Let's talk about the debate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Why put up such a goddamn fight and instead unite around policies that just make sense?

I'm a left-leaning moderate, and I don't think his policies make good sense. I applaud his moral sentiment to "look out for the little guy," but I don't think he could effectively manage the country, and I believe his policies (if he actually gets any of them passed) would be an economic disaster for the United States.

If Senator Sanders cannot convince any other Senators to support him, if he cannot convince a single one of the politicians from his own state to endorse him, how will he get anything done as President? He would be just a big a disaster at President as Donald Trump.

No elected officials from his state endorse them because they are the establishment. Only two congressman and no senators have endorsed him, but that's because they are all the establishment. Bernie alone is not the establishment, apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If America votes in Bernie, he's going to need massive public support to move and shake. I don't doubt him when he says the biggest thing standing between the vision and the enactment is a massive swelling "revolution" among the people. Corny? Maybe. But I think that's what it's going to take.

I hope we have it in us to do it.

Then he probably ought to do something to help down-ballot candidates, don't you think? He hasn't raised a penny for anyone other than himself. Clinton has raised millions for state parties and the Democratic Party as a whole - $18 million in the fourth quarter alone. He's done absolutely nothing.

You do realize she's helping herself every single time she raises money others, I hope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sanders is not a serious candidate. He'd be a disaster as President. I'd probably vote for Bush/Rubio/Christie over Sanders. Not Cruz or Trump though, but that's because they're just as terrible.

You're a fucking moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still prepared to vote for someone whose policies make the most sense to the most people. I'm very disappointed that other big American political entities aren't ready to take that leap, too.

Sadly on the Democrat side, "other big American political entities" were paid off by The Clintons in an attempt to get Hillary into the White House.
Can't understand how people could vote for her knowing this.

Because we don't believe a bunch of conspiracy theories? Sanders supporters are starting to act as ridiculous as the 90s Republicans who were willing to say and/or believe anything as long as it was anti-Clinton.

Not true for this Sanders supporter. I support him because of his progressive ideas and consistent and persistent voicing of those ideas. Clinton is definitely inconsistent on various progressive ideas, which makes her out to be, well.... inconsistent. Clinton has plenty of dirt in her past. You either care about her inconsistent, dirty record, or you don't. You either ride an incremental approach to progress, or you don't. Personally, I feel like I don't have to vote for my second choice in the primaries. I'll "settle" in the national election. But not before then.

Bernie is as ineffective as sh!t. So yeah - he's been voicing the same ideas for 25 years but WITHOUT> ANY> RESULTS. I just don't get how you can vote for some one with this track record of the inability to lead and create supports so change can actually happen.

YOU>ARE>THE>PROBLEM.

NOT BERNIE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If America votes in Bernie, he's going to need massive public support to move and shake. I don't doubt him when he says the biggest thing standing between the vision and the enactment is a massive swelling "revolution" among the people. Corny? Maybe. But I think that's what it's going to take.

I hope we have it in us to do it.

Then he probably ought to do something to help down-ballot candidates, don't you think? He hasn't raised a penny for anyone other than himself. Clinton has raised millions for state parties and the Democratic Party as a whole - $18 million in the fourth quarter alone. He's done absolutely nothing.

You do realize she's helping herself every single time she raises money others, I hope.

Actually that money goes to the DNC and state parties regardless of who the nominee is. It's separate from her campaign funds.

[Anonymous]

The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

The polling is interesting in Iowa. Opposition to her there is driven by white men - the Berniebros. I read a fairly upsetting article on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

And Trump is a total fraud who will say anything and stab anyone in the back to get what he wants. With friends like him, who needs enemies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

And Trump is a total fraud who will say anything and stab anyone in the back to get what he wants. With friends like him, who needs enemies?

Not sure what Trump has to do with Sanders taking a commanding lead over Clinton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

The polling is interesting in Iowa. Opposition to her there is driven by white men - the Berniebros. I read a fairly upsetting article on it.

Do you have a link for this assertion?

What I have read is that younger women support Sanders by a large margin. Older women support Clinton.

If you look at those who attend Sanders rallies a lot of the men and women are relatively young.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

The polling is interesting in Iowa. Opposition to her there is driven by white men - the Berniebros. I read a fairly upsetting article on it.

Do you have a link for this assertion?

What I have read is that younger women support Sanders by a large margin. Older women support Clinton.

If you look at those who attend Sanders rallies a lot of the men and women are relatively young.

Yes, here's a link to the piece I read:
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/20/10793856/sanders-iowa-men

[Anonymous]

What annoys me more than anything is that we have ended up in the Democratic party with two potential nominees who both come with baggage.

Clinton is a seriously flawed candidate in multiple ways. Sanders is as honest as they come - for any politician - but between his age and his well-intentioned policy positions, it will be an uphill task for him to win the general.

The Democratic party has so much talent and yet we are left with a choice between these two individuals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sanders is not a serious candidate. He'd be a disaster as President. I'd probably vote for Bush/Rubio/Christie over Sanders. Not Cruz or Trump though, but that's because they're just as terrible.

You're a fucking moron.

No, I'm realistic. Sanders would be a terrible President. All he's got going for him is emotion and sentiment -- he's just as much a demagogue as Trump and Cruz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

The polling is interesting in Iowa. Opposition to her there is driven by white men - the Berniebros. I read a fairly upsetting article on it.

Do you have a link for this assertion?

What I have read is that younger women support Sanders by a large margin. Older women support Clinton.

If you look at those who attend Sanders rallies a lot of the men and women are relatively young.

Are you the right-winger who routinely posts here? You have many of the same writing mannerisms he does. I also would not be surprised to see him stoop to promoting Sanders in hopes of depressing support for Clinton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The latest CNN/ORC poll just released for Iowa shows Sanders leading 51% to 43% over Clinton.

Democrats, thank goodness, are realizing that Clinton is a fraud.

The polling is interesting in Iowa. Opposition to her there is driven by white men - the Berniebros. I read a fairly upsetting article on it.

Do you have a link for this assertion?

What I have read is that younger women support Sanders by a large margin. Older women support Clinton.

If you look at those who attend Sanders rallies a lot of the men and women are relatively young.

Are you the right-winger who routinely posts here? You have many of the same writing mannerisms he does. I also would not be surprised to see him stoop to promoting Sanders in hopes of depressing support for Clinton.

No, I am as liberal as they come on most issues. But you are right that I support Sanders over Clinton - for me it is a no-brainer. I support Sanders not with a view to depressing support for Clinton but because I respect the man for his integrity and consistency - the very characteristics that I think are solely lacking when it comes to Clinton.

I am just elated that the majority of Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire prefer Sanders over Clinton.