Bernie Sanders' popularity making Hillary Clinton campaign 'nervous'
77 replies, posted
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49495879]Man, I gave you a star for the basic premise but... man just switch out Trump with somebody else. Anyone really.
On that note Gary motherfuckin' Johnson has announced that he's seeking the Libertarian nomination.[/QUOTE]
Aint no one else, Trump is legit smart with the economy and speaks his mind, I really like how he will say "I am smart, I am rich" even if that sounds douchey, hes not pussyfooting. I also strongly support his views on military veterans, he seems to really actually care. I know how much he lies, or how much he uses speech in a business manner, but he really gives a fuck about veterans which I think is extremely important. He also has an incredible view on gun laws and the 2nd amendment. Its actually realistic, calling for more help with mental healthcare and changing the USA view on guns, but not trying to control them. Hate Trump all you want, but his view on gun control is like, fucking perfect and logical.
But Trump would be a horrible Commander in Chief(same with Bernie tbh, same with most presidents)
Bernie on the other hand, his economic proposals are full on magic promises. Free college? Free healthcare? okay dude, how about even explaining the basics on how you will do that. How will you make it happen?
That said, Bernie is extremely truthful, hes not as blunt or egotistical as Trump, but he really comes of as genuine. Sounds like his mind is in all the right places, but promises too much. So if we could get Trumps actual sassy attitude, plus Bernie actual good views and honesty, I think we would have the best candidate. You can tell a shill from someone who cares, and the way Bernie will get riled up sometimes shows how much he actually cares and believes in what he says. Thats really good.
I do think Bernie will do good, and at the very least lay groundwork for legitimate progressive social things though.
Where as I think Trump would really do good with the economy and veterans.
Sadly neither are good as a commander in chief, but almost no president is.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496247]Aint no one else, Trump is legit smart with the economy and speaks his mind, I really like how he will say "I am smart, I am rich" even if that sounds douchey, hes not pussyfooting. I also strongly support his views on military veterans, he seems to really actually care. I know how much he lies, or how much he uses speech in a business manner, but he really gives a fuck about veterans which I think is extremely important. He also has an incredible view on gun laws and the 2nd amendment. Its actually realistic, calling for more help with mental healthcare and changing the USA view on guns, but not trying to control them. Hate Trump all you want, but his view on gun control is like, fucking perfect and logical.
But Trump would be a horrible Commander in Chief(same with Bernie tbh, same with most presidents)
Bernie on the other hand, his economic proposals are full on magic promises. Free college? Free healthcare? okay dude, how about even explaining the basics on how you will do that. How will you make it happen?
That said, Bernie is extremely truthful, hes not as blunt or egotistical as Trump, but he really comes of as genuine. Sounds like his mind is in all the right places, but promises too much. So if we could get Trumps actual sassy attitude, plus Bernie actual good views and honesty, I think we would have the best candidate. You can tell a shill from someone who cares, and the way Bernie will get riled up sometimes shows how much he actually cares and believes in what he says. Thats really good.
I do think Bernie will do good, and at the very least lay groundwork for legitimate progressive social things though.
Where as I think Trump would really do good with the economy and veterans.
Sadly neither are good as a commander in chief, but almost no president is.[/QUOTE]
Why would you think that Trump would do well with the economy? He's explained far less about his plans for that than Bernie has.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49496262]Why would you think that Trump would do well with the economy? He's explained far less about his plans for that than Bernie has.[/QUOte]
He's a "businessman." :downs:
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49496262]Why would you think that Trump would do well with the economy? He's explained far less about his plans for that than Bernie has.[/QUOTE]
Mostly because hes a billionaire whos start was getting chump change for NYC real estate. Before someone says "but he claimed bankruptcy!" yeah Chapter 11, meaning he just admits his company is out of money, but agrees to payback those who helped funded it.
He saved a shitload of jobs by claiming bankruptcy, and he got out of bankruptcy and a billionaire.
