I really want to know what either party wants to due about the current amount of Federal Student Loan debt. It may seem selfish since I am in the boat now, but I cared about it before I had loans to pay off, but no one seems to be talking about it.
I know the argument of "well you took the loans out" and its true, we did, but its because we had to get crazy expensive degrees to get jobs. And while I'm not so bad (I qualified for income based repayment) I know people who are paying $800-$1000 a month to pay off their student loans. Imagine what that could buy, new cars, a home, diamonds those things that help keep the economy flowing.
Do you qualify for the public service loan forgiveness program? If you're not gonna earn a lot of money, hop on that, so you can hand most of the debt to the taxpayer.
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
The endorsement thing is jarring not so much in that he isn't endorsing-- he's not obligated to do that. The poor form lies in the fact that he's essentially using the endorsement as a threat. He doesn't want Trump to win, but he appears to be calculating that Trump is going to lose anyway but that Hillary will be so afraid of losing to Trump that he can safely force her to pivot further left for fear of fracturing the party going into the general.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
+11
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
China ain't in NAFTA, so not sure how that's relevant.
Edit: and as for dumping on the chart, dismissing facts because they disagree with your worldview is what we lambast the gop for all the time. Why is your anecdote a special snowflake.
That chart dumps on your argument if anything. If you note the sharp drop in employment comes not too long after NAFTA gets passed and right around the time the trade deals with China take effect. Yes the remaning production coming out of the area continues growing but that's through changes in technology and automation. It's like arguing that self-checkout kiosks are good for grocery baggers because people still get their food bagged except instead of minimum wage jobs we're talking about a whole industry here. Nobody's disputing that the steel got made, it's just that they care about their local economy not falling into the toilet due to decisions they had no part in suddenly changing things. Again, the overall benefit for the country is there but it came at the cost of a lot of blue collar workers getting shit on by Clinton on his way out of office.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
He has open negotiations with the next president of the United States, that seems like a pretty good way to talk policy. Sanders isn't a democrat, it's not likely that once he's conceded he would have this kind of access again. Might as well use it.
Then why should he get a say in the Democratic National Convention?
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
like a lot of us used to like sanders. I would have voted for him if I was registered as a democrat(it's complicated. well not really but) but then he dug in, threw a tantrum, and his supporters accused everyone OF BEING IN THE HILLARY BIG MONEY POCKETS WAKE UP SHEEPLE and it's a bunch of bullshit and we're all fucking tired of it
Hmm, well from my perspective, all I see is a lot of people repeating a false narrative about tantrums without any substantive points, while talking down and talking over people with legitimate concerns about Hillary's platform (Hurray drone strikes! Hurray Goldman Sachs!). Like, the number of times I've seen people in this thread effectively say "DO YOU WANT TRUMP TO WIN???" is off the charts.
And then of course, if you bring up any of these matters of public record, you get accused of being crazy, a conspiracy theorist, sheeple, etc. So that's super cool!
Except it isn't a false narrative; Bernie's political revolution has become the Sanders campaign desperately trying to keep its head above water. At this point, Bernie has spent more time in the past two months talking about how he can still win the election, instead of telling us what he'd do if he actually won the nomination.
For the record, I'd be much happier if Bernie were the presumptive candidate. But he's not. Whatever issues you may have with Hillary's platform - and credit where it's due, Bernie pulling Hillary left is a great thing for all parties involved - her constituents have spoken, and they clearly have more confidence in her than in Sanders. That's the way our democratic system works, and while it may be a flawed system, pretending like somehow the rules shouldn't apply to Sanders is not the way to fix that system.
Bernie lost, and he has not lost gracefully. That isn't an opinion, that is a fact. Acting as if people are somehow in the wrong for pointing it out just because you like Bernie better than Hillary is childish.
And for the record; talking down to people because they'd rather vote Hillary than risk Trump getting elected is a bad look. Whatever your problems with Hillary, at least she's not running on a platform of open nativist and racist demagoguery.
[IMG][/img]
+10
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Ha ha, I hadn't seen that article before, and I know it's a bit off topic, but: I'm not a millennial, but I don't buy mined diamonds for a bunch of reasons. A big one being, I just bought two flawless diamond rings over the past month, a total of 3 carats, all for under $100. Why would I prefer something dug from the ground? Lab diamonds rule.
Peace to fashion police, I wear my heart
On my sleeve, let the runway start
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
I mean, if you want to use this average voter idea, wouldn't most average voters see Sanders decision not to drop out now that the primaries have been over for a month as nothing less than sour grapes?
Bernie Sanders signaled a formal endorsement of Hillary Clinton is imminent, saying in an interview that Republican Donald Trump is “a pathological liar” and that he’ll throw his full support behind electing his rival for the Democratic nomination as president.
“We have got to do everything that we can to defeat Donald Trump and elect Hillary Clinton,” the Vermont senator said in an interview Thursday with Bloomberg’s Albert R. Hunt for PBS’s “Charlie Rose” program. “I don’t honestly know how we would survive four years of a Donald Trump” as president.
I'm just glad it seems this will be wrapped up before the conventions. I admit to having some harsh feelings toward Sanders during the last few months regarding how he's played out the tail end of his campaign, but now, honestly, I mostly just feel relief. I'm ready to move on.
Good grief, I don't know how we would survive four weeks, but Bernie, what the hell has been stopping you from endorsing her for the last 6 weeks?
The dnc hasn't committed to many of the policies and views Bernie is fighting for, he doesn't owe HRC or the DNC any endorsement. He'll use it as leverage and once policy that he can agree with is put in place the endorsement will be made.
He at least owes them a concession speech, which he has yet to give.
Why?
because he lost
... But he hasn't yet The contest isn't over till the convention. Is Hillary going to win? Yes, at the convention.
Which hasn't happened
I too like when the football team down 40 with a minute left in the 4th keeps calling timeout to try and get the ball back one last time.
Your analogy falls flat, how about. "It's always great when the Olympic team in second place during the relay race says "Fuck it" and walks off the field.
Sanders not formally conceding impedes nothing and doesn't delay Hillary's victory.
Holy christ
He lost
It's over
Fucking deal with it
ah yes, the ideal route for political and social progression
Okay, so, you know what? It really fucking is.
Sometimes you lose elections. This is quite possibly the single most important lesson any young progressive could ever learn. The fact that so many Sanders supporters are anywhere from rejection to outright denial of the idea that their guy lost is only outclassed by the stubbornness of Sanders himself on this. I don't have time to coddle Sanders supporters and hand them a participation trophy, and if I don't, Hillary Clinton sure as shit doesn't.
+13
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
I wanted to make a joke about how that writer for The Economist was pictured here shopping for a new belt "just for around the house"...
...but then I couldn't find a by line and now I'm assuming the article is written by a swarm AI programmed to hate the poor.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
Hey, maybe don't resort to the straw man that you're somehow smarter than the average voter because you support a candidate that they don't.
[IMG][/img]
+2
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
Hey, maybe don't resort to the straw man that you're somehow smarter than the average voter because you support a candidate that they don't.
Except I didn't infer that...like at all...
edit: To clarify I'm saying that we're all a bunch of political wonks who care about this stuff way more than most people. Most people don't debate the policy of the party platform going into the DNC. Most people don't know when the convention is. Most people get their news from angry Facebook posts...
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
Hey, maybe don't resort to the straw man that you're somehow smarter than the average voter because you support a candidate that they don't.
Except I didn't infer that...like at all...
I'm pretty sure "The average voter doesn't know half as much as I do" is a straw man.
Unless, you know, you have some empirical proof that the "average voter" isn't keeping up with Bernie's recent struggles.
[IMG][/img]
0
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
That's what he's doing?
Also it honestly will help. It amazes me that the DNC is still supporting the TPP since Clinton has come out against it. Now that might be disingenuous since she previously endorsed it dozens of times but it's one of the few things Trump can legitimately hit her over the head with despite the fact that you just know he would love to pass similar legislation. They whole party needs to position themselves as progressive not just because those policies are what I or anybody else agrees with but because it will draw a stark contrast between Hillary and Trump.
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
I really want to know what either party wants to due about the current amount of Federal Student Loan debt. It may seem selfish since I am in the boat now, but I cared about it before I had loans to pay off, but no one seems to be talking about it.
I know the argument of "well you took the loans out" and its true, we did, but its because we had to get crazy expensive degrees to get jobs. And while I'm not so bad (I qualified for income based repayment) I know people who are paying $800-$1000 a month to pay off their student loans. Imagine what that could buy, new cars, a home, diamonds those things that help keep the economy flowing.
Do you qualify for the public service loan forgiveness program? If you're not gonna earn a lot of money, hop on that, so you can hand most of the debt to the taxpayer.
As someone who used to qualify for that program, I hate to break it to you but it ain't that great. You usually have to consolidate your loans into higher or variable interest packages. You can't pay it forward and double up on payments, so you're on the hook for any higher interest that accrues while you're making your qualifying payments. (This isn't a big deal yet since interest rates are low, but it can pose a problem later.) If you're married, your spouse's AGR kinda messes the qualifying payments up as if he or she's expected to pick up your tab. On top of that, they changed the rules on it midstream, such that certain types of payment plans counted and others don't. I can still re-qualify but I'd have to start from scratch.
And of course on top of that you have to jump through hoops when you finally make all the payments to prove that you made them after your debt has been bought and sold over and over again to various companies during the ten years you were making your payments.
I think It's only really a good deal if you're single, you have a high income, and a ridiculously large loan to pay off.
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
That's what he's doing?
Also it honestly will help. It amazes me that the DNC is still supporting the TPP since Clinton has come out against it. Now that might be disingenuous since she previously endorsed it dozens of times but it's one of the few things Trump can legitimately hit her over the head with despite the fact that you just know he would love to pass similar legislation. They whole party needs to position themselves as progressive not just because those policies are what I or anybody else agrees with but because it will draw a stark contrast between Hillary and Trump.
DNC supports it b/c Obama legacy
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
That's what he's doing?
Also it honestly will help. It amazes me that the DNC is still supporting the TPP since Clinton has come out against it. Now that might be disingenuous since she previously endorsed it dozens of times but it's one of the few things Trump can legitimately hit her over the head with despite the fact that you just know he would love to pass similar legislation. They whole party needs to position themselves as progressive not just because those policies are what I or anybody else agrees with but because it will draw a stark contrast between Hillary and Trump.
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
Because at this point his campaign has unequivocally lost all momentum, and his chances of actually winning the nomination are as close to zero as they could get. And since the primary season is over, there's no point in campaigning further since he won't be in the general, and it's doubtful anybody would pay attention even if he kept campaigning.
And IMO, for all the criticism he's received for letting his campaign devolve into a massive ego trip, Bernie's enough of a progressive to understand a Trump presidency would be devastating for the US, and he absolutely does not want to take that risk.
It's nice that Bernie dragged us left, I just feel like if your main success is acting as a lodestone then don't be surprised when people complain about you dragging your feet on the endorsement thing. Ultimately he's part of a major party, a party which has to compromise to get things done. And it's awesome that he stuck to his guns, but the battles been over for a while and he's still firing wildly, endangering his own side. And it is about sides at this point. If that upsets you it's not Hilary or Hilary supporters, it's the whole damn political system that upsets you.
I think what irks people is that he's not an independent, if he wants the support of his own party to get things done, then he needs to support them too. Sure, drag us left, please do! But know when to stop dragging and let us breathe.
It really does come across as him using the unlikelihood of a trump win as a way to turn the whole thing into a left-leaning litmus test
Saying that Hillary has dragged the party to the left feels misguided at best. Clinton moved left because a whole lot of people were shouting and demanding a turn to the left, and whatever faults you may ascribe to her the lady definitely possesses a pair of ears. Nor am I going to begrudge Sanders for taking this to the convention when my initial hope/expectation for the primary was exactly this, Sanders losing the nomination but riding it out through July and giving a voice to some progressive issues. Now I may not be a fan of Sanders the candidate (I think the way he ran his campaign shows that he would kind of suck as a president), but now that he's mostly stopped the direct attacks on Clinton I just can't bring myself to get up in arms about anything he's doing (or not doing, I guess, since endorsing is the hot topic of the day). Especially since a lot of those shouting people either back or are sympathetic to Sanders, and caustically cutting him out of any DNC participation would be a huge slap in the face to some really important activist voices.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
Hey, maybe don't resort to the straw man that you're somehow smarter than the average voter because you support a candidate that they don't.
Except I didn't infer that...like at all...
I'm pretty sure "The average voter doesn't know half as much as I do" is a straw man.
Unless, you know, you have some empirical proof that the "average voter" isn't keeping up with Bernie's recent struggles.
There is a degree of danger in assuming, in a liberal democratic fashion, that your average voter engages much in the political process.
And there's probably lots of empirical evidence of that, too. For a start, voter turnout. 2012 US presidential election, receiving all of that coverage and all of that discussion ra ra ra, 54.9%.
Your average voter is barely an average citizen, maybe, on account of probably if you work out the percentage of citizens who voted in that election from the percentage of total citizens (including those too young to vote, convicted of a felony in some states etc) probably less than half do. I'd be interested to see those numbers.
Anyway, I'm not dissing your average US voter or average US citizen or whatever, people engage with what they feel is important. But it is the folly of many people who are passionate about politics to assume that other people are too. It's easy to do that when you are the kind of person who is passionate and are surrounded by other people with similar passions.
i guess being white doesn't always stop the cops from gunning you down, even if you're just a regular unarmed kid
fuck, dudes. i don't know.
Jesus Christ?! The pause for 14 seconds before shooting him again on the ground. I feel like cops really do buy into the narrative that they have the most dangerous job in the world so it's okay to fire on someone even if you can't see a gun, I feel like that at least an officer should have to yell "gun!" or something before everyone opens up on someone, like should the requirement be you actually have to see a gun, not just see someone reaching for something?
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
Because at this point his campaign has unequivocally lost all momentum, and his chances of actually winning the nomination are as close to zero as they could get. And since the primary season is over, there's no point in campaigning further since he won't be in the general, and it's doubtful anybody would pay attention even if he kept campaigning.
And IMO, for all the criticism he's received for letting his campaign devolve into a massive ego trip, Bernie's enough of a progressive to understand a Trump presidency would be devastating for the US, and he absolutely does not want to take that risk.
Well, so what if he can't win? If his objective is dragging her to the left, and staying in despite not being able to win (clearly) will do that (as far as he sees it) while a Trump candidacy is unelectable, then why not? Like, I'm not saying that would be a strategy above criticism at all, just that sometimes your strategy doesn't actually mean you win 100% all out, it means you secure the best possible outcome at the time.
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
edited July 2016
Oh and beyond more progressive ideas I'd like Hillary to throw more specific policies and laws at Trump if for no other reason than I think she legitimately has a shot at tricking him with a line about healthcare regulations needing "Updoc" subsidies.
PwnanObrien on
+3
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Thinking that trump is unelectable is dangerous, dangerous, dangerous thinking.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
And if Bernie thinks that then yeah, I'd say that's foolish, but at the same time, if he thinks he can push things because he thinks Clinton can beat Trump anyway...
Like, Sanders at the moment seems to be taking the view of, let's stay in. Let's pull the Dems to the left, by using the influence we've gained. We can't win but we can change the winner's position, and Clinton will be able to beat Trump either way. And if Clinton does move to the left, and she does beat Trump, then that strategy will have actually been pretty sound, as it turns out.
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
Because at this point his campaign has unequivocally lost all momentum, and his chances of actually winning the nomination are as close to zero as they could get. And since the primary season is over, there's no point in campaigning further since he won't be in the general, and it's doubtful anybody would pay attention even if he kept campaigning.
And IMO, for all the criticism he's received for letting his campaign devolve into a massive ego trip, Bernie's enough of a progressive to understand a Trump presidency would be devastating for the US, and he absolutely does not want to take that risk.
Well, so what if he can't win? If his objective is dragging her to the left, and staying in despite not being able to win (clearly) will do that (as far as he sees it) while a Trump candidacy is unelectable, then why not? Like, I'm not saying that would be a strategy above criticism at all, just that sometimes your strategy doesn't actually mean you win 100% all out, it means you secure the best possible outcome at the time.
I think after Brexit people are just genuinely scared of what can happen. I feel like everyone would love a pull to the left, but at the moment it feels like we are in danger of a massive pull to the right. And as cliche as it is (and as much as it's based on fear and voting against something rather than for it) to call for unity and centrism, it's only natural in the face of Trump and Trump supporters.
People can't be easily placed in either camp, we all want more progressive issues championed, but we also all want Trump destroyed in a way that shuts down that discourse and drift to the right comprehensively.
That's why people are annoyed about him not endorsing, it's because he's using the high stakes to gamble. Like we will all love it if the gamble pays off, but if it doesn't it's terrifying
Prohass on
+3
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
Because at this point his campaign has unequivocally lost all momentum, and his chances of actually winning the nomination are as close to zero as they could get. And since the primary season is over, there's no point in campaigning further since he won't be in the general, and it's doubtful anybody would pay attention even if he kept campaigning.
And IMO, for all the criticism he's received for letting his campaign devolve into a massive ego trip, Bernie's enough of a progressive to understand a Trump presidency would be devastating for the US, and he absolutely does not want to take that risk.
Well, so what if he can't win? If his objective is dragging her to the left, and staying in despite not being able to win (clearly) will do that (as far as he sees it) while a Trump candidacy is unelectable, then why not? Like, I'm not saying that would be a strategy above criticism at all, just that sometimes your strategy doesn't actually mean you win 100% all out, it means you secure the best possible outcome at the time.
I'm not sure what you're arguing here, because his objective isn't pulling Hillary to the left.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have wasted this much time talking about super delegates while trying to make Hillary sound like a corporate stooge. Bernie has been trying to win the nomination, even after the point where it became impossible for him to do so.
And if it was his objective, he's not going to pull her any farther left than he already has; now that Hillary's the presumptive nominee, Bernie's campaign has ceased to be a threat. There's no reason why Hillary needs to move any further to the left to meet him.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Posts
Do you qualify for the public service loan forgiveness program? If you're not gonna earn a lot of money, hop on that, so you can hand most of the debt to the taxpayer.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I think Hillary should just cut him loose at this point and say look, you got what you got, if you aren't going to endorse then you aren't going to. It's not you Bernie, It's me.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
This is where I basically stand on it as well
I feel like he thinks he's a lot more important than he actually is
That chart dumps on your argument if anything. If you note the sharp drop in employment comes not too long after NAFTA gets passed and right around the time the trade deals with China take effect. Yes the remaning production coming out of the area continues growing but that's through changes in technology and automation. It's like arguing that self-checkout kiosks are good for grocery baggers because people still get their food bagged except instead of minimum wage jobs we're talking about a whole industry here. Nobody's disputing that the steel got made, it's just that they care about their local economy not falling into the toilet due to decisions they had no part in suddenly changing things. Again, the overall benefit for the country is there but it came at the cost of a lot of blue collar workers getting shit on by Clinton on his way out of office.
Honestly this feels like a Pyrrhic victory, what gains he made for progressives, he got at the expense of cooperation with people pulling a no true scottsman on what a real progressive is. I can't imagine obama/hillary voters of the future will look kindly on the next sanders and if you think he got chopped off at the knees next one won't even be able to get feet on the ground.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Then why should he get a say in the Democratic National Convention?
Steam Me
The average voter isn't really engaged in this stuff enough to have all that detailed a grasp on what is actually happening let alone extrapolating it into the weird fanfictions about Bernie becoming a bitter egomaniac or having a secret "in case of indictment" pact with Hillary that this thread invents.
