Support NeoGAF

[CHC]

I like Sanders, but yeah, he's not really a democrat. A large part of his platform is based on the idea of realism and compromise, and while his views certainly don't align 100% with the democratic party, it's the next best thing and the only chance he had to run a serious campaign.

Calling himself a dem is pretty much just a compromise, which is fine because he certainly would not have gotten this far on an independent ticket.

 

[Kusagari]

From the beginning I just assumed that Bernie doesn't contribute to downticket races because he needs every single dollar he can get. I've heard some people liken the democratic primaries to a David and Goliath scenario this go around. When you are going up against Hillary Rodham Clinton you are gonna need every rock you can get your hands on. I could be wrong, but this is what I assumed from the start.

He has been point blank asked if he'll do it once he becomes nominee and he won't say yes.

Even fucking Trump said he would.

 

[Macam]

I'm really starting to think that the "Do cigarettes or farts smell worse?" threads are the most substantive ones around here these days.

 

[ivysaur12]

If this thread was about Sanders reiterating that he isn't a Democrat, BernieGAF would be cheering on and shitting on the Democratic Party.

Hillary says the exact same thing, she is 'abusing Bernie and being petty' when asked a direct question about Bernie's party affiliation.

Honestly, the more worrying thing -- that Hillary is correct about -- that Hillary is raising money for downticket Dems.

I mean, 15% of Bernie voters didn't vote for the Dem Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate last night. Only 4% of HRC voters didn't. That's super concerning. I know that Bernie talked a bit about supporting Kloppenburg, but he also coated it with "I'm not familiar with local issues" while Hillary attacked the fact that Rebecca Bradley said in 2006 that birth control is basically murder.

If you're going to run for president, you have to be familiar with local issues and local candidates.

 

[Hellwarden]

She's done so little to alienate anyone though. She could have attacked his campaign for literally stealing her information but she did not and settled things amicably, has been congratulating him on his wins (something he has not done the same for to her), and agreed to more debates when there realistically should have only been a couple considering how few people were running. He has been the one attacking her character the past month or so.

Sanders hasn't congratulated Clinton?....Because I'm seeing statements to the contrary.

Is there something I'm missing?

 

[DarkKyo]

And this is an "attack" how, exactly?

It's a needless critique of his identity intended to passive aggressively question his loyalty to the establishment; a misdirect focused on petty labels instead of critiquing his positions on the actually important issues. Well, no matter.. people who can look beyond arbitrary party labels won't care about this anyways.

 

[Armaros]

I'm gonna third my prophetic warning: the Hillary campaign is going to end up alienating Bernie voters so much that they go vote for Trump and make him win. I hope I'm wrong, but I can feel a definite vibe of fuck off berniebros.

Bernie and his supporters can only threaten this enough times before the rest of the party decides to stop giving a shit.

Their rhetoric is telling others that they won't vote for her anyway, so what's the point?

 

[marrec]

Nice to see her not flaming Sanders as she or her supporters have been. This talk isn't useful except to a media that wants to see a democrat primary go on a little while longer. She really should avoid this crap or turn it on it's head. Saying it now ticking off sanders supporters is a really incredibly bad idea.

I think it's really important to point out that he is avoiding the issue of supporting down-party tickets.

They're desperately important and especially so this election.

It's a needless critique of his identity intended to passive aggressively question his loyalty to the establishment; a misdirect focused on petty labels instead of critiquing his positions on the actually important issues. Well, no matter.. people who can look beyond arbitrary party labels won't care about this anyways.

Oh so you didn't read the OP okay cool

 

[Evolved1]

She is being impatient and stupid. You have him beat, shut up.

 

[jakonovski]

At this point, these veiled threats are just straight up tired.

Go ahead, try to take the ball and go home. I am, at a personal level, currently thinking the president elected should go against my own interests and increase my taxes significantly and sharply, for the better of the country.

Want to take the ball home and elect the guy that will decrease them instead? Go for it. Have your phyrric, spiteful victory on the backs of immigrants, minorities, and genuinely poor people. If it's "fuck you, got mine", it won't hurt me. I'd rather not think that way, even if I hear disparaging remarks online. I'd vote for Sanders without a second thought.

It's not a threat, I'm not American. The only real effect on my life will be a Republican victory doing something terrible to the world economy.

 

[FrontalMonk]

I view this as a plus lol Hillary.

And when dems in contested races lose because they didn't get the backing they would have needed from the Democratic candidate and Sanders can't get any legislation passed, will it still be a plus?

Don't be myopic, there is a reason why she's saying this.

 

[Armaros]

She is being impatient and stupid. You have him beat, shut up.

As opposed to Bernie that walks out of interviews of the doesn't like how it's going.

 

[sphagnum]

Your scale seems to be basically that a far leftie would be a communist. This is like saying that a far-rightist in U.S. politics would be a literal crusader-pope. While technically those are the extremes of those philosophies, that's not a useful scale.

Far leftist being communist is correct, yes.

 

[Meowster]

He has been point blank asked if he'll do it once he becomes nominee and he won't say yes.

Even fucking Trump said he would.

Which really confuses me because how else is the revolution going to happen? It's so strange because you would think he'd be the one using his money to help down-ticket Dems to achieve his goal.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

She is being impatient and stupid. You have him beat, shut up.

She... answered a question. What would you have her say? "No comment"?

 

[User1608]

I just wish they'd be outright with it and call her a bitch. Go right the hell ahead and get it out there. She's been catching hell from every angle since before the campaign has started, and people are up her ass because of honest, non-aggressive statements about her opponent.

It's amazing to me. I know that you can't just write off all criticism of Clinton as sexist, but I firmly, firmly[/i] believe that she's getting this much because of her gender.

Yeah, those comments have been leaving me uneasy and make me wonder about how some people really feel about Hillary. I know a few have already been caught and taken themselves out being so direct on GAF. Yes, Hillary isn't perfect, but neither is Bernie, and his character attacks (so much for a positive campaign, he isn't above it), refusal to congratulate her on her wins, and his vague platform and answers have really disappointed me, and lead me to believe the man is ignorant and way over his head.

Hillary has at least been very respectable, congratulated him on his wins, and I'm glad she isn't resorting to how she was in 2008 in light of the attacks, now that was something else. Also, can't forget about supporting and raising money for down ticket Democrats/races!

 

[nelsonroyale]

He is a true democrat but not a true Democrat.

She is a true Democrat but not a true democrat.

 

[marrec]

She is being impatient and stupid. You have him beat, shut up.

She answered a direct question about Bernie's support of down-ticket races in the nicest way possible. I don't see how your assessment makes any sense.

 

[Sobriquet]

So what? He's a progressive. Hillary is a self-described moderate centrist. That's a dog-easy choice for me to make, as a lifelong Democrat.

She's a self-described progressive.

 

[ivysaur12]

He is a true democrat but not a true Democrat.

She is a true Democrat but not a true democrat.

John Bel Edwards is a true Democrat

Elizabeth Warren is a true Democrat

It's a big ticket party. Both of these things can be true.

 

[Cipherr]

It's a needless critique of his identity intended to passive aggressively question his loyalty to the establishment; a misdirect focused on petty labels instead of critiquing his positions on the actually important issues. Well, no matter.. people who can look beyond arbitrary party labels won't care about this anyways.

You are embarrassing yourself. Go read the OP. You look really ridiculous trying to spin your way out of this.

Bernie is not a democrat. He joined out of convenience last year to help his campaign and is already filing paperwork for returning to Independent after this is over.

Also, Hillary didn't ask the question she answered it, and correctly. And commended his policies and said she even agrees with a lot of it.

Bernie not supporting down tickets that he will require in order to pass any of the things he campaigns on IS A PROBLEM. Point blank period. This is not negotiable.

And when dems in contested races lose because they didn't get the backing they would have needed from the Democratic candidate and Sanders can't get any legislation passed, will it still be a plus?

Don't be myopic, there is a reason why she's saying this.

Short term thinking man. They like his policies but refuse to think beyond the words. It takes support and liberals in the right places to get his legislation passed. But some people just.... have no ability to look down the road. Its so frustrating.

 

[loki 16]

If he's not a democrat then I hope he runs as a third party candidate.

 

[kirblar]

In the last seven years, it's become calling everybody who isn't as liberal as you a neoliberal sellout because God forbid you understand the facts on the ground instead of being upset Obama didn't turn us into Sweden in his first six months.

"Neoliberal" being used as a term says more about the person using the term than anything else. Take it as a signal not to bother arguing.

 

[Abounder]

That's part of Bernie's appeal especially to new and independent voters - he doesn't bleed blue & beats to his own drum.

Also it's a 2-way street, DNC hasn't exactly been pro-Bernie and is led by goddamn Debbie Wasserman Schultz for crying out loud!

 

[Burt]

She even goes so far as to say that he's bringing lots of great, important Democratic issues to the table. She's definitely not questioning his ideological purity.

“I know that Sen. Sanders spends a lot of time attacking my husband, attacking President Obama. I rarely hear him say anything negative about George W. Bush, who I think wrecked our economy.”

I mean, if you can't read between the lines for this interview's gameplan, agree to disagree, I guess.

I get that some people irrationally hate Clinton, but let's try to give her the benefit of the doubt with a simple question and answer such as this.

But I am still trying to wrap my head around why this is there.

