• Bernie Sanders Trounces Hillary In First Super Tuesday Results!
    212 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49848471]I already have :smile:[/QUOTE] Is it online? Show me that link, brother.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49848476]Is it online? Show me that link, brother.[/QUOTE] It's not technically a petition. The reason why they're not in some states is because of a huge "ballot cost" for a party to be on the national ballot. [url]https://www.lp.org/ballotfund[/url] You have to donate, essentially. Think of it as a financial petition more than a signatory petition.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49848014]Thats kinda gross. Good foreign policy but the Libertarian economics will get people killed.[/QUOTE] Libertarian foreign policy is garbage because there is no libertarian foreign policy.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49848530]Libertarian foreign policy is garbage because there is no libertarian foreign policy.[/QUOTE] [url=https://www.lp.org/platform#3.0]What's this[/url]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49848530]Libertarian foreign policy is garbage because there is no libertarian foreign policy.[/QUOTE] Libertarian foreign policy is non-interventionism =/= isolationism. You can continue diplomacy without getting directly involved in military conflicts.
[QUOTE=matt000024;49847204]That is debatable. A lot of Democrats, myself included, would likely be voting 3rd party in that scenario which could heavily change the outcome.[/QUOTE] I don't know if he would actually run independent because it would undermine Hillary. It would give trump more of a chance.
I don't think Bernie will win the Democratic side. He wants to change too much, Clinton will pretty much continue on where Obama left off, a change of reins is easier than a change of everything that still gives the politicians money.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;49847162]I am toxxing my account on this. I think we all can recognize that Clinton will beat Sanders - whether we like Sanders or not.[/QUOTE] can I be you're replacement if you lose mod yes?
[QUOTE=Mingebox;49848249]Even if he doesn't get anything past congress,(and besides him making us the laughing stock of the entire world) we would still have to deal with the fact such a dreadful person at could get win the election purely with demagoguery and sloganeering, and what the would mean about our country.[/QUOTE] And the international community will forever make a mockery of United States politics, as if the current criticism is enough, by now saying "You elected Trump!"
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;49848305]A member of congress must submit his proposal for him. The member may refuse to submit the proposal. The executive branch can only ASK, it can't directly interface with the legislative branch until the piece of legislation is on the presidents desk.[/QUOTE] Oh my yes I forgot, it's not obamacare it's the Charles rengle patient protection and healthcare act. Ya presidents can always propose legislation, there is always a congressmen that will take a favor
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49848392]We had Libertarian economics under Coolidge which gave us the Roaring Twenties. The reason it fell was because Wall Street went rampant and collapsed. As long as Wall Street is kept in check a pseudo-libertarian economy can work.[/QUOTE] Wat the fuck are you talking about? The 20s were powered by a massive rise in affordability of consumer goods, tons of excess manufacturing capacity, tons of avalible credit, and a giant knot of reparations Modern Libertarianism wasn't a thing until the 1970s, before that they were communist/anarchists hardly the far right conservatives they are today
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49848547][URL="https://www.lp.org/platform#3.0"]What's this[/URL][/QUOTE] The libertarian platform; a list comprising of 5-10% decent ideas surrounded by bad ones, bad because they won't work or actually, morally bad. [QUOTE=LtKyle2;49848548]Libertarian foreign policy is non-interventionism =/= isolationism. You can continue diplomacy without getting directly involved in military conflicts.[/QUOTE] I guess in a fantasy version of the world sure.
So at this point what are the odds that Clinton and Trump DON'T win the nomination, it doesn't seem likely to happen.
[QUOTE=Medevila;49849101]What an optimistic title, too bad for all of us that all Super Tuesday has done is extend Hillary's lead[/QUOTE] Hillary was declared the inevitable nomination since she announced running, it's a miracle that bernie is still gonna be in the race until March 15th when he should start to pick up more delegates than clinton.
[QUOTE=Medevila;49849249]Bernie didn't meet the expectations he set for his own campaign, coming up short in Massachusetts- after tonight, Hillary will have far more than double Bernie's modest ~420 delegates[/QUOTE] Bernie was expected to win vermont, but taking oklahoma, Minnesota, and colorado is pretty a pretty good tuesday. And numbers are still coming in for mass, it's really close
[QUOTE=Medevila;49849288]Mind you those are 4 out of the 5 states the Sanders campaign -said- they'd win prior to today, the fact that Massachusetts ended up going for Hillary (she's predicted the winner there by everyone at this point) says that Hillary has encroached on territory his campaign was pretty confident about[/QUOTE] numbers are still coming in and it's gonna be very close [editline]1st March 2016[/editline] also lets not forget Bill Clinton closed 4 voting locations to break the law and campaign within 150 feet of a polling location
[QUOTE=Sableye;49849102]Wat the fuck are you talking about? The 20s were powered by a massive rise in affordability of consumer goods, tons of excess manufacturing capacity, tons of avalible credit, and a giant knot of reparations Modern Libertarianism wasn't a thing until the 1970s, before that they were communist/anarchists hardly the far right conservatives they are today[/QUOTE] Because the private sector prospered without the federal government directly intervening at all which is the basis of libertarian economics. Everything during that time was without the government unlike today. Coolidge was favorable towards more progressive economic ideas but allowed the states to manage the economy on their own. Which is essentially libertarianism.