Except it isn't a false narrative; Bernie's political revolution has become the Sanders campaign desperately trying to keep its head above water. At this point, Bernie has spent more time in the past two months talking about how he can still win the election, instead of telling us what he'd do if he actually won the nomination.
For the record, I'd be much happier if Bernie were the presumptive candidate. But he's not. Whatever issues you may have with Hillary's platform - and credit where it's due, Bernie pulling Hillary left is a great thing for all parties involved - her constituents have spoken, and they clearly have more confidence in her than in Sanders. That's the way our democratic system works, and while it may be a flawed system, pretending like somehow the rules shouldn't apply to Sanders is not the way to fix that system.
Bernie lost, and he has not lost gracefully. That isn't an opinion, that is a fact. Acting as if people are somehow in the wrong for pointing it out just because you like Bernie better than Hillary is childish.
And for the record; talking down to people because they'd rather vote Hillary than risk Trump getting elected is a bad look. Whatever your problems with Hillary, at least she's not running on a platform of open nativist and racist demagoguery.
Ha ha, I hadn't seen that article before, and I know it's a bit off topic, but: I'm not a millennial, but I don't buy mined diamonds for a bunch of reasons. A big one being, I just bought two flawless diamond rings over the past month, a total of 3 carats, all for under $100. Why would I prefer something dug from the ground? Lab diamonds rule.
On my sleeve, let the runway start
I mean, if you want to use this average voter idea, wouldn't most average voters see Sanders decision not to drop out now that the primaries have been over for a month as nothing less than sour grapes?
3DS: 2981-5304-3227
Okay, so, you know what? It really fucking is.
Sometimes you lose elections. This is quite possibly the single most important lesson any young progressive could ever learn. The fact that so many Sanders supporters are anywhere from rejection to outright denial of the idea that their guy lost is only outclassed by the stubbornness of Sanders himself on this. I don't have time to coddle Sanders supporters and hand them a participation trophy, and if I don't, Hillary Clinton sure as shit doesn't.
...but then I couldn't find a by line and now I'm assuming the article is written by a swarm AI programmed to hate the poor.
Hey, maybe don't resort to the straw man that you're somehow smarter than the average voter because you support a candidate that they don't.
Except I didn't infer that...like at all...
edit: To clarify I'm saying that we're all a bunch of political wonks who care about this stuff way more than most people. Most people don't debate the policy of the party platform going into the DNC. Most people don't know when the convention is. Most people get their news from angry Facebook posts...
If Sanders thinks that by using his endorsement as leverage to push Clinton to the economic left will work then hey, why not do that.
If that's his strategy, why drop out? Why not keep pushing it, in order to try and drag her the way he wants?
I'm pretty sure "The average voter doesn't know half as much as I do" is a straw man.
Unless, you know, you have some empirical proof that the "average voter" isn't keeping up with Bernie's recent struggles.
That's what he's doing?
Also it honestly will help. It amazes me that the DNC is still supporting the TPP since Clinton has come out against it. Now that might be disingenuous since she previously endorsed it dozens of times but it's one of the few things Trump can legitimately hit her over the head with despite the fact that you just know he would love to pass similar legislation. They whole party needs to position themselves as progressive not just because those policies are what I or anybody else agrees with but because it will draw a stark contrast between Hillary and Trump.
As someone who used to qualify for that program, I hate to break it to you but it ain't that great. You usually have to consolidate your loans into higher or variable interest packages. You can't pay it forward and double up on payments, so you're on the hook for any higher interest that accrues while you're making your qualifying payments. (This isn't a big deal yet since interest rates are low, but it can pose a problem later.) If you're married, your spouse's AGR kinda messes the qualifying payments up as if he or she's expected to pick up your tab. On top of that, they changed the rules on it midstream, such that certain types of payment plans counted and others don't. I can still re-qualify but I'd have to start from scratch.
And of course on top of that you have to jump through hoops when you finally make all the payments to prove that you made them after your debt has been bought and sold over and over again to various companies during the ten years you were making your payments.
I think It's only really a good deal if you're single, you have a high income, and a ridiculously large loan to pay off.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
DNC supports it b/c Obama legacy
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The TPP is a bad legacy to leave behind.
Because at this point his campaign has unequivocally lost all momentum, and his chances of actually winning the nomination are as close to zero as they could get. And since the primary season is over, there's no point in campaigning further since he won't be in the general, and it's doubtful anybody would pay attention even if he kept campaigning.
And IMO, for all the criticism he's received for letting his campaign devolve into a massive ego trip, Bernie's enough of a progressive to understand a Trump presidency would be devastating for the US, and he absolutely does not want to take that risk.
I think what irks people is that he's not an independent, if he wants the support of his own party to get things done, then he needs to support them too. Sure, drag us left, please do! But know when to stop dragging and let us breathe.
It really does come across as him using the unlikelihood of a trump win as a way to turn the whole thing into a left-leaning litmus test
http://laist.com/2016/07/07/fresno_dylan_noble.php
i guess being white doesn't always stop the cops from gunning you down, even if you're just a regular unarmed kid
fuck, dudes. i don't know.
There is a degree of danger in assuming, in a liberal democratic fashion, that your average voter engages much in the political process.
And there's probably lots of empirical evidence of that, too. For a start, voter turnout. 2012 US presidential election, receiving all of that coverage and all of that discussion ra ra ra, 54.9%.
Your average voter is barely an average citizen, maybe, on account of probably if you work out the percentage of citizens who voted in that election from the percentage of total citizens (including those too young to vote, convicted of a felony in some states etc) probably less than half do. I'd be interested to see those numbers.
Anyway, I'm not dissing your average US voter or average US citizen or whatever, people engage with what they feel is important. But it is the folly of many people who are passionate about politics to assume that other people are too. It's easy to do that when you are the kind of person who is passionate and are surrounded by other people with similar passions.
Jesus Christ?! The pause for 14 seconds before shooting him again on the ground. I feel like cops really do buy into the narrative that they have the most dangerous job in the world so it's okay to fire on someone even if you can't see a gun, I feel like that at least an officer should have to yell "gun!" or something before everyone opens up on someone, like should the requirement be you actually have to see a gun, not just see someone reaching for something?
Well, so what if he can't win? If his objective is dragging her to the left, and staying in despite not being able to win (clearly) will do that (as far as he sees it) while a Trump candidacy is unelectable, then why not? Like, I'm not saying that would be a strategy above criticism at all, just that sometimes your strategy doesn't actually mean you win 100% all out, it means you secure the best possible outcome at the time.
Like, Sanders at the moment seems to be taking the view of, let's stay in. Let's pull the Dems to the left, by using the influence we've gained. We can't win but we can change the winner's position, and Clinton will be able to beat Trump either way. And if Clinton does move to the left, and she does beat Trump, then that strategy will have actually been pretty sound, as it turns out.
I think after Brexit people are just genuinely scared of what can happen. I feel like everyone would love a pull to the left, but at the moment it feels like we are in danger of a massive pull to the right. And as cliche as it is (and as much as it's based on fear and voting against something rather than for it) to call for unity and centrism, it's only natural in the face of Trump and Trump supporters.
People can't be easily placed in either camp, we all want more progressive issues championed, but we also all want Trump destroyed in a way that shuts down that discourse and drift to the right comprehensively.
That's why people are annoyed about him not endorsing, it's because he's using the high stakes to gamble. Like we will all love it if the gamble pays off, but if it doesn't it's terrifying
one
more
match
I'm not sure what you're arguing here, because his objective isn't pulling Hillary to the left.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have wasted this much time talking about super delegates while trying to make Hillary sound like a corporate stooge. Bernie has been trying to win the nomination, even after the point where it became impossible for him to do so.
And if it was his objective, he's not going to pull her any farther left than he already has; now that Hillary's the presumptive nominee, Bernie's campaign has ceased to be a threat. There's no reason why Hillary needs to move any further to the left to meet him.
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
They can't resist the call of the Field of Rakes