• CNN Resorts to Internet Censorship to Promote Hilary Clinton Over Bernie Sanders
    114 replies, posted
I don't understand how people can think Clinton won. Sanders started off a little weak(why does he suck at explaining the socialist label? I was so upset with that shit.) but at least his answers had substance. Hilary dodged like 80% of the questions and when she took a stance it was a shitty one or a flip flop. No glass stegall? No universal healthcare? We're america and we get things done? Suddenly now she's a "progressive"? Yeah okay Hilary. She also adopted a large portion of Bernie's platform before the debate, it's ridiculous. Moderators need to learn to call out bullshit better because I'm sick of politicians "winning" debates by dodging answers, lying, or spinning the question.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;48931486]Did you hear differently about his foreign policy then I did? Let's be honest here, there's not many good democratic candidates. Bernie is very appealing to the younger crowd because of his fight for income equality, wealth distribution, taxes, education, healthcare, social policies which is all well and good and I totally support...but people are totally ignoring the other side of the Presidency. He's too focused on domestic issues and does not seem like he would be a strong world leader especially with America being one of (if not THE) most influential and powerful country in the world.[/QUOTE] U.S. foreign policy since WW2 has been utterly destructive. Even today the U.S. is embroiled in wars and committing war crimes in the Middle East, pursuing gunboat diplomacy in Asia and more; resulting in anti-Americanism across the globe, and in the Middle East in particular, cultivating Islamic fundamentalism. None of this benefits the American people, on the contrary; it is incredibly costly, it increases the risk of terrorism and attacks on Americans abroad, and erodes their freedoms with mass surveillance. Other than Sanders, which candidates oppose this dysfunctional foreign policy?
[QUOTE=jA_cOp;48933554]U.S. foreign policy since WW2 has been utterly destructive. Even today the U.S. is embroiled in wars and committing war crimes in the Middle East, pursuing gunboat diplomacy in Asia and more; resulting in anti-Americanism across the globe, and in the Middle East in particular, cultivating Islamic fundamentalism. None of this benefits the American people, on the contrary; it is incredibly costly, it increases the risk of terrorism and attacks on Americans abroad, and erodes their freedoms with mass surveillance. Other than Sanders, which candidates oppose this dysfunctional foreign policy?[/QUOTE] Based on this, you'd think that the US singlehandily plunged the world into ruin. Also, it seems to me that the world, overall, still likes the US quite a bit. The US is gaining a huge fanbase in countries like India, and [url=http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/]these polls[/url] show that favorable views of the US are slowly increasing in several countries and stayed high in others. Only Russia's views of the US have really tanked.
Why does the media want Hillary to win so much, even going to the point of censoring polls to show that "hey most people support clinton!" In hopes that people will bandwagon her. Is it because of Bernie's socialist ideals? Sorry if this question is stupid, just want to get a grasp on why CNN would do this.
[QUOTE=Toro;48933829]Why does the media want Hillary to win so much, even going to the point of censoring polls to show that "hey most people support clinton!" In hopes that people will bandwagon her. Is it because of Bernie's socialist ideals? Sorry if this question is stupid, just want to get a grasp on why CNN would do this.[/QUOTE]Hillary is the establishment democrat, basically doing nothing really risky or pushing in boundaries, and very much a corporate whore. Bernie is the exact opposite, his entire platform is one massive risk, and he is not going to take shit from corporations. Pretty much, Hillary is the one that will best benefit the media and many other big groups.
[QUOTE=Toro;48933829]Why does the media want Hillary to win so much, even going to the point of censoring polls to show that "hey most people support clinton!" In hopes that people will bandwagon her. Is it because of Bernie's socialist ideals? Sorry if this question is stupid, just want to get a grasp on why CNN would do this.[/QUOTE] if there were some sort of conspiracy to push Hillary (which I doubt exists), it would be because Hillary is a much better presidental canidate than Bernie to sell to the general public. Let me put it this way; the Republicans can destroy Bernie just by making an ad that consists of clips that have him saying he's a socialist. Do that, play it in swing states, and he is done. No matter how many campaigns on Reddit to explain to your paren...I mean other people that socialism is not a bad thing, you cannot make people totally flip their opinion on a very loaded word within a few months. Ads showing how much taxes would increase under Bernie, which would be very easy to make, would be the cherry on Bernie's grave.
[QUOTE=Flameon;48931016]Bernie sanders isnt shit, hes fucking Jesus' jewish stepbrother.[/QUOTE] Not quite sure how to tell you this but Jesus was jewish to begin with.
[QUOTE=Ziron;48933765] Also, it seems to me that the world, overall, still likes the US quite a bit. The US is gaining a huge fanbase in countries like India, and [url=http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/1-americas-global-image/]these polls[/url] show that favorable views of the US are slowly increasing in several countries and stayed high in others. Only Russia's views of the US have really tanked.[/QUOTE] The same polls also show that [url=http://www.pewglobal.org/database/indicator/1/survey/17/response/Unfavorable/]potentially close to a billion people[/url] have an unfavourable view of the US. Just as it is increasing in some countries, it is also dropping in others, including European countries in the aftermath of Snowden. One can only wonder what the numbers would have been for Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and Iran.
[QUOTE=Flameon;48931016]Bernie sanders isnt shit, hes fucking Jesus' jewish stepbrother.[/QUOTE] Moses?
[video=youtube;R1RIWEOVoVc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1RIWEOVoVc&feature=youtu.be&t=20m30s[/video] People have to remember it is still early for Bernie Sanders and he has to get the word out. Contrary to what some people on this thread say, people like what he is saying, as evidence by his huge crowds. And instead of me rambling on why Sanders say the things he say, the best is him telling us about it in this very video I link above. Sooner or later Bernie will explain what democratic socialism means which is very important.
again I will are people starting to wake up and realalise that site's like CNN are bullshit ( not just pro - snaders people but maybe pro clinton people before the meeting/debate )
[QUOTE=Ziron;48933861]if there were some sort of conspiracy to push Hillary (which I doubt exists), [/QUOTE] The owners of the media companies give her money. Of course they'd like her to be president.
[QUOTE=Toyokunari;48934386] People have to remember it is still early for Bernie Sanders and he has to get the word out. Contrary to what some people on this thread say, people like what he is saying, as evidence by his huge crowds. And instead of me rambling on why Sanders say the things he say, the best is him telling us about it in this very video I link above. Sooner or later Bernie will explain what democratic socialism means which is very important.[/QUOTE] He's only attracting people already sympathetic to his message; 20-something, (upper) middle-class whites. Elections are won by winning a coalition between multiple groups deciding to vote for you, not just being carried by a single group. So far, Bernie has done a terrible job at reaching to anyone besides the 20-somethings and late teenagers that are already fully onbard the Bernie train or very sympathetic to his views in the first place. In fact, it's likely that, if Bernie were to win the nomination, he will be shredded in the general election by the Republicans just by virtue of calling himself a socialist on video. It might not be a Dukais-caliber blowout, but it'll be pretty bad. Huge crouds means jack in the grand scheme of things; rememeber Ron Paul?
[QUOTE=Ziron;48934471]He's only attracting people already sympathetic to his message; 20-something, (upper) middle-class whites. Elections are won by winning a coalition between multiple groups deciding to vote for you, not just being carried by a single group.[/QUOTE] Should really drop the wealthy white hipster thing you're trying to push. Just look at his rallies. [QUOTE=Ziron;48934471] Huge crouds means jack in the grand scheme of things; rememeber Ron Paul?[/QUOTE] You mean when the media did the same thing to a person I mostly disagree with?
[QUOTE=27X;48934003]Not quite sure how to tell you this but Jesus was jewish to begin with.[/QUOTE] Then it's technically still true.
[QUOTE=Ziron;48934471]He's only attracting people already sympathetic to his message; 20-something, (upper) middle-class whites. Elections are won by winning a coalition between multiple groups deciding to vote for you, not just being carried by a single group. So far, Bernie has done a terrible job at reaching to anyone besides the 20-somethings and late teenagers that are already fully onbard the Bernie train or very sympathetic to his views in the first place. In fact, it's likely that, if Bernie were to win the nomination, he will be shredded in the general election by the Republicans just by virtue of calling himself a socialist on video. It might not be a Dukais-caliber blowout, but it'll be pretty bad. Huge crouds means jack in the grand scheme of things; rememeber Ron Paul?[/QUOTE] so what can he do to up his game?
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48934559]so what can he do to up his game?[/QUOTE] *Sanders needs to revamp his image. Currently, he's a "Snooty Northeastern intellectual", which voters hate and will not vote for in the general. *Sanders needs to expand beyond just yamering about economic inequality all the time. There has to be some other issues that would resonate with Middle America. HINT: Things like #Blacklivesmatter support is not this. *He must reassure middle America that he will not do any sort of tax increase on them, no matter how small. If middle class America gets even a whiff that he'll increase taxes, they will quickly turn against him. *He needs to make an actual foreign policy that is fleshed out instead of having the nothing he currently has. *He needs to show himself as more open to debate and disagreement. Sanders has a big issue where he dodges questions a lot and greatly limits the amount of Q&A time in a town hall meeting, giving the imrpession he really can't handle anything not fully in agreement with his beliefs. *He needs to distance himself from the Occupy Wall Street-types before such an association can be made to the general public. OWS are seen as hippie lunatics, and looking like you're allied with them in any way makes you look like a fool.
[QUOTE=Ziron;48934606]*Sanders needs to revamp his image. Currently, he's a "Snooty Northeastern intellectual", which voters hate and will not vote for in the general. *Sanders needs to expand beyond just yamering about economic inequality all the time. There has to be some other issues that would resonate with Middle America. HINT: Things like #Blacklivesmatter support is not this. *He must reassure middle America that he will not do any sort of tax increase on them, no matter how small. If middle class America gets even a whiff that he'll increase taxes, they will quickly turn against him. *He needs to make an actual foreign policy that is fleshed out instead of having the nothing he currently has. *He needs to show himself as more open to debate and disagreement. Sanders has a big issue where he dodges questions a lot and greatly limits the amount of Q&A time in a town hall meeting, giving the imrpession he really can't handle anything not fully in agreement with his beliefs. *He needs to distance himself from the Occupy Wall Street-types before such an association can be made to the general public. OWS are seen as hippie lunatics, and looking like you're allied with them in any way makes you look like a fool.[/QUOTE] someone needs to email to him and or someone will tell him this because the usa needs this guy in office but I agree most people who goo yay at his meeting tend to be on side before hand and he needs to get other side/people on his side as well,.
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48930478]I'd rather have Clinton than Sanders. All of his free programs would double our national debt. Silly.[/QUOTE] Ahaha, that debt the US already has wont be gone in your lifetime. Free programs are good, if they need extra money, cut the defense budget.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48934629]someone needs to email to him and or someone will tell him this because the usa needs this guy in office but I agree most people who goo yay at his meeting tend to be on side before hand and he needs to get other side/people on his side as well,.[/QUOTE] Good idea, let's tell the guy who's been a professional career politician and political veteran for longer than most of us here have been alive know that his campaign is doing things wrong.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;48934929]Good idea, let's tell the guy who's been a professional career politician and political veteran for longer than most of us here have been alive know that his campaign is doing things wrong.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Ziron;48934606]*Sanders needs to revamp his image. Currently, he's a "Snooty Northeastern intellectual", which voters hate and will not vote for in the general. *Sanders needs to expand beyond just yamering about economic inequality all the time. There has to be some other issues that would resonate with Middle America. HINT: Things like #Blacklivesmatter support is not this. *He must reassure middle America that he will not do any sort of tax increase on them, no matter how small. If middle class America gets even a whiff that he'll increase taxes, they will quickly turn against him. *He needs to make an actual foreign policy that is fleshed out instead of having the nothing he currently has. *He needs to show himself as more open to debate and disagreement. Sanders has a big issue where he dodges questions a lot and greatly limits the amount of Q&A time in a town hall meeting, giving the imrpession he really can't handle anything not fully in agreement with his beliefs. *He needs to distance himself from the Occupy Wall Street-types before such an association can be made to the general public. OWS are seen as hippie lunatics, and looking like you're allied with them in any way makes you look like a fool.[/QUOTE] so these are bad ideas?
[QUOTE=Ziron;48931736]You should still be able to say SOMETHING instead of acting like someone caught you with your pants down. Use lots of weasel words, greatly simplify it, whatever; but you NEED to say something.[/QUOTE] Honestly that's worse than saying nothing.
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;48930536]I'm getting tired of these Bernie Sanders supporters whining about censorship, I can guarantee a vast majority of those who voted for Sanders did not even watch the debate, and blindly vote Sanders on every poll to make him look good. Polls like that are fucked with all the time. I actually watched the debate. Sanders sucked. He flopped early on, started picking up a little steam when the topic turned to domestic policy, but then sucked the rest of the night. He made the mistake of praising one of his opponent,s which is now the only noteworthy soundbyte from his mouth during the debate.[/QUOTE] To the attention of the few among you who have reported this post and others: it is not a bannable offense to dislike Bernie Sanders.
[QUOTE=mr apple;48934855]Ahaha, that debt the US already has wont be gone in your lifetime. Free programs are good, if they need extra money, cut the defense budget.[/QUOTE] The defense budget is a sacred cow, you can't cut shit from it. Suggesting anything that will take money from defense will make you a filthy commie terrorist nazi scum
[QUOTE=AkujiTheSniper;48937268]The defense budget is a sacred cow, you can't cut shit from it. Suggesting anything that will take money from defense will make you a filthy commie terrorist nazi scum[/QUOTE] the problem with defense is we talk about needing every penny, then the army goes and spends a couple billion on a weapons program to figure out what color they should paint their guns, then they decide to stick with what they have, they've done this over and over again for the last 40 years, and now other countries are starting to push out their future weapon systems and we've been sitting on the programs for decades [editline]19th October 2015[/editline] there is a certain efficiency with the way other countries do defense acquisitions, they just say "you tank bureau, build tank, you gun beureau, build gun"
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48930478]I'd rather have Clinton than Sanders. All of his free programs would double our national debt. Silly.[/QUOTE] Even though Bernie's detailed exactly how he's going to pay for his programs?
[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;48937655]Even though Bernie's detailed exactly how he's going to pay for his programs?[/QUOTE] ya its too shocking for people to expect that he actually knows how to pay for his programs and its not like the taxes he is talking about are horrible, like his .003% speculative stock tax, people whine about it, but you're already paying like 10% to a broker, you won't ever see it unless you're trading large volumes, and even then the fees are already a few orders of magnitude greater than the tax, or the way he plans on funding paid leave so businesses don't have to is adding a very small payroll tax, so employees are essentially paying into a sick leave pool at their employer, which makes perfect sense
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;48931937]Do you think 'mass mobilization' of the people would realistically happen or mean shit if Bernie was elected? Of Republicans control the Senate, House, or both with Bernie as president then his presidency will mean fuck all. He needs bipartisan support and not just 20 year old college students as his voter base.[/QUOTE] It's already happening, and it has happened plenty of times already throughout American history at a national level (never mind countless incidents of it happening and moreover succeeding at state/local levels). If you've got essentially an army-sized horde of pissed-off citizens who are severely disappointed, frustrated, and feeling hopeless about their lives, their financial situations, employment and educational opportunities, etc., then you have a tremendous amount of power at your fingertips. This is exactly what we already have in this country and have had since the recession hit us last decade. Shit, just within the last week, look at the facts about this that have been posted here about it on this forum: there's a gigantic $1.3 trillion student loan bubble that isn't just going to disappear, college degrees are becoming worthless, employment opportunities are declining steeply for this generation and are going to continue to decline unless something gets done... people are hurting badly, and they're fed up with it. Groups get things done when they take action. That's just a fact of politics. The Bonus Army did in 1932, the National Equality Marchers did back in 2009, the millions of anti-Vietnam marchers succeeded in permanently damaging the reputation of the government after what happened in the 1960s, the Women's Suffrage Movement succeeded before all these things, etc. Sanders has a huge group of loyal supporters at his disposal here, and they need to be utilized and made to feel useful so they'll be willing to do more and more to get done what needs to get done and so their loyalty will continue to build-- not sidelined and made to feel like everything is done, like they've won, and like there's nothing left to do. This is what Obama did with his supporters, and look how that turned out. The great thing as well about this approach is that Congress has to be careful how they'd go about handling that kind of movement. It can't just be suppressed and killed, or else the reputations of those who try to suppress it will be ruined. Herbert Hoover learned this lesson the hard way with his bungled handling of the Bonus Army that led to two demonstrators getting shot and killed and more than a thousand others injured. Again, basically what this all must boil down to eventually is for a collection of people, I don't care who, to stand up, organize, and say to Congress: "You work for us. We're in control. Do your jobs, or there will be consequences." Because things are not improving for the vast majority of people in this country today, they're getting worse-- which is the exact reason why you see so many people coming out and supporting Sanders like they are today. Again, they did the same with Obama when he first ran for the exact same reasons. It's already happening, it's only a question of how long this is going to take to produce results. It will take even longer if these people and their desperation/desire to create change are not utilized effectively, which is exactly why they need to be seen as a potential tool against Congress if/when Sanders becomes president. Political groups can translate into political muscle/enforcers. In the case of Sanders' supporters, imagine an Americanized/democratic interpretation of the historical Sturmabteilung in Germany during the Weimar Republic, if you will (minus the SA's right-wing fanaticism, of course; again, think Americanized/democratic here). The more people you mobilize to your cause, the more power you have: the power to win elections, and the power to force/strongly encourage your opponents to comply with your side's will. Mobilize as many people as you can, organize and teach them to function as a cohesive group, and use them to do whatever work is necessary to achieve your goals. That's the principle here. Don't be stupid and waste their support; use it for everything it's worth.
[QUOTE=Govna;48939800] It's already happening, it's only a question of how long this is going to take to produce results. It will take even longer if these people and their desperation/desire to create change are not utilized effectively, which is exactly why they need to be seen as a potential tool against Congress if/when Sanders becomes president. Political groups can translate into political muscle/enforcers. In the case of Sanders' supporters, imagine an Americanized/democratic interpretation of the historical Sturmabteilung in Germany during the Weimar Republic, if you will (minus the SA's right-wing fanaticism, of course; again, think Americanized/democratic here). The more people you mobilize to your cause, the more power you have: the power to win elections, and the power to force/strongly encourage your opponents to comply with your side's will. Mobilize as many people as you can, organize and teach them to function as a cohesive group, and use them to do whatever work is necessary to achieve your goals. That's the principle here. Don't be stupid and waste their support; use it for everything it's worth.[/QUOTE] As much as I would like to see this happen, I can't help but think it will end up exactly like the Occupy Movement did. Create a temporary talking point until the media no longer needs them. After that, they will be vilified by politicians, pundits, media personalities, and since people are stupid and compliant they'll buy every word of it. Feel free to call me out if I turn out to be wrong.
[QUOTE=Flameon;48930739]What do you think their stake is?[/QUOTE] "At least she's not Bernie"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.