[quote]"ABC News"[/quote] [quote]Minority voters have voted for Clinton in record numbers, 83% of acknowledged minorities voted for Clinton all across the country [/quote] :why:
[QUOTE=Starpluck;49849060]And the international community will forever make a mockery of United States politics, as if the current criticism is enough, by now saying "You elected Trump!"[/QUOTE] I was more thinking about what they're going to after he gets elected, i.e. petulant sabre-rattling left and right.
[QUOTE=27X;49849438]:why:[/QUOTE] Don't you know, Bill plays the Sax. But seriously, [I]record[/I] numbers? I can't comprehend or think of any reason why Hillary is so appealling to minorities, especially considering some things I've heard about her recently.
America will become a corporate cyberpunk dystopia and we'll all have neon mohawks and piercings and communicate on underground networks. It's gonna be sick.
I don't want pointy ears, arm spurs and a credstick
I haven't been able to get to early voting because of dealing with bowel issues for two days, but seeing this, isn't giving me confidence to vote for Bernie right now. I really shouldn't ask in this subforum since I always smell bias whenever I do, but I must. Should I still go for Sanders, or just go for my original secondary choice of Clinton, despite everything I've heard? I'll take a stable but stale administration than gamble on Trump.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49849602]I haven't been able to get to early voting because of dealing with bowel issues for two days, but seeing this, isn't giving me confidence to vote for Bernie right now. I really shouldn't ask in this subforum since I always smell bias whenever I do, but I must. Should I still go for Sanders, or just go for my original secondary choice of Clinton, despite everything I've heard? I'll take a stable but stale administration than gamble on Trump.[/QUOTE] There's zero harm in going for Sanders still - all that does is increase the likelihood he'll be the competitor against Trump (who's inevitably going to win the republican nomination). In the general, if Sanders loses, go for Clinton. There's no reason to switch to Clinton at this point if you've been supporting Sanders all along - either Sanders will win or Hillary will win. If she's your second choice, and she wins, vote for her in the general. Otherwise, continuing to go for Sanders in the primaries will mean your first choice has a greater chance of being in the general. Sanders is hardly out of the race - Super Tuesday hurts a bit, but Hillary has less than a 200 delegate lead, which can hopefully be closed over the following month or two.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;49847687]your post said your vote in the general election would be for trump if bernie doesn't get the nomination, which is something bernie himself condemns[/QUOTE] Very first line said I'm voting for Bernie. In the event he doesn't get the nomination, I have no clue what I'm doing. Both Trump and Hillary are repulsive to me but I won't lie when I say I have a hate boner for Clinton. That being said, they're both equally shitty candidates in my opinion. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I really don't give a shit about who to vote for if I cant vote Bernie in the general election. I mean, it's not like my choices will include a candidate I actually like.
[QUOTE=Solo Wing;49849832]Very first line said I'm voting for Bernie. In the event he doesn't get the nomination, I have no clue what I'm doing. Both Trump and Hillary are repulsive to me but I won't lie when I say I have a hate boner for Clinton. That being said, they're both equally shitty candidates in my opinion. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I really don't give a shit about who to vote for if I cant vote Bernie in the general election. I mean, it's not like my choices will include a candidate I actually like.[/QUOTE] Well on the one hand you would have a candidate who is the opposite of everything Bernie and on the other hand you would have one who has 99% of the same stances. Tough choice huh?
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49849961]Tough choice huh?[/QUOTE] What Hilary says she believes doesn't necessarily reflect what she actually believes. Hell.. I don't even know what she believes.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49850001]What Hilary says she believes doesn't necessarily reflect what she actually believes. Hell.. I don't even know what she believes.[/QUOTE] She believes a balance of whatever nets the biggest donations, and whatever grants the biggest PR bonus. Social progressiveness is big right now, so she's definitely in favor of that. On the other hand, she's totally bought, and I worry she might try to undo corporate abuse preventions such as Net Neutrality.
[QUOTE=cody8295;49849262]Bernie was expected to win vermont, but taking oklahoma, Minnesota, and colorado is pretty a pretty good tuesday. And numbers are still coming in for mass, it's really close[/QUOTE] Ah, the ever so popular "Well he wasn't supposed to win THOSE states..." again. Bernie lost with about 150 delegates behind. I don't know how this can be seen as a good thing unless you never expected him to win at all.
Anyone who thinks Bernie Sanders is out of the race at this point is delusional. [img]http://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/sliver-clintonvsanders-1.png[/img] Today, Bernie won 4 states. Nate Silver predicted we would only barely win Oklahoma, we rolled that and instead barely lost Massachusetts. This is a real race, and if you look at what's to come, Bernie Sanders is likely to come out on top with pledged delegates by the end of March. And from there he really REALLY starts picking up steam, ending with a win in California that secures him the nomination. This isn't to say it will be [i]easy[/i]. The media will claim Bernie should drop out now, but we must keep fighting.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.