PDA

View Full Version : Bernie Sanders Annihilates Scott Walker At Record Setting Madison Rally



TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 11:54 AM
Bernie Sanders Annihilates Scott Walker At Record Setting Madison Rally
By: Jason Easley

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/01/bernie-sanders-annihilates-scott-walker-record-setting-wisconsin-rally.html

"Sanders announced at the beginning of his speech that they drew the most people to a rally of any candidate this year. Sanders responded to Wisconsin Republicans who called him an extremist, “Let me just say a few words to my friends in the Republican Party about extremism. When you deny the right of workers to come together in collective bargaining that’s extremism. When you tell a woman that she can not control her own body, that’s extremism. When you think a woman is a child and can’t purchase a contraceptive, that is extremism. When you give tax breaks to billionaires and refuse to raise the minimum wage, that’s extremism.”


=============================================

Yes sir, that Bernie Sanders is sharp as an ice pick. And he really tells it like it is about Republicans, going for the jugular. People are listening to his message and the GOP is up in arms about his increasing popularity. Thanks to Politicususa for this report.

hanger4
07-23-2015, 12:10 PM
How many pres. rallies has Walker had in Wisconson ?? How many people showed for Walkers rallies ?? How many showed for Sanders ??

With Jason Easley's past record one needs a hell lot more then he (Jason Easley) said so.

Chris
07-23-2015, 12:13 PM
"Sanders announced at the beginning of his speech that they drew the most people to a rally of any candidate this year."

Good, he's beating Hillary as well.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 12:22 PM
"Sanders announced at the beginning of his speech that they drew the most people to a rally of any candidate this year."

Good, he's beating Hillary as well.
I doubt that. But what's important is that he is an Independent who is very closely aligned with the Democrats. That's what counts. We have to retain a Democrat in the White House from now on as that's the bottom line.

Chris
07-23-2015, 12:24 PM
I doubt that. But what's important is that he is an Independent who is very closely aligned with the Democrats. That's what counts. We have to retain a Democrat in the White House from now on as that's the bottom line.

So are you saying Bernie is a liar?

Captain Obvious
07-23-2015, 12:29 PM
Today must be amateur day.

PolWatch
07-23-2015, 12:36 PM
I think Bernie is surprising the Clinton camp. He seems to be attracting attention. I don't think any candidate should think they will win the nomination without some competition. More voices = more chance that someone will actually address an issue.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 12:38 PM
So are you saying Bernie is a liar?
Not at all. I'm saying the man is very sharp and he is trouncing Republicans and the GOP right and left, ha.ha. Bernie is just a true Democrat at heart. That's why I have to say "Gotta Luv It!!" http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/mini/biggrin_mini2.gif

Chris
07-23-2015, 12:42 PM
Not at all. I'm saying the man is very sharp and he is trouncing Republicans and the GOP right and left, ha.ha. Bernie is just a true Democrat at heart. That's why I have to say "Gotta Luv It!!" http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/mini/biggrin_mini2.gif

Right, because he said any candidate, not just Reps: "Sanders announced at the beginning of his speech that they drew the most people to a rally of any candidate this year."

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 01:35 PM
Right, because he said any candidate, not just Reps: "Sanders announced at the beginning of his speech that they drew the most people to a rally of any candidate this year."
Like I said, he's very impressive. However, I don't believe he will beat Hillary Clinton by any means. But if he was to get in somehow he would be just another Democrat in the White House and that has to make one go "WOO, WOO!!" http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/mini/dance_mini.gif

Chris
07-23-2015, 01:41 PM
Like I said, he's very impressive. However, I don't believe he will beat Hillary Clinton by any means. But if he was to get in somehow he would be just another Democrat in the White House and that has to make one go "WOO, WOO!!" http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/mini/dance_mini.gif

So then his drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate is really not very significant, is it.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 02:11 PM
So then his drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate is really not very significant, is it.
Put it this way Chrissy boy, crowds are great no doubt about it. But what really matters is whether those crowds will translate into voting constituencies. Um, not always Chrissy.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 02:20 PM
Bernie Sanders Annihilates Scott Walker At Record Setting Madison Rally
By: Jason Easley

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/07/01/bernie-sanders-annihilates-scott-walker-record-setting-wisconsin-rally.html


=============================================

Yes sir, that Bernie Sanders is sharp as an ice pick. And he really tells it like it is about Republicans, going for the jugular. People are listening to his message and the GOP is up in arms about his increasing popularity. Thanks to Politicususa for this report.


The only way Bernie Sanders can " annihilate" Scott Walker or any true conservative is to say his leftist idiotic shit when no one is there to oppose him.

Chris
07-23-2015, 02:38 PM
Put it this way Chrissy boy, crowds are great no doubt about it. But what really matters is whether those crowds will translate into voting constituencies. Um, not always Chrissy.


So you must reduce yourself to childish taunts when you can't refute the point made? Pathetic.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 03:45 PM
So you must reduce yourself to childish taunts when you can't refute the point made? Pathetic.
What I stated is Factual. Why are you having such a problem with it? You evidently don't realize that just because a candidate gets mega-scores of people to attend their rally does not mean that they are going to turn around and vote for that candidate. Anyone with a little common sense would be able to realize that.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 03:49 PM
The only way Bernie Sanders can " annihilate" Scott Walker or any true conservative is to say his leftist idiotic shit when no one is there to oppose him.
If there was no one there to oppose him, and I highly doubt that as CONServatives like to attend the opposing party's rallies all the time to hear first hand what was said to possibly use against them, then it is not Bernie's fault. It is the Republican's fault for not challenging him. Now who's to be blamed for that? Certainly not Bernie.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 03:50 PM
So then his drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate is really not very significant, is it.

If by some fluke Sanders is nominated, the Democrat party will be solidified as the party of the loony ultra left wing of American society. They will lose any centrist or mainstream support they have now.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 03:52 PM
If there was no one there to oppose him, and I highly doubt that as CONServatives like to attend the opposing party's rallies all the time to hear first hand what was said to possibly use against them, then it is not Bernie's fault. It is the Republican's fault for not challenging him. Now who's to be blamed for that? Certainly not Bernie.


Right. The only way Sanders can "annihilate" a conservative in a debate is if the conservative doesn't exist and Sanders is in front of a 100% friendly hack crowd.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 03:56 PM
Right. The only way Sanders can "annihilate" a conservative in a debate is if the conservative doesn't exist and Sanders is in front of a 100% friendly hack crowd.
Wrong. He already has CONServatives beat by a long shot. The only reason they don't rebut Sanders is because They Can't! That's the only reason. If they could they would have already done so. And if they don't go to and attend his rallies then so much for them caring about winning the White House in 2016.

zelmo1234
07-23-2015, 04:00 PM
Well that great conservative FDR was against public sector unions, and it Blue Wisconsin Walker has beat the Democrats 3 times in 4 years.

The people understand that the government is out of control. Sanders has stated on several occasions that he is a socialist, his words not mine. The people of WI rejected that

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 04:02 PM
If by some fluke Sanders is nominated, the Democrat party will be solidified as the party of the loony ultra left wing of American society. They will lose any centrist or mainstream support they have now.
And how many CONServatives have been saying that Bernie could beat Hillary? Not long ago in this very forum there were many right-wingers rooting for Sanders with great enthusiasm.

And your assertion is wrong as usual. Democrats will not lose anything except crap from the right wing side as they go on to win the White House yet again. :)

zelmo1234
07-23-2015, 04:04 PM
Wrong. He already has CONServatives beat by a long shot. The only reason they don't rebut Sanders is because They Can't! That's the only reason. If they could they would have already done so. And if they don't go to and attend his rallies then so much for them caring about winning the White House in 2016.

Even Hillary is falling in swing states?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2261

If one more swing state, like WI were to fall?

Hillary can't win the WH! and the others get killed.

How is fading fast .. Trump running as an independent is the Democrats saving grace.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 04:07 PM
Well that great conservative FDR was against public sector unions, and it Blue Wisconsin Walker has beat the Democrats 3 times in 4 years.

The people understand that the government is out of control. Sanders has stated on several occasions that he is a socialist, his words not mine. The people of WI rejected that
Wisconsin is but one state, my friend. People are tired of the GOP and will soundly defeat them again in 2016 and elect a Democrat once again to the White House for obvious reasons. They know they cannot gain one thing with Republicans in office unless they are rich which the vast majority is not. Woozy-eyed as some voters are they are finally waking up to the fact that the GOP will leave them far worst off than they already are. They are not willing to take that chance. Smart on their part! :)

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:12 PM
What I stated is Factual. Why are you having such a problem with it? You evidently don't realize that just because a candidate gets mega-scores of people to attend their rally does not mean that they are going to turn around and vote for that candidate. Anyone with a little common sense would be able to realize that.

What you stated was your opinion.

You don't seem to get the contradiction between your two opinions.

1) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate => he's annihilating Reps
2) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate ≠> he's annihilating Hillary

Having that contradiction pointed out seems to make you angry.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 04:12 PM
Even Hillary is falling in swing states?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2261

If one more swing state, like WI were to fall?

Hillary can't win the WH! and the others get killed.

How is fading fast .. Trump running as an independent is the Democrats saving grace.
Ah but the night is still young, Zelly, remember that. We still have a good ways to go and Hillary hasn't even started using her Big Ammo in her campaign. Wait till the real fireworks start. It will literally be World War III and Hillary will emerge victorious!

zelmo1234
07-23-2015, 04:13 PM
Wisconsin is but one state, my friend. People are tired of the GOP and will soundly defeat them again in 2016 and elect a Democrat once again to the White House for obvious reasons. They know they cannot gain one thing with Republicans in office unless they are rich which the vast majority is not. Woozy-eyed as some voters are they are finally waking up to the fact that the GOP will leave them far worst off than they already are. They are not willing to take that chance. Smart on their part! :)


In VA, IW, and CO Hillary is already running behind the 3 most likely GOP contenders Take those three states and WI and the Democrats lose the electoral collage.

Like it or not there are only about 9 states that are in play. They will elect the president.

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:14 PM
If by some fluke Sanders is nominated, the Democrat party will be solidified as the party of the loony ultra left wing of American society. They will lose any centrist or mainstream support they have now.

Disagree, Sanders is not a socialist but a populist social democrat like every other candidate, Dem and Rep, racing to define the center. Populist is the key word here.

zelmo1234
07-23-2015, 04:16 PM
Ah but the night is still young, Zelly, remember that. We still have a good ways to go and Hillary hasn't even started using her Big Ammo in her campaign. Wait till the real fireworks start. It will literally be World War III and Hillary will emerge victorious!

You apparently don't remember 2008 The more people see of Hillary, the more they don't like her.

Plus she has her Rico Statutes Hearings coming out. and about 55% of the people already don't trust her.

If it is anyone but Hillary, it is likely a GOP blow out. And of course the 3 items including the luxury tax that will hit unions. Will be just around the corner going into the election thanks to the ACA.

But if Trump runs as an independent she will win.

even though she is not the wrong side of the issues.

zelmo1234
07-23-2015, 04:17 PM
Disagree, Sanders is not a socialist but a populist social democrat like every other candidate, Dem and Rep, racing to define the center. Populist is the key word here.

You might but Sanders has identified as a socialist, he does not run from the term.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 04:20 PM
What you stated was your opinion.

You don't seem to get the contradiction between your two opinions.

1) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate => he's annihilating Reps
2) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate ≠> he's annihilating Hillary

Having that contradiction pointed out seems to make you angry.
Why angry when I never said anything about Sanders annihilating Hillary. So, there's nothing to feel angry about. It always comes down to who has the bigger britches, Chris. Yes, I'm rooting for Hillary no doubt about that. But Sanders would be a great compliment to the Democratic Party and would obviously not caucus with Republicans. That is what I am primarily looking at at this point.

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:22 PM
You might but Sanders has identified as a socialist, he does not run from the term.

Democratic socialist actually. Basically what I mean when I say social democrat, meaning one who grows government to control economy in support of social agenda. Socialists are more anarchists. --Yea, I know, terminology.

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:23 PM
Why angry when I never said anything about Sanders annihilating Hillary. So, there's nothing to feel angry about. It always comes down to who has the bigger britches, Chris. Yes, I'm rooting for Hillary no doubt about that. But Sanders would be a great compliment to the Democratic Party and would obviously not caucus with Republicans. That is what I am primarily looking at at this point.

I said it and you rejected it, thus contradicting opinion 1. Simple as that. Try and be more consistent in your illogic. :D

And I still don;t get why you root for a 0.1%er like Hillary.

TrueBlue
07-23-2015, 04:29 PM
I said it and you rejected it, thus contradicting opinion 1. Simple as that. Try and be more consistent in your illogic. :D

And I still don;t get why you root for a 0.1%er like Hillary.
I rejected it because you stated something that I did not say. Simple as that.

As for Hillary, she has lots of time to really come out and fire up the base and believe me she will! Like I said, the night is still young.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 04:33 PM
Disagree, Sanders is not a socialist but a populist social democrat like every other candidate, Dem and Rep, racing to define the center. Populist is the key word here.

No. He's a pure socialist. He's even claimed that in the past This new term people have come up with is a way to soften his socialist stance.

One thing about Trump, he is demonstrating that people respect candidates being honest with them. trying to deceive [people by altering what Sanders stands for is dishonest. People see through that.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 04:38 PM
And how many CONServatives have been saying that Bernie could beat Hillary?

I don't know, nor do I care.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 04:39 PM
Wrong. He already has CONServatives beat by a long shot. The only reason they don't rebut Sanders is because They Can't! That's the only reason. If they could they would have already done so. And if they don't go to and attend his rallies then so much for them caring about winning the White House in 2016.

All Sanders is doing is preaching to the choir .

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:42 PM
I rejected it because you stated something that I did not say. Simple as that.

As for Hillary, she has lots of time to really come out and fire up the base and believe me she will! Like I said, the night is still young.


Logically the following two implications are either both true or both false:

1) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate => he's annihilating Reps
2) Sanders drawing more people at a rally that any other candidate => he's annihilating Hillary

Partisanship is not logical.

Chris
07-23-2015, 04:46 PM
No. He's a pure socialist. He's even claimed that in the past This new term people have come up with is a way to soften his socialist stance.

One thing about Trump, he is demonstrating that people respect candidates being honest with them. trying to deceive [people by altering what Sanders stands for is dishonest. People see through that.

Were he a socialist he'd be an anarchist and that is certainly not the case.

Here is some of what Sanders himself says: 14 things Bernie Sanders has said about socialism (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/14-things-bernie-sanders-has-said-about-socialism-120265.html#ixzz3gOF0v1d9):


...1. In the summer 1986 issue of a now-defunct magazine called Vermont Affairs: “All that socialism means to me, to be very frank with you, is democracy with a small ‘d.’ I believe in democracy, and by democracy I mean that, to as great an extent as possible, human beings have the right to control their own lives. And that means that you cannot separate the political structure from the economic structure....

2.... I had that feeling when I first read Eugene Debs, for example. If you read what Debs said about the goals of socialism, it’s no different from what I’ve been saying — that all socialism is about is democracy.

3. From the 1988 dissertation of Steven Soifer, a professor of social work at the University of Memphis, who wrote about Sanders’ time as mayor of Burlington: “What being a socialist means is … that you hold out … a vision of society where poverty is absolutely unnecessary, where international relations are not based on greed … but on cooperation … where human beings can own the means of production and work together rather than having to work as semi-slaves to other people who can hire and fire.”

...8. In the book he wrote with Huck Gutman, Outsider in the House, published in 1997: “Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I’m a democratic socialist.”



What I call social democrat I think aligns somewhat with democratic socialist, but the latter is probably more accurate.

Chris
07-23-2015, 05:18 PM
No. He's a pure socialist. He's even claimed that in the past This new term people have come up with is a way to soften his socialist stance.

One thing about Trump, he is demonstrating that people respect candidates being honest with them. trying to deceive [people by altering what Sanders stands for is dishonest. People see through that.


Trump, honest?

Pro-Lifers Shouldn’t Fall For Donald Trump’s Latest Abortion Con (http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/23/pro-lifers-shouldnt-fall-for-donald-trumps-latest-abortion-con/)


After a week of silence, Trump finally voiced calculated outrage over revelations of Planned Parenthood’s secret baby organ racket. Given Trump’s history on the issue of abortion, the pro-life community shouldn’t fall for the Donald’s latest con....

...Voters shouldn’t be convinced and they shouldn’t be surprised at his most recent crass opportunism. After all, a record of campaign cash contributions speaks louder than sound bites.

For the last two decades, Donald Trump has supported the most extreme of abortion advocates. His moral trepidation didn’t stop him from bankrolling high profile pro-choice Democrats like Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer. Donald didn’t feel squeamish about partial birth abortion or embryonic stem cell research when he signed their checks. Those politicians have dedicated their careers to the defense of abortion—and at least they’re consistent and honest about it.

A money man by trade, Trump regularly refinances his views based on their political costs. Trump stumped for universal healthcare in the early 2000’s, now he opposes it. He once called for an end to the War on Drugs, now he supports it. He once supported abortion and now he opposes it and no one should be surprised. He used to love gun control and now…well, we’ll see....

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:21 PM
Trump, honest?

Pro-Lifers Shouldn’t Fall For Donald Trump’s Latest Abortion Con (http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/23/pro-lifers-shouldnt-fall-for-donald-trumps-latest-abortion-con/)

I didn't bring up Trump because I support him because I don't. I brought him up because he showing that by representing yourself honestly, one can gain some support.

Trying to to alter the principles which guide Sanders by calling him something other than what he is, is dishonest and most people see through that.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:24 PM
Were he a socialist he'd be an anarchist and that is certainly not the case.


Socialists are the opposite of anarchists. They are about maximum government control over business, industry and commerce. Anarchists are for eliminating government all together.

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:25 PM
I didn't bring up Trump because I support him because I don't. I brought him up because he showing that by representing yourself honestly, one can gain some support.

Trying to to alter the principles which guide Sanders by calling him something other than what he is, is dishonest and most people see through that.


He flip flops with the wind. That's hardly an example of honesty.

I called him what he calls and explains himself.

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:26 PM
Socialists are the opposite of anarchists. They are about maximum government control over business, industry and commerce. Anarchists are for eliminating government all together.


They could be that if you accept the Marxist definition. But socialism predates Marx and even now is anarchistic. Again, he claims to be a democratic socialist.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:28 PM
You might but Sanders has identified as a socialist, he does not run from the term.

He is running from it a bit now. He's trying to change the definition. This social democrat, or democratic socialist thing is just a deceptive ruse.

It's kind of like when modern liberals tried to deceive people by changing their stance to "progressive". There's nothing progressive about liberals. In fact they are regressive.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:29 PM
They could be that if you accept the Marxist definition. But socialism predates Marx and even now is anarchistic. Again, he claims to be a democratic socialist.


I accept the the time tested definition of socialism. Not the modern deceptive definition designed to fool people.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:30 PM
He flip flops with the wind. That's hardly an example of honesty.

I called him what he calls and explains himself.

huh?

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:32 PM
I accept the the time tested definition of socialism. Not the modern deceptive definition designed to fool people.

That's being deceptive to say there's one and only one definition when there are several and Bernie himself in his own words doesn't fit your preferred definition.

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:33 PM
huh?

Which word poses you difficulty?

Bob
07-23-2015, 06:33 PM
Sanders is back of the pack jack almost.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

Walker ranks 2 mostly but 3 in some polls.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 06:35 PM
Which word poses you difficulty?

the bold part. Try it again.





I called him what he calls and explains himself

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:35 PM
Socialists are the opposite of anarchists. They are about maximum government control over business, industry and commerce. Anarchists are for eliminating government all together.

Your definition^^. But the common definition is this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism: "Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[1][2] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system..[3][4] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[5] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[6] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[7]"

Like I said, to insist on a single definition is deceptive. People see right through that.

Chris
07-23-2015, 06:36 PM
the bold part. Try it again.

You'll have to tell me which word is difficult.

Peter1469
07-23-2015, 07:05 PM
I doubt that. But what's important is that he is an Independent who is very closely aligned with the Democrats. That's what counts. We have to retain a Democrat in the White House from now on as that's the bottom line.

Why? Not much difference.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 07:08 PM
That's being deceptive to say there's one and only one definition when there are several and Bernie himself in his own words doesn't fit your preferred definition.

the definition of many words have been altered over time because of political correctness. This is an indisputable fact.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 07:09 PM
You'll have to tell me which word is difficult.

the words combines are unintelligible.

I think you are trying to say that you are only going by how he represents himself. Is that right?

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 07:12 PM
Originally Posted by TrueBlue

I doubt that. But what's important is that he is an Independent who is very closely aligned with the Democrats. That's what counts. We have to retain a Democrat in the White House from now on as that's the bottom line.
(http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/48025-Bernie-Sanders-Annihilates-Scott-Walker-At-Record-Setting-Madison-Rally/showthread.php?p=1189922#post1189922)

Remember. This is a person who says many people believe that the government is now going to force them to dissolve their marriage and then be forced to marry someone of the same gender. She actually presented that ridiculously silly comment as fact.

Peter1469
07-23-2015, 07:17 PM
No. He's a pure socialist. He's even claimed that in the past This new term people have come up with is a way to soften his socialist stance.

One thing about Trump, he is demonstrating that people respect candidates being honest with them. trying to deceive [people by altering what Sanders stands for is dishonest. People see through that.





Does Sanders advocate for the abolishment of private property to any degree?

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 07:37 PM
Does Sanders advocate for the abolishment of private property to any degree?

I've heard him take both sides of that issue. So, I'm not sure where he stands on that one.

Dr. Who
07-23-2015, 07:38 PM
Bernie Sanders is the only test America will get to determine whether any President can overcome the corporate oligarchy, because he's the only candidate who will not be beholding to the corporatocracy except for Trump who is one of them. If Sanders gets elected, America will not become a socialist country, but if a President has any independence at all, the corporations will be sidelined. If not, someone will have a gun at Sanders' head and he he doesn't cooperate he will not survive his term.

del
07-23-2015, 07:43 PM
Does Sanders advocate for the abolishment of private property to any degree?

no

he does support breaking the big banks into smaller entities and he's been calling for an audit of the fed since at least 2011.

Captain Obvious
07-23-2015, 07:46 PM
no

he does support breaking the big banks into smaller entities and he's been calling for an audit of the fed since at least 2011.

He'll get blackballed if he continues to gain popularity.

del
07-23-2015, 07:49 PM
He'll get blackballed if he continues to gain popularity.

we'll see

if he's around to vote for, i'll be voting for him.

otherwise, i see no one i could vote for without puking

Chris
07-23-2015, 07:57 PM
Your definition^^. But the common definition is this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism: "Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[1][2] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system..[3][4] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[5] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[6] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[7]"

Like I said, to insist on a single definition is deceptive. People see right through that.


the definition of many words have been altered over time because of political correctness. This is an indisputable fact.


Understood, and that, above, is the current definition, not your narrow, preferred one.

Chris
07-23-2015, 07:59 PM
the words combines are unintelligible.

I think you are trying to say that you are only going by how he represents himself. Is that right?

Yes, by what he calls and explains himself. Is it the parallelism? Simplify: He calls himself and he explains himself. As a democratic socialist.

Chris
07-23-2015, 08:01 PM
He'll get blackballed if he continues to gain popularity.


He's the Ron Paul of the Democrats.

How some will wince at that!

Captain Obvious
07-23-2015, 08:02 PM
we'll see

if he's around to vote for, i'll be voting for him.

otherwise, i see no one i could vote for without puking

Just hope he doesn't own one of Gary Hart's old yachts.

del
07-23-2015, 08:04 PM
He's the Ron Paul of the Democrats.

How some will wince at that!

i would if someone whose opinion i respected said it, for sure.

Chris
07-23-2015, 08:05 PM
i would if someone whose opinion i respected said it, for sure.

Is that post supposed to be something significant?

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 08:11 PM
Understood, and that, above, is the current definition, not your narrow, preferred one.

your definition is the modern sanitized politically correct definition.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 08:14 PM
Yes, by what he calls and explains himself. Is it the parallelism? Simplify: He calls himself and he explains himself. As a democratic socialist.


Your communication skills need improvement, but that's beside the point.

Bernie Sanders in now changing his own representation of his view to make them less objectionable. This tells me that in essence, he's no different than any politician. Dishonest and conniving.

Chris
07-23-2015, 08:19 PM
your definition is the modern sanitized politically correct definition.

LOL. Each definition has it's history and adherents. None of them use the word as an epithet.

Chris
07-23-2015, 08:20 PM
Your communication skills need improvement, but that's beside the point.

Bernie Sanders in now changing his own representation of his view to make them less objectionable. This tells me that in essence, he's no different than any politician. Dishonest and conniving.

The source I provided earlier was a collection of Sander's defining his position over the years. I disagree with his message but see no need to attack the messenger. That dishonest and conniving.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 08:49 PM
The source I provided earlier was a collection of Sander's defining his position over the years. I disagree with his message but see no need to attack the messenger. That dishonest and conniving.

Defining his positions which he has sanitized to make him seem less of the traditional socialist he is. He knows he needs to deceive people to gain their support.

Chris
07-23-2015, 09:15 PM
Defining his positions which he has sanitized to make him seem less of the traditional socialist he is. He knows he needs to deceive people to gain their support.

Find some evidence for any of that and get back to me.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 09:33 PM
I see you are a true believer.

del
07-23-2015, 10:01 PM
Is that post supposed to be something significant?

no, did you think it was?

just a statement of fact.

Peter1469
07-23-2015, 10:09 PM
no

he does support breaking the big banks into smaller entities and he's been calling for an audit of the fed since at least 2011.

I suppose both of those as well along with separating financial institutions from banks.

del
07-23-2015, 10:11 PM
I suppose both of those as well along with separating financial institutions from banks.

i think he supports that as well, i need to check.

he also wants to ban anyone from the financial industry from sitting on the 12 regional boards.

Tahuyaman
07-23-2015, 10:50 PM
If Sanders gets elected, America will not become a socialist country,

That's true. He doesn't have the leadership ability to change people's mind on the basic principles which are the foundation of the country.

Chris
07-24-2015, 05:48 AM
no, did you think it was?

just a statement of fact.


For someone who doesn't care what I think, why are you telling me what you think? That's stupid.

Chris
07-24-2015, 05:49 AM
I see you are a true believer.

A true believer? In what? Sanders? No, that would be del here, who's really going out on a limb saying something positive about anything.

Mac-7
07-24-2015, 05:53 AM
We have to retain a Democrat in the White House from now on as that's the bottom line.

Of course.

Single party rules has worked so well in Germany and Russia to name only two countries that have tried it.

Tahuyaman
07-24-2015, 08:57 AM
A true believer? In what? Sanders? No, that would be del here, who's really going out on a limb saying something positive about anything.


del has something of substance to say? I'll believe that when I see it

del
07-24-2015, 09:24 AM
For someone who doesn't care what I think, why are you telling me what you think? That's stupid.

you asked, stupid

Chris
07-24-2015, 10:21 AM
you asked, stupid

But you don't care, or'd you forget that?

You're so afraid of looking stupid, aren't you. But that fear makes you look stupid.

Ivan88
07-24-2015, 12:16 PM
http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/FabianSocietyLogo.jpg
There are very few politicians or preachers that are not wolves in sheeps' clothing or just the blind leading the blind.
You can tell most of them fall into these 2 categories from the way they avoid the real issues.

Venus
07-24-2015, 12:21 PM
Put it this way Chrissy boy, crowds are great no doubt about it. But what really matters is whether those crowds will translate into voting constituencies. Um, not always Chrissy.

Why are you calling him Chrissy Boy and Chrissy? Isn't that a bit homophobic?

Bob
07-24-2015, 12:29 PM
del has something of substance to say? I'll believe that when I see it

LMAO I probably won't believe it if it should ever happen. LMAO

TrueBlue
07-24-2015, 12:37 PM
Why are you calling him Chrissy Boy and Chrissy? Isn't that a bit homophobic?
Not to me, it's a term of endearment, but it could be only to a homophobic mind.

Venus
07-24-2015, 12:42 PM
Not to me, it's a term of endearment, but it could be only to a homophobic mind.

Calling a male ( straight or gay) Chrissy or Chrissy Boy is not a term of endearment, but it could be only in a delusional mind.

Chris
07-24-2015, 03:13 PM
Calling a male ( straight or gay) Chrissy or Chrissy Boy is not a term of endearment, but it could be only in a delusional mind.

It's childish. Trueblue was mad I'd pointed out a contradiction.

del
07-24-2015, 04:29 PM
But you don't care, or'd you forget that?

You're so afraid of looking stupid, aren't you. But that fear makes you look stupid.

http://www.midnightridazz.com/images/forums/large/i-can-catch-lightning-in-a-bottle_1243586513.jpg

you really are fucked in the head

Chris
07-24-2015, 04:47 PM
http://www.midnightridazz.com/images/forums/large/i-can-catch-lightning-in-a-bottle_1243586513.jpg

you really are fucked in the head


You don't care what I think and yet you continue to try and communicate with me. And, now you see it's not working, you get angry and vulgar. Dumber and dumber.

Tahuyaman
07-24-2015, 05:56 PM
LMAO I probably won't believe it if it should ever happen. LMAO


Don't worry. It won't happen.

OGIS
07-27-2015, 11:57 AM
Like I said, he's very impressive. However, I don't believe he will beat Hillary Clinton by any means. But if he was to get in somehow he would be just another Democrat in the White House and that has to make one go "WOO, WOO!!" http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/mini/dance_mini.gif

He probably should not take any plane trips in Africa.....