It isn't civil. And, it isn't necessary.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 03:18 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

I think Izzy gives out what he gets only one up. I have no problem with that.

He's anti-racist, antifascist, antiwar, anti-Islamaphobe, pro children, progressive..... - sounds like a wonderful man to me.


The issue isn't whether or not you agree with his positions. The issue is the incivility; the name-calling and personal attacks against people who haven't done anything other than to disagree with him.

You can disagree with someone in a civil way without calling them a "******* idiot". That's the point. Even when I agree with Izzy (and I often do) I hate the way his behavior shuts out dissenting opinions and makes intelligent discussion much more difficult.

roger
 
  3  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 05:19 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

I haven't seen it either, Lash has been civil and intelligent in any thread I have been a part of.


Same here.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  3  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 10:34 pm
@maxdancona,
Yes Izzy sometimes attacks people as do you and Lash. Please no more holier than thou stuff.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 2 Sep, 2015 10:59 pm
@RABEL222,
Quote:
Yes Izzy sometimes attacks people as do you and Lash. Please no more holier than thou stuff.


No Rabel. I do not make personal attacks, and I don't indulge in name calling.

I argue against ideas and ideologies, and I have no problem with people arguing against my ideas as long as it doesn't get person. That is what I am here for. And, I criticize behavior when I feel people are being uncivil here. You will not see me attacking someone personally (with one single exception when I responded harshly to someone who crossed a line by attacking my family). And you will not see me calling other A2K members names. Nor will you see me carrying a grudge from thread to thread. I can strongly disagree with someone on one thread, and then be in jovial agreement on the next.

If you believe I do, then provide some examples. I can certainly provide you examples of Izzy attacking people by calling them "******* idiot" and "liar" and all sorts of mean nasty things for the simple reason that he disagrees with them... they are easy to find even on this very thread.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 12:43 am
I get the defense of Hebdo.

I'm not a political cartoonist. I used to pester Slappy Doo Hoo, very aggravate by him. I gradually changed my mind and sometime later let him know and he saw that.

Slappy's view was pretty much anything goes. I moved over to get his point, and I'm still there.

Of course, I miss Slappy,


In the monkey thing, the woman was a friend of theirs.
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 01:37 am
@maxdancona,
max, your appeals to fairness and accuracy are wasted. Rabel is a nasty old coot himself and watching him complain about the behavior of others is preposterous. Those who are attacking you now just don't like your political opinion, so things like veracity and fairness hamper their dialogue with you. Scroll through Rabels posts. Almost 100% mean spirited and personally insulting. Try not to be bothered by it. There are very few people here who are actually fair minded and not agenda-driven.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 01:42 am
@Lash,
Quote:
There are very few people here who are actually fair minded and not agenda-driven.


WTF lady, I though you are one of the cool kids. Did I get that wrong?
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 01:54 am
@hawkeye10,
Well, am I wrong?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 02:01 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

Yes Izzy sometimes attacks people as do you and Lash. Please no more holier than thou stuff.


He'd have to stop believing his own lies in order to do that, and that's something he's incapable of. Not so much the truth will set you free, more a case of you can't handle the truth.

Hawkeye is exactly the same, delusion trumps reason every time.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 3 Sep, 2015 02:04 am
@hawkeye10,
The ratio of decent human to waste of flesh has dropped precipitously of late.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bernie's In
  3. » Page 54
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 8.87 seconds on 12/24/2024 at 06:31:50