 

[Omadahl]

To be honest, he's probably not a democrat by traditional definition, but then again, I vote democrat and I think Clinton isn't liberal enough to be considered more than a left-leaning centrist. Until we either get a large social-democrat party that can run on its own, the Democratic party's just going to have to house everyone from the center to the left. I certainly don't see the Republican party moving anywhere near the center and is basically in the same position. They have their RHINOs and we have our socialists.

 

[ApharmdX]

She's a self-described progressive.

Are you calling her a liar?

"You know, I get accused of being kind of moderate and center," Clinton told the audience at a Women for Hillary event in Ohio. "I plead guilty."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/hillary-clinton-democrat-progressive/

 

[massoluk]

She is being impatient and stupid. You have him beat, shut up.

She's answering a question in a totally non-confrontational way that kinda reiterated Sander's own position, some people need to chill out.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

If he's not a democrat then I hope he runs as a third party candidate.

He won't. He's not going to sabotage the country like that.

 

[Steel]

From the beginning I just assumed that Bernie doesn't contribute to downticket races because he needs every single dollar he can get. I've heard some people liken the democratic primaries to a David and Goliath scenario this go around. When you are going up against Hillary Rodham Clinton you are gonna need every rock you can get your hands on. I could be wrong, but this is what I assumed from the start.

He's spent a lot more money than Hillary. Hillary hasn't been spending all that much because she feels she doesn't need to and is saving it for the general. He's also spent a ton of money in places he had no chance in hell of winning, like, iirc, he spent around 2 million on Arizona.

I mean, I can kinda see the "Hillary has a reputation he needs all the money he can get" thing, but on the other side of the coin Hillary has baggage weighing her down in the form of all the attacks she's received over the years while Bernie doesn't.

That is okay too. He'll still vote mostly with democrats, so in the end he helps us out even if it is in a small way. At least he's not a thorn in our side like tea party members or most republicans. The senate could use some more centrist/leftist independent senators in the place of republicans if you ask me.

You're right about that much, he caucused with the dems even when he was an independent.

Far leftist being communist is correct, yes.

You're technically correct. The best kind. Congrats.

 

[Drek]

Your scale seems to be basically that a far leftie would be a communist. This is like saying that a far-rightist in U.S. politics would be a literal crusader-pope. While technically those are the extremes of those philosophies, that's not a useful scale.

Have you listened to Ted Cruz speak?

As to the OP, yeah, been stated before. Such is life when there is populist sentiment in the air and a cultural trend to latch on to anything that makes you feel good versus fact checking and learning the issues yourself. Same sentiment that has Trump the RINO running roughshod through the GOP primary.

I'm gonna third my prophetic warning: the Hillary campaign is going to end up alienating Bernie voters so much that they go vote for Trump and make him win. I hope I'm wrong, but I can feel a definite vibe of fuck off berniebros.

In some ways I'd absolutely fucking love it if this happened. Elections have consequences and it's pretty clearly time for another generation to learn that.

But then I'm a white, straight, college educated man with a solidly upper middle class job immune to off-shoring or automation so I'm not in the danger zone. It isn't worth the damage to those who are just for some angsty hipster schadenfreude.

 

[Goodstyle]

Not even sure Hillary is human.

Yeesh

 

[kirblar]

Are you calling her a liar?



http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/hillary-clinton-democrat-progressive/

You can be both progressive and an incrementalist/moderate/centrist.

 

[FrontalMonk]

Short term thinking man. They like his policies but refuse to think beyond the words. It takes support and liberals in the right places to get his legislation passed. But some people just.... have no ability to look down the road. Its so frustrating.

I mean the way I look at it is: I like Sanders, and I think he's been saying a lot of the right things, but there's no detail, no substance, no actual plans for how he's going to do any of the grand revolutionary things he wants to do. What's the point of saying you want to do stuff when you have zero plans to actually make it a reality? At least with Hillary you can bet that she might actually get some shit done.

 

[Josh5890]

If he's not a democrat then I hope he runs as a third party candidate.

If you want a Republican in the White House this time next year then yes, you want Sanders to run 3rd party against Hilary and Trump/Cruz.

 

[VendettaRed07]

It only matters if it extends to his desire to get other people in the democratic party elected or not

I'm not convinced yet he is interested in that. Or that he will work to help democrats in blue states win elections so he can actually accomplish things, or what.

 

[Angry Grimace]

He isn't.

 

[SolarPowered]

He has been point blank asked if he'll do it once he becomes nominee and he won't say yes.

Even fucking Trump said he would.

That surprises me and I'm a bit disappointed. I hope he changes his mind and considers it. I'm not quite as bothered about it because every vote for Bernie is a vote for a suspiciously agnostic Jew leftist from Brooklyn. This is some mindblowing stuff for Americans here. The money he collects and spends for those votes may be doing a lot to open new avenues for future presidential candidates of other races, religious affiliations (or lack thereof) and far left political leanings. To be fair he could just as easily have a similar impact by supporting the downticket races of people with said traits. I guess it all depends on how you view it.

