Now Bernheads are screaming obscenities at children. But we on the Hillary side are the meanies. Okay then.
Slacker … what are you trying to accomplish at this point?
Yes, some of Sanders’ supporters are way way out of bounds. Most however understand that Clinton is going to be the nominee with some interested in trying to “force” her to move as far to their desired positions as possible. Hence they want him to continue and do whatever it takes to get the most power at the convention he can have. Of course I personally think that the need for a while now has been to work toward unification, circling the wagons, and preparing for the general election battle, and that it is regrettable that Sanders is forcing her to use up resources that could be used in the general. I think it will end up giving him less influence not more. But beating up on the broad group of Sander supporters by pointing out the craziness and ugliness of a few and calling the whole group names is supposed to accomplish what?
I don’t see my posts as needing to have a specific aim as far as trying to “accomplish” anything except for expressing what I think or feel about something. But what names did I call Bernie’s supporters? If you mean “Bernheads”, that is a positive nickname they gave themselves.
Not all of Bernie fans are unreasonable, (and I don’t think Bernie is unreasonable either). Some of his supporters are assholes, but a lot of them are young. At least he’s getting the kids engaged.
Hillary supporters I’ve met, (other than posters here who are name calling), seem perfectly reasonable to me.
My parents PROSPERED through Bill’s presidency. They actually voted for Bernie, however they were sold on, and excited for, Hillary before they got to know Sanders. Most of their friends voted for Hillary, and as far as I know, they all still like each other.
I don’t think Hillary would make a bad president, though I am worried about Iraq and Syria. I just don’t think she has the same integrity as Sanders. Sanders, for the most part, seemed to have been on the right side of history since he was young. We grew into a country that made him a formidable opponent. I just respect that.
I believe that Sanders made Hillary a better candidate.
Praising repressive, violent regimes is being ‘on the right side of history?’
I said “for the most part” because, you know what? He’s not perfect.
[shrug] Both major parties were guilty of that throughout the Cold War.
Do you actually think that a living wage is incompatible with socialized medicine?
Anyway, Walmart is getting away with abusively low pay because we have Medicaid for some. Companies that don’t pay their workers like crap are expected to pay quite a bit more, because their employees don’t qualify for Medicaid.
Sanders is right that we should have something like Medicaid for all. He is also right to point out that Walmart is getting away with something employers that play by the existing rules of the social contract don’t and can’t.
More childish antics from the Bernie Bros. If Bernie had any morals and was a team player, he’d strongly denounce these tactics, rather than using weasel words. Maybe he’s too busy helping his wife find their tax returns.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/security-concerns-end-nevada-democrats-convention-39134128
Is that the incident that I’ve seen some Sanders supporters characterizing as an attempt to suppress their votes?
Burlington College to close. Jane Sanders has shown herself to be just as despicable and corrupt as Bernie is.
From the article:
…While Sanders has inspired millions of young supporters with his promise to eliminate college debt, his wife’s decision to hike tuition in order to pay for a costly campus expansion—a big factor in the rise of college tuition throughout the country—casts Bernie’s hopeful policy proposals in a more complicated light…
I’m sure there is a lot of interesting data in the Sanders tax returns related to Burlington College.
Also,
…Jane has also profited off Bernie’s campaigns: She received $91,020 between 2002 and 2004 for “consultation” and to negotiate the purchase of television and radio time-slots for Sanders’ advertisements, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported in 2006…
If Sanders wins the two contests today, then I think it’s time for Clinton surrogates to attack Bernie. The Bernie Bros are getting more obnoxious by the day and it’s time to destroy Bernie politically.
Wow.
$91,000 for three years of consulting is outrageous to you? Really?
She should have just given speeches to businesses that helped destroy our economy. The going rate for that is considerably more than that.
Bora Bora is looking better and better.
That’s school closing is a bombshell. However, I’m a little less confident about the Washington Post reporting that ten years ago the Pittsburgh Tribune found out fishy stuff about the Vermont Senator’s wife’s campaign compensation.
If you read the article they say that 60k of that was “pass through” that actually went towards ad purchasing.
A woman with a degree from a diploma mill being paid $91,000 for ‘consulting’ in a tiny state like Vermont where Bernie faced no serious challenges, yes that looks bad. He funneled campaign contributions to his wife.
Smells like a bullshit attack, frankly.
30 grand a year is not a lot, even in Vermont. Especially when 60 grand of it went directly to the purchase of ads.
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Sorry I should have been clearer, you have to actually go to the Pittsburgh Tribune article cited by the WP to get:
From “A socialist in the Senate”, which is clearly a bit of a hit piece as it begins: