I think the OP was joking. These are normal, reasonable homes.

But it goes to show, Bernie is not about limiting what people do with their money and he's not anti-capitalism. He is simply for shifting social benefits from the rich, who get them in the form of tax cuts and business subsidies, to the working and middle class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who gives a crap? I can’t stand Bernie, but this focus on his homes is ridiculous. Moreover, those places are not extravagant; in fact, the lake house looks like a dump. The DC place is referred to as an ‘apartment’. Those are townhomes. Does this mean Bernie rents an apartment in someone else’s home? Give it a rest. Focus on Bernie’s ideas, not his homes.

The Lakehouse is valued at $600,000, is waterfront, and has a guest house.

I don’t get it. He earned money. What do you want him to do with it?

how about sharing it with his female staffers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexism.html

Bernie reminds me so much of my boomer parents' friends - these old school lefties who talk for hours about the need for more equality, the need for more affordable housing - then complain when rent control laws mean they can't kick tenants out of the house they just bought without offering them some compensation.

I’m sorry your parents are friends with jerks but that’s largely irrelevant and I’m sorry this “3 house” attack isn’t resonating.

Life is so hard for trolls!

I'm not a troll, and I don't actually care if Bernie has three houses, or seven. I do think it's a little rich for him to purport that he has a modest lifestyle as a low level millionaire who earned his money while complaining about other rich people. I did genuinely grow up knowing a lot of people like this. They call themselves "comfortable" - they are rich but don't identify as rich.

I'd pick Bernie 1000 times out of 1000 over Trump. But I do roll my eyes at him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who gives a crap? I can’t stand Bernie, but this focus on his homes is ridiculous. Moreover, those places are not extravagant; in fact, the lake house looks like a dump. The DC place is referred to as an ‘apartment’. Those are townhomes. Does this mean Bernie rents an apartment in someone else’s home? Give it a rest. Focus on Bernie’s ideas, not his homes.

The Lakehouse is valued at $600,000, is waterfront, and has a guest house.

I don’t get it. He earned money. What do you want him to do with it?

how about sharing it with his female staffers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexism.html

Bernie reminds me so much of my boomer parents' friends - these old school lefties who talk for hours about the need for more equality, the need for more affordable housing - then complain when rent control laws mean they can't kick tenants out of the house they just bought without offering them some compensation.

I’m sorry your parents are friends with jerks but that’s largely irrelevant and I’m sorry this “3 house” attack isn’t resonating.

Life is so hard for trolls!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect pictures of those properties might hurt Bernie more than win him supporters. Especially his main VT property with those two crappy cars in his garage. I don't think most people will see that as a virtue but simply weird and it'll tell people how different Bernie is rather than your aspirational American. It's the properties and lifestyle of a weird left wing college professor who matured past 1969.

I'm not a Bernie supporter but the desperation of this kind of attack is just stupid and makes me even more disgusted with the republicans. Doesn't really affect my view of Bernie at all.

Is it an attack or just an observation? The United States is a very aspirational society. One reason why Trump is forgiven for his tackiness and extravagance is a lot of people understand and expect that level of flaunting from the rich, it's part of the American materialism. He's forgiven for it in a way Bloomberg may not be.

When someone is so clearly not materialistic to the point that he seems to go out of his way to disdain materialism and signs of materialism, that actually puts them outside the mainstream of America. People will wonder why this guy doesn't live "nicer" given his other accomplishments as a long term senator. I grew up around college professors as my dad was a professor so I see where Bernie comes from, that lack of interest in material things or having a nicer house or nicer cars or even nicer clothing. But it's unusual given the larger context of society, just as professors are often unusual and seen as loopy, marching to a different drummer. He's weird. And that's fine.

It's funny to see people so defensive of Bernie that they can't take any criticism of him. Bernie is who he is. A left wing socialist whose views were sharply formed by left wing progressive politics of the late 1960s. They are weird people because they don't think or see things in the same way most Americans do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who gives a crap? I can’t stand Bernie, but this focus on his homes is ridiculous. Moreover, those places are not extravagant; in fact, the lake house looks like a dump. The DC place is referred to as an ‘apartment’. Those are townhomes. Does this mean Bernie rents an apartment in someone else’s home? Give it a rest. Focus on Bernie’s ideas, not his homes.

The Lakehouse is valued at $600,000, is waterfront, and has a guest house.

I don’t get it. He earned money. What do you want him to do with it?

how about sharing it with his female staffers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexism.html

Bernie reminds me so much of my boomer parents' friends - these old school lefties who talk for hours about the need for more equality, the need for more affordable housing - then complain when rent control laws mean they can't kick tenants out of the house they just bought without offering them some compensation.

The guy is 78 and they recently bought this vacation home. It's not like he has owned 3 houses all his life.

Injecting a bit more information here:

Sanders' wife, Jane, said around the time of the purchase that she and her husband paid cash for the four-bedroom house. She had sold a share of her family’s longtime vacation home in Bridgton, Maine, to her brother for $150,000, and to buy the property, added some money from her retirement account and from an advance her husband got on a book he was writing.

It was valued at $540,000 as of 2017, just less than what the Sanderses paid, according to Lisa Keyworth, assistant town clerk.

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/02/20/us/politics/ap-us-election-2020-sanders-houses.html

They don't look outrageous to me, for someone who has been a member of Congress for a while..a place at home, a place in DC and a vacation place. All fairly modest, especially compared to the rest of the Congress critters, Bloomberg, and Trump. He's a democratic socialist, not a communist. Better try next time.

Anonymous wrote:
With so many homeless it's a scandal that wealth inequality allows him to have three.


He should be giving these homes to the homeless. He’s the worst kind of socialist- everyone should give up stuff except me!

He's not a socialist (look up what a socialist is). That should actually make you feel better about Bernie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs 3 houses when there are so many people homeless.

I’m a Democrat, and that is a ridiculous assertion. Senators need, at a minimum, a place to live in their home state and a place to live in DC. If they can afford a modest vacation property, then that’s their right. Yes, there are a lot of homeless people, but there are a lot of reasons for that, especially mental illness and substance abuse. We need to intelligently address these issues, not penalize people who are just doing their best to live a reasonable life.

Isn’t Bernie going to take working people’s wealth to fund the programs for these homeless people? That’s not penalizing people who are just doing their best to live a reasonable life?

you must be the stupidest person alive, because this would be an argument for zero taxes. Are you 12?

Answer the question.

The question is invalid because at this juncture work and wealth are not directly correlated. Sorry!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs 3 houses when there are so many people homeless.

I’m a Democrat, and that is a ridiculous assertion. Senators need, at a minimum, a place to live in their home state and a place to live in DC. If they can afford a modest vacation property, then that’s their right. Yes, there are a lot of homeless people, but there are a lot of reasons for that, especially mental illness and substance abuse. We need to intelligently address these issues, not penalize people who are just doing their best to live a reasonable life.

Isn’t Bernie going to take working people’s wealth to fund the programs for these homeless people? That’s not penalizing people who are just doing their best to live a reasonable life?

you must be the stupidest person alive, because this would be an argument for zero taxes. Are you 12?

Answer the question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect pictures of those properties might hurt Bernie more than win him supporters. Especially his main VT property with those two crappy cars in his garage. I don't think most people will see that as a virtue but simply weird and it'll tell people how different Bernie is rather than your aspirational American. It's the properties and lifestyle of a weird left wing college professor who matured past 1969.

I'm not a Bernie supporter but the desperation of this kind of attack is just stupid and makes me even more disgusted with the republicans. Doesn't really affect my view of Bernie at all.

I’m neutral to Bernie and I agree. It’s low, and obvious.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't like Sanders, but this is not the reason why.

Exactly! I assume most folks in Congress have a home in the state they got elected and someplace to live while in DC. Do you expect them to do AirBnB or camp while in DC?

Anonymous wrote:With so many homeless it's a scandal that wealth inequality allows him to have three.

He should be giving these homes to the homeless. He’s the worst kind of socialist- everyone should give up stuff except me!

Anonymous wrote:I suspect pictures of those properties might hurt Bernie more than win him supporters. Especially his main VT property with those two crappy cars in his garage. I don't think most people will see that as a virtue but simply weird and it'll tell people how different Bernie is rather than your aspirational American. It's the properties and lifestyle of a weird left wing college professor who matured past 1969.

I'm not a Bernie supporter but the desperation of this kind of attack is just stupid and makes me even more disgusted with the republicans. Doesn't really affect my view of Bernie at all.