 

[Cybrwzrd]

If it does, that's on them. They (and their candidate) have been treated with absolute kid gloves. Anybody who flips from Bernie to Trump over stuff like this isn't actually a Progressive, a liberal, a lefty, or whatever the fuck you want to call it; they're just petty jackasses.

And odds are? If Bernie wasn't a factor begin with? They'd have voted Trump anyway. Or jut not voted.

I would never vote Trump, but I won't vote for Hillary either - for a few reasons, the biggest of which is the whole THOU SHALT hold the party line even if you don't like the candidate shit that Hillary supporters vomit up in every thread like this.

Democrats have not exactly been a force for economic populism anytime in the past 20 years. Because of this, the party can get fucked. Both major parties have little interest in dealing with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality, corrupt banking system and dealing with the inevitable mass unemployment coming as AI and other automation take over the service sector. Both parties want to squabble over social issues and ignore the elephant in the room because it doesn't drum up support of their big donors and the low information voters on both sides.

 

[DietRob]

Which really confuses me because how else is the revolution going to happen? It's so strange because you would think he'd be the one using his money to help down-ticket Dems to achieve his goal.

It's a gigantic red flag. I'm surprised more of his supporters aren't concerned about it.

 

[Flo_Evans]

And when dems in contested races lose because they didn't get the backing they would have needed from the Democratic candidate and Sanders can't get any legislation passed, will it still be a plus?

Don't be myopic, there is a reason why she's saying this.

Think about what you are saying here. You want Sanders to "support" i.e. give money to, politicians so that they will vote they way he wants them to. Is that right?

 

[Sobriquet]

Are you calling her a liar?



http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/hillary-clinton-democrat-progressive/

No. Are you?

 

[B-Dubs]

I would never vote Trump, but I won't vote for Hillary either - for a few reasons, the biggest of which is the whole THOU SHALT hold the party line even if you don't like the candidate shit that Hillary supporters vomit up in every thread like this.

Democrats have not exactly been a force for economic populism anytime in the past 20 years. Because of this, the party can get fucked. Both major parties have little interest in dealing with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality, corrupt banking system and dealing with the inevitable mass unemployment coming as AI and other automation take over the service sector. Both parties want to squabble over social issues and ignore the elephant in the room because it doesn't drum up support of their big donors and the low information voters on both sides.

Yes because equal rights for people is completely unimportant.

 

[PeskyToaster]

It would be kind of nice to see an independent exploit the primary system to take control of a party.

 

[hawk2025]

I would never vote Trump, but I won't vote for Hillary either - for a few reasons, the biggest of which is the whole THOU SHALT hold the party line even if you don't like the candidate shit that Hillary supporters vomit up in every thread like this.

Democrats have not exactly been a force for economic populism anytime in the past 20 years. Because of this, the party can get fucked. Both major parties have little interest in dealing with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality, corrupt banking system and dealing with the inevitable mass unemployment coming as AI and other automation take over the service sector. Both parties want to squabble over social issues and ignore the elephant in the room because it doesn't drum up support of their big donors and the low information voters on both sides.

In what way does protectionism of manufacturing jobs through being anti-trade help with the "coming AI and automation"?

Please, do expand on that thought.

 

[TheOohChild]

Democrats: the people who treat the word "liberal" as a pejorative leading up to their midterm races

 

[marrec]

I mean, if you can't read between the lines of this interview's gameplan, agree to disagree, I guess.

I guess we will.

But I am still trying to wrap my head around why this is there.

It's true, some people irrationally hate Clinton, as in there is no rational reason for some people to have beef with her and yet they do.

 

[kirblar]

I would never vote Trump, but I won't vote for Hillary either - for a few reasons, the biggest of which is the whole THOU SHALT hold the party line even if you don't like the candidate shit that Hillary supporters vomit up in every thread like this.

Democrats have not exactly been a force for economic populism anytime in the past 20 years. Because of this, the party can get fucked. Both major parties have little interest in dealing with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality, corrupt banking system and dealing with the inevitable mass unemployment coming as AI and other automation take over the service sector. Both parties want to squabble over social issues and ignore the elephant in the room because it doesn't drum up support of their big donors and the low information voters on both sides.

Trying to reduce the amount of people without health coverage to 0 is "not dealing with wealth inequality"?

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

In what way does protectionism of manufacturing jobs through being anti-trade help with the "coming AI and automation"?

Please, do expand on that thought.

Foreign robots taking our jobs.

 

[DietRob]

Think about what you are saying here. You want Sanders to "support" i.e. give money to, politicians so that they will vote they way he wants them to. Is that right?

Oh Jesus. Seriously?