He does global business deals, he doenst just work in the USA. So yeah, I do think a very successful American businessman could be a very good thing for the econmey. Especially since hes lived that lavish and celebrity lifestyle already. He has his business making all his money and its completely disconnected from politics. Instead of monetary gain because of politics. His money is casino and real estate, not because he passes certain laws.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496405]Mostly because hes a billionaire whos start was getting chump change for NYC real estate. Before someone says "but he claimed bankruptcy!" yeah Chapter 11, meaning he just admits his company is out of money, but agrees to payback those who helped funded it.
He saved a shitload of jobs by claiming bankruptcy, and he got out of bankruptcy and a billionaire.
He does global business deals, he doenst just work in the USA. So yeah, I do think a very successful American businessman could be a very good thing for the econmey. Especially since hes lived that lavish and celebrity lifestyle already. He has his business making all his money and its completely disconnected from politics. Instead of monetary gain because of politics. His money is casino and real estate, not because he passes certain laws.[/QUOTE]
millions of dollars from his rich father is what you consider chump change?
[QUOTE=TheHydra;49496447]millions of dollars from his rich father is what you consider chump change?[/QUOTE]
Yes, when we are talking about New York City real estate. Thats nothing.
:snip:
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496477]Yes, when we are talking about New York City real estate. Thats nothing.[/QUOTE]
That was back in the 70s, when a million dollars WAS a pretty big sum of money.
Let's also not forget that the Trump real-estate fortune has its roots in brothels and gambling. :^)
Tbh despite how much Trump is out of touch with reality and shit talks John McCain and says he isn't a war hero, he is pretty good at business since he turned a one million dollar loan into a multi-million dollar corporation and made himself a household name.
Bernie would pay for his programs through new taxes and tax hikes, when we already have some of the highest in the world. If we mixed Medicare and Medicaid into one fund/program and maybe divert a bit of funding from the military and established something like the United States Postal Service but call it United States Health Services and renovate old abandoned hospitals(or tear down and build new ones if it's too expensive to renovate) as centers for the program and use the US Navy Seabee's to do the job of handling construction(It'd provide training for the new recruits!) we could accomplish a healthcare program funded by the feds and operated by the states. There should be no need for new taxes.
If we took a bit more funding from the military and directed it towards education, reformed our school structure and encouraged skilled craftsmanship and self-employment to adapt to our increasingly artisan/services based economy maybe we could see a decrease in youth unemployment for minorities and people wouldn't have to rely on dead end jobs to survive.
We should put more focus on public libraries as well to encourage communities to come together and for people to go help further their education as well. They aren't there to look pretty, they can serve a very essential purpose in our society. Establish more youth clubs and recreational activities and encourage enrollment so kids aren't smoking cigarettes at 13 years old, doing self-destructive drugs and robbing houses at 18 years old.
Other subjects like paid leave should be paid into by people expecting kids in the near future, if I'm not expecting to have a kid why the hell should I pay into it.
Why do people keep saying he would do good with the economy, he filed for bankruptcy 4 times because because of asinine casino idea he had.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49496525]That was back in the 70s, when a million dollars WAS a pretty big sum of money.
Let's also not forget that the Trump real-estate fortune has its roots in brothels and gambling. :^)[/QUOTE]
Hey, I never said he made his money cleanly. I am very against Casinos and hes make fuckloads from it.
Even in the 70s that wasnt a shitload for NYC real estate, that land and building on it has always been expensive since it was a city.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496584]Hey, I never said he made his money cleanly. I am very against Casinos and hes make fuckloads from it.
Even in the 70s that wasnt a shitload for NYC real estate, that land and building on it has always been expensive since it was a city.[/QUOTE]
It was actually his grandfather that started the whole brothel/casino thing. Another funny thing is he fled Germany to avoid taxes and military service. :v:
A lot of people say Trump is a great business man, but I've also seen a few people who claim that not only did he simply inherit his fortune and business empire from his daddy and grandpa, but that this wealth and power was actually worth far more (adjusted for inflation) back before he got control of it and ran it into the ground. Which, he's still a very rich man obviously, so "ran it into the ground" is relative, but yeah, I've seen people claim that his fortune would have been worth far more had he never touched it and fucked it up.
Is there any truth to this?
[QUOTE=J Paul;49496725]A lot of people say Trump is a great business man, but I've also seen a few people who claim that not only did he simply inherit his fortune and business empire from his daddy and grandpa, but that this wealth and power was actually worth far more (adjusted for inflation) back before he got control of it and ran it into the ground. Which, he's still a very rich man obviously, so "ran it into the ground" is relative, but yeah, I've seen people claim that his fortune would have been worth far more had he never touched it and fucked it up.
Is there any truth to this?[/QUOTE]
I mean if he just let it sit, it may have appreciated in terms of pure interest but I doubt it would have been as much.
I don't think Trump is qualified to run the country at all, but underestimating him and his intelligence is foolish. He's a demagogue, and demagogue's are never dumb- they just have a different kind of intelligence. There was a video posted recently of the way his sentences are structured. He speaks like a salesman, and sells himself and his ideology to people. He exploits the fears and worries of Americans and uses them to leverage political power by stirring up more fervor with emotional claims and hyperbolic statements, then claims he's going to perform various things once he's sold himself and the necessity of his actions.
Trump has an interesting political stance with a few mixed-in bits of intense progressivism- like the whole bit about wanting to decriminalize drugs and then tax the revenue from them. But other claims are just completely fucking pants-on-head retarded. He's officially said he wants to build a wall across the mexican border and then get mexico to pay for it, and seems to imply that he [I]WILL[/I] force Mexico to pay for it (lolwut). He did say he wants to (temporarily) ban all Muslims from entering the US, which is another retarded claim and believes that the US should dickpunch the shit out of ISIS and then steal their oil somehow (once ISIS faces large scale attack, I imagine they'll become more of a guerilla force and then we have iraq 2.0 electric boogaloo).
It's pretty easy to understand why he's able to capture the attention of so many americans, since he speaks emotionally and passionately. But he doesn't even have any true political experience and would be like a bull in a china shop, trying to shout and punch his way through international politics and domestic affairs. It just wouldn't work, and I haven't even gone into his whole economic issues in taking care of his casinos (casinos are p. much money printers how the fuck did you do this trump). Sanders shares some traits in that he speaks emotionally, but he's different in some fundamental ways. Less asinine, for one. But he also has political experience and has shown a strict adherence to his core idealogy and values- while still changing his stance and being driven to understand better. Like the whole BLM thing, and his visits to cities with large amounts of black voters so he can attempt to learn to understand and relate to that voting base better. Sanders seems more human and approchable than most senators, and is a man not entirely of the system (which trump also sorta is), but is still sensible and qualified enough to do the job.
I don't agree with every single one of his policies, but the broad strokes of who he is and how he presents himself have given me the confidence to vouch for him and then vote for him when the time comes. I think he'll do it, I really do.
this was typed on a fuckload of caffeine and my first dose of adderall in like a month so yeah it probably doesn't make sense and has tons of errors but idgaf
[QUOTE=J Paul;49496725]A lot of people say Trump is a great business man, but I've also seen a few people who claim that not only did he simply inherit his fortune and business empire from his daddy and grandpa, but that this wealth and power was actually worth far more (adjusted for inflation) back before he got control of it and ran it into the ground. Which, he's still a very rich man obviously, so "ran it into the ground" is relative, but yeah, I've seen people claim that his fortune would have been worth far more had he never touched it and fucked it up.
Is there any truth to this?[/QUOTE]
I think yes, there is truth that if Trump did nothing with his money and put it a bank correctly he would be much richer today.
[editline]9th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=paindoc;49496803]I mean if he just let it sit, it may have appreciated in terms of pure interest but I doubt it would have been as much.
I don't think Trump is qualified to run the country at all, but underestimating him and his intelligence is foolish. He's a demagogue, and demagogue's are never dumb- they just have a different kind of intelligence. There was a video posted recently of the way his sentences are structured. He speaks like a salesman, and sells himself and his ideology to people. He exploits the fears and worries of Americans and uses them to leverage political power by stirring up more fervor with emotional claims and hyperbolic statements, then claims he's going to perform various things once he's sold himself and the necessity of his actions.
Trump has an interesting political stance with a few mixed-in bits of intense progressivism- like the whole bit about wanting to decriminalize drugs and then tax the revenue from them. But other claims are just completely fucking pants-on-head retarded. He's officially said he wants to build a wall across the mexican border and then get mexico to pay for it, and seems to imply that he [I]WILL[/I] force Mexico to pay for it (lolwut). He did say he wants to (temporarily) ban all Muslims from entering the US, which is another retarded claim and believes that the US should dickpunch the shit out of ISIS and then steal their oil somehow (once ISIS faces large scale attack, I imagine they'll become more of a guerilla force and then we have iraq 2.0 electric boogaloo).
It's pretty easy to understand why he's able to capture the attention of so many americans, since he speaks emotionally and passionately. But he doesn't even have any true political experience and would be like a bull in a china shop, trying to shout and punch his way through international politics and domestic affairs. It just wouldn't work, and I haven't even gone into his whole economic issues in taking care of his casinos (casinos are p. much money printers how the fuck did you do this trump). Sanders shares some traits in that he speaks emotionally, but he's different in some fundamental ways. Less asinine, for one. But he also has political experience and has shown a strict adherence to his core idealogy and values- while still changing his stance and being driven to understand better. Like the whole BLM thing, and his visits to cities with large amounts of black voters so he can attempt to learn to understand and relate to that voting base better. Sanders seems more human and approchable than most senators, and is a man not entirely of the system (which trump also sorta is), but is still sensible and qualified enough to do the job.
I don't agree with every single one of his policies, but the broad strokes of who he is and how he presents himself have given me the confidence to vouch for him and then vote for him when the time comes. I think he'll do it, I really do.
this was typed on a fuckload of caffeine and my first dose of adderall in like a month so yeah it probably doesn't make sense and has tons of errors but idgaf[/QUOTE]
Him doing the temp ban on Muslims entering is something Obama personally did vs Iraq in 2008 and no one gave a single fuck. I bet most dont even know lol.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496806]Him doing the temp ban on Muslims entering is something Obama personally did vs Iraq in 2008 and no one gave a single fuck. I bet most dont even know lol.[/QUOTE]
Banning people entering from a country is different from banning people entering based on their religion, you've had this pointed out to you multiple times and every time you ignore it.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49496845]Banning people entering from a country is different from banning people entering based on their religion, you've had this pointed out to you multiple times and every time you ignore it.[/QUOTE]
Actually no, this is the first time I am pretty sure I ever posted Obama did that.
Also, Iraq is mostly muslim(actually, its one of the largest Muslim populations on the planet), just because its "Iraq" doesnt change the fact its majority was Muslims lol, and it was SPECIFICALLY the refugee program.
So if you just say "Lets ban anyone entering from Syria/Turkey/Iraq/Iran" thats okay, even though they are some of the largest muslim populations on the planet, with Iraq nearing the absolute top. Thats fine. The second you just say "Muslim" oh boy, you said the wrong thing, even though stopping people coming in from those countries is straight up just stopping muslims lol. If you are gonna lie about me dude you are gonna have to try a lot fucking harder and not be as boringly lazy.
I highly suggest doing a google search on Iraq demographics and with religion. Because its population is 99% Muslim.
But nope, banning Iraq aint banning a religion because we call it Iraq lol, im just some dumb asshole lol. I am curious, why would you try and lie about me? What was the actual thought process?
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496959]Actually no, this is the first time I am pretty sure I ever posted Obama did that.
Also, Iraq is mostly muslim(actually, its one of the largest Muslim populations on the planet), just because its "Iraq" doesnt change the fact its majority was Muslims lol, and it was SPECIFICALLY the refugee program.
So if you just say "Lets ban anyone entering from Syria/Turkey/Iraq/Iran" thats okay, even though they are some of the largest muslim populations on the planet, with Iraq nearing the absolute top. Thats fine. The second you just say "Muslim" oh boy, you said the wrong thing, even though stopping people coming in from those countries is straight up just stopping muslims lol. If you are gonna lie about me dude you are gonna have to try a lot fucking harder and not be as boringly lazy.[/QUOTE]
My bad, I've seen the "countries ban people based on location all of the time" brought up a ton and I figured it must have been you at least some of the time.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49497050]My bad, I've seen the "countries ban people based on location all of the time" brought up a ton and I figured it must have been you at least some of the time.[/QUOTE]
Nope, im not for banning people due to location, but its naive to think sometimes it couldnt be for the better. Were just human, we cant save everyone all the time everyday and pretending we can never works. Sometimes the world is fucked and biding time and thinking things through can be way more beneficial than kneejerk reactions just trying to help everyone.
Like I am glad nearly every state like the very same day Obama proposed like 50,000 refugees all said "Absolutely not" because its just not realistic to control. That has already proven itself in the EU sadly. But I am for accepting Muslim refugees, but I want it done smart and slower, not like 50,000 just dropped off to look progressive, because ALL THE PEOPLE DECIDING THIS NEVER ACTUALLY DEAL WITH REFUGEES.
Also a lot of people shit on Trump for proposing this, while our current President did the exact same thing and no one even batted an eye, and most dont even know.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49496806]I think yes, there is truth that if Trump did nothing with his money and put it a bank correctly he would be much richer today.
[editline]9th January 2016[/editline]
Him doing the temp ban on Muslims entering is something Obama personally did vs Iraq in 2008 and no one gave a single fuck. I bet most dont even know lol.[/QUOTE]
Jimmy Carter gathered all the Iranian students and deported them and did a ban on Iranian immigration. In fact banning chinese immigrants was one of the first instances of structured legal immigration iirc.
Putting a immigration ban on a ethnic group to protect national security is nothing new. There is legitimate fear to be had after looking at Europe and the New Years Eve assaults by migrants, but we should try to be above it and encourage people to engage the migrants coming into their communities, befriend them and make them our brothers and sisters.
Doing so could at least show that the propaganda any potential ISIS fighter infiltrating our country has been fed is at least somewhat a lie, and if they do decide to try and attack us at home they'll be met with citizens packing enough firepower to put the army to shame.
Liberals are wrong for wanting massive gun restrictions or outright bans and conservatives are wrong for entire ban of a ethnic group. We shouldn't be afraid to be compassionate, but we should also never be afraid to protect our country from those who threaten it and our liberty.
[video=youtube;JvSiH1eAF3s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvSiH1eAF3s[/video]
i guess SNL was pretty spot on then if her campaign is worried
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49497122]Jimmy Carter gathered all the Iranian students and deported them and did a ban on Iranian immigration. In fact banning chinese immigrants was one of the first instances of structured legal immigration iirc.
Putting a immigration ban on a ethnic group to protect national security is nothing new. There is legitimate fear to be had after looking at Europe and the New Years Eve assaults by migrants, but we should try to be above it and encourage people to engage the migrants coming into their communities, befriend them and make them our brothers and sisters.
Doing so could at least show that the propaganda any potential ISIS fighter infiltrating our country has been fed is at least somewhat a lie, and if they do decide to try and attack us at home they'll be met with citizens packing enough firepower to put the army to shame.
Liberals are wrong for wanting massive gun restrictions or outright bans and conservatives are wrong for entire ban of a ethnic group. We shouldn't be afraid to be compassionate, but we should also never be afraid to protect our country from those who threaten it and our liberty.[/QUOTE]
I am very for migrants, I just want it done right and not allow like 50,000 in all at once, because its been proven to be retarded.
We should be helping Muslim refugees because think about it, THEY HAVE NO MEANS TO PROTEST IN THERE COUNTRIES. Its sadly a lost cause, you just cannot fight the type of enemy they have over there by being peaceful. You can only kill them and wipe them out, which is really fucked because of how widespread the issues are.
How the hell can you stand against an opposition hi-jacking your religion who are literally willing to blow themselves up just to kill you. They would shoot you and your family in a second. They have no option but to flee over there right now. But when you let in absurd amounts all at once, a lot of those asshole hijackers will come. You cant realistically screen people letting in that amount.
We wouldnt even be having these constant refugee talks on this forum if it was just done slower and more realistically.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49497155]I am very for migrants, I just want it done right and not allow like 50,000 in all at once, because its been proven to be retarded.
We should be helping Muslim refugees because think about it, THEY HAVE NO MEANS TO PROTEST IN THERE COUNTRIES. Its sadly a lost cause, you just cannot fight the type of enemy they have over there by being peaceful. You can only kill them and wipe them out, which is really fucked because of how widespread the issues are.
How the hell can you stand against an opposition hi-jacking your religion who are literally willing to blow themselves up just to kill you. They would shoot you and your family in a second. They have no option but to flee over there right now. But when you let in absurd amounts all at once, a lot of those asshole hijackers will come. You cant realistically screen people letting in that amount.
We wouldnt even be having these constant refugee talks on this forum if it was just done slower and more realistically.[/QUOTE]
ISIS wouldn't be a thing if we weren't pussyfooting around the issue of giving aid to the FSA back during the start of all this. Our indecisiveness caused the FSA to fracture and give ISIS support.
Of course, that could've created a different set of problems. We should've got involved when entire town populations where being exterminated by Assad.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49494397][video=youtube;4uQutU7FzcQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uQutU7FzcQ[/video]
The flip flopping is also ridiculous. Suddenly she's the most progressive person ever, caring about gay rights when she previously did not, etc.[/QUOTE]
god she uses some guilt tripping shit
"i represented NY on 9/11"
"most of my donors are women"
I'm friends with what you lot would call tumblr tier feminist, they do not support Hilary at all, they think she's a fucking idiot. There's going to be more opportunity to vote the first female president into the white house (Elizabeth Warren) but for now America's only best hope is Sanders
[t]http://i.imgur.com/IcHiwMP.png[/t]
An infographic on how Sanders will pay for his programs
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;49498979][t]http://i.imgur.com/IcHiwMP.png[/t]
An infographic on how Sanders will pay for his programs[/QUOTE]
The tragedy of good politicians. They enact good policy that will benefit the nation in the long term allowing shitty politicians to take credit for their work.
Of course they're too good to be concerned about that.
[QUOTE=J Paul;49496725]A lot of people say Trump is a great business man, but I've also seen a few people who claim that not only did he simply inherit his fortune and business empire from his daddy and grandpa, but that this wealth and power was actually worth far more (adjusted for inflation) back before he got control of it and ran it into the ground. Which, he's still a very rich man obviously, so "ran it into the ground" is relative, but yeah, I've seen people claim that his fortune would have been worth far more had he never touched it and fucked it up.
Is there any truth to this?[/QUOTE]
According to 2 banks who assessed Trump's value before lending him money, Trump is worth somewhere between $788 Million and $1.2 Billion
And of course Trump may have started with "only" $1 Million, be in 1971 he inherited control of a $200 Million business empire from his father. Adjusted for inflation, that's $1.18 Billion, so apparently he hasn't really made anything (and may well be worth less than what he started with).
Which is fairly remarkable, seeing as simply investing that $200 Million in an index fund would have given him $3 Billion today. Not to mention that many legitimately successful businessmen have turned smaller starting amounts into far larger sums over a similar time period.
Sanders campaign is behind and says some bullshit about someone ELSE being nervous
yeah ok
the only thing that would make them nervous is if sanders actually ran independent
but we don't want a repeat of 2000 do we
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;49499584]Sanders campaign is behind and says some bullshit about someone ELSE being nervous
yeah ok
the only thing that would make them nervous is if sanders actually ran independent
but we don't want a repeat of 2000 do we[/QUOTE]
Sanders is 13 points ahead in New Hampshire, and Iowa hasn't been polled in a month for the Dems.
There's a reason why the Clinton Camp has been getting feisty with rhetoric. Internal polling for them probably shows Iowa getting close.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;49499584]Sanders campaign is behind and says some bullshit about someone ELSE being nervous
yeah ok
the only thing that would make them nervous is if sanders actually ran independent
but we don't want a repeat of 2000 do we[/QUOTE]
You do realize that it's only the last couple months where the biggest shifts happen right? All the best political ammunition is saved for the end when it has the most impact, and quite frankly Hillary has too much bullshit in her past for her campaign to survive widespread scrutiny.
I think Sanders getting the nomination is way more likely than people give him credit for.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.