Bernie Sanders 2020

Merit is subjective.

Interesting observations. I agree that Sanders' policy promises are very short on just how his programs will be paid for - even in a world of still rising deficits - and just what might be the collateral economic and political effects that might attend them. However that comment could be justly made about Warren as well : both face some highly likely resistance from union workers concerned about their hard won (and treasured) active & retiree medical benefits , --- and this comes from voters located in the swing Midwest industrial states that decided the 2016 election. Warren is ahead in the polls now and currently appears to have more upside potential than Sanders, however that will be tested as more focus is applied to her positions and proposals. No one appears to match the dedicated enthusiasm of Sanders' core supporters, a group that appears to comprise about 24% of The Democrat electorate.

What in hell makes an elderly, crotchety old Jewish man a celebrity?

His policies. Too many people are desperate for those policies.

The BerninSAGARedux
@Alscool1
·
2h
Recently I was polled by phone. They asked me if I would support the following for POTUS - Klobuchar, Beto, Castro, Warren, Buttigieg, Biden & Harris - Didn't mention Bernie even running. Last question was - Do you view Hillary Clinton favorably?

You are allowed to be that mistaken. I think you don't follow the candidates you don't like that closely.

One of the talking points against Sanders is the financing. He explains it for each phase. It involves expanding Medicare and paying for it the same way as always, with the change being the non tax paying rich will be expected to chip in. The amount it would possibly increase for the working people would be more than offset with savings. Taking these rich taxes and scaling back the fraudulent military waste, plus ending the wars that help no one except profiteers, are among the avenues under consideration.

In some instances, student loan forgiveness, for instance, it is believed the ones who lose that debt will be able to pour more into the economy.

I don't have any preferences for candidates at this point and I follow the front runners about equally. That said, Sanders is a celebrity candidate, perhaps the only celebrity candidate in the Democratic field other than O'Rourke. He could shoot someone in front of the statehouse in Montpelier and most of his base would still vote for him. You can wish that people ignore celebrity if you want, but I think that would hurt your candidate more than help.

Based on the last question, it would seem that the rumor Hillary is waiting for zero hour to enter the race again could be true. This DNC race keeps getting more and more interesting.

Sanders is the only noncelebrity candidate out of them all. If he wavered on his policies the way Warren does, his entire candidacy would implode. - I should not have characterized your political activity the way I did. I find it annoying when others do the same about me.

I’m hearing that from detractors and adherents.

You've taken leave of your senses — that's a ridiculous idea.

Some speculate Clinton wants to run as veep to Warren. I offer no opinion, other than disgust.

Disgust at the stupidity of "some"?

I didn't say it was going to happen, it's something I've heard talked about. I actually laughed when I heard that, because I thought it was silly. Could it be that they were looking to see who still supports Hillary, so she could endorse someone? She isn't running, who cares what people think of her. She certainly keeps her name in the news though.

Not my words. Disgust that she is still in contention in some quarters.

Bernard Sanders’ beautifully honest endorsement of Bill Clinton:

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton’s politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I’m a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I’ve decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps “support” is too strong a word. I’m planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I’m kidding. You think I’m exaggerating. Well, I’m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I’m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country—for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."

I wouldn't be terribly upset if he repeated this sometime soon.

This is awfully close to my thinking. In fact, I think I've posted similar sentiments. (Although no one ever referred to them as "beautifully honest" — "derivative quasi-Republican hackwork" would be more likely. What we need is two consecutive two-term liberal administrations. Eight years of moderate administration to renew people's faith in government and politics in general, followed by an activist administration that begins to dismantle the trappings of the imperial corporate state. What we seem to get is one step forward, two steps backward as voters, disappointed by the Democrats' broken promises and unseemly disarray, return conservatives to power again and again, retrenchment unbound.

The Bill Clinton victory Sanders was talking about was in the early 90s.

Our time is now.

At one time I stated that I would vote for Bernie if he wad the democratic candidate. After lash and Edgar's b s I think if he is the candidate I will vote for trump. Ill go with the crook I know rather than a god.