Let’s say Sanders wins the nomination. I have heard that Republican groups have ads ready to go branding Sanders with the hammer and sickle logo. What would be his best response? My first inclination is for Bernie to give a detailed analysis of his interpretation of “Democratic Socialist” and why the American public should not be alarmed. Then I think, no way. The American public won’t listen to a “detailed analysis”, they want a sound bite.
How would he best answer?
Only one answer, only one thing trumps hammer and sickle: he has to go swastika.
There’s got to be some way to get the h&s and swastika respectively printed next to Bernie’s and Donald’s names on the ballot! Even if it takes an emergency session of Congress!
Embrace it.
Don’t reject it; embrace it. Make an ad showing Sanders clobbering an effigy of Trump using agricultural tools.
It would go great with his rhetoric. Not too far off the mark…
“Let us wage a moral and political war against the Jews, on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”
“What kind of nation are we when we give tax breaks to Jews, but we can’t take care of the elderly and the children.”
“How do we say, why do you keep voting for people who are giving more tax breaks to Jews, who are going to send your jobs abroad, not going to let you form a union, not going to allow your kids to go to college? Why do you keep voting for these guys?”
“The votes elected officials make should be based on the best interests of the American people, not the fear of retribution when shadowy groups spend millions of dollars on negative advertisements.”
“The Jews are apparently leaving America. They’re giving up their citizenship. These great lovers of America who made their money in this country-when you ask them to pay their fair share of taxes they run abroad.”
“The Jews pay an effective tax rate lower than nurses or truck drivers. That makes no sense at all. There has to be real tax reform, and the Jews will pay.”
“The point is change can come about, but it only comes about when millions of people are actively involved in political struggle, the Jews may have the money, but we have the people.”
“To be honest with you, I worry about Jewish ownership in media, where you have a handful of Jews largely controlling what we see, hear and read.”
“Jews have enormous power over the Republican Party, enormous power over the Democratic Party.”
“What Jews are doing is really not much different from what gangsters and loan sharks do who make predatory loans. While the Jews wear three-piece suits and don’t break the knee caps of those who can’t pay back, they still are destroying people’s lives.”
I haven’t noticed his racist rhetoric. A self hating Jew, you say?
He may have dressed the arguments up a bit to keep scapegoat fresh and fashionable.
Or maybe you just so easily substituted “jews” for “money & banks” for a more obvious reason.
So those statements are acceptable when directed against the wealthy, but not against Jews?
Yes.
Talk about all the popular programs that were deemed communist when they first came out and talk about how conservatives were wrong to oppose those programs then and are wrong to oppose programs now.
Medicare, medicaid, minimum wage, social security, child labor laws, etc.
Progressives have no view of history.
He honeymooned in the Soviet Union. He’s not “Democratic socialist” except to the extent that he needs to be to get elected. He also seemed to be a fan of Castro and the Sandinistas in the 80s.
Now I don’t believe he’s a communist, but his rather typical leftist cluelessness about horrible dictatorships when he was relatively younger is always useful fodder if you can get it.
You seem confused, so he’s not a democratic socialist and he’s not a communist, then what is he? And Reagan’s support for horrible right wing anti-communist dictatorships didn’t seem to hurt his popularity much, oops, sorry that was when he was in office, not when he was young and foolish.
It is my great displeasure to inform you that you haven’t the slightest clue what you’re talking about. Sanders is himself a Jew.
Please, do try to keep up, I know these facts do tend to change on a day by day basis.
A social democrat. Something rather bland and middle-of-the-road by international standards.
Obviously he’s trying to discredit Sanders as a candidate. I mean a person who would target an entire religion is clearly unfit to be President.
Reagan’s support for right-wing dictatorships was based on national interest, support of allies. There was never a US interest in supporting our adversaries. “Well, you supported Pinochet and Marcos and Chung Hee Park!” just doesn’t work as a comeback to supporting the Soviets and Castro.
In reality, he’s not really that either. He’s a weird American version of a social democrat where the rich are expected to somehow pay for free stuff for everyone else. There’s no social solidarity, the middle class is supposed to somehow get a free ride in all of this and is absolved of any responsibility whatsoever for lifting up the poor.
The middle class being broadly responsible for reducing wealth inequality is a key feature of European social democracy. Leaving that out makes it a totally different animal.
So let’s just call him a left wing populist.
Selling arms to a country that only a few years earlier had taken over our embassy and held our citizens hostage for over a year doesn’t qualify as “supporting our adversaries”?? :smack: