Democrat Tracker (1 Viewer)

[SaintForLife]

This isnt deserving of it's own thread, but we dont have a thread for general Democrat subjects.

I almost thought this was a joke:

 

[brandon]

I guess I appreciate your support for lowering the costs of healthcare, education, and housing?

 

[bird]

This isnt deserving of it's own thread, but we dont have a thread for general Democrat subjects.

I almost thought this was a joke:

Why would you think it was a joke?

 

[LA - L.A.]

This is meaningless information without knowing the full text of what was being voted on.

Surely, you know that people stick unrelated amendments into every bit of legislation that gets voted on. You do know that, right?

It's possible and likely that Sanders voted no on the audit legislation, because somebody attached a non-starter amendment to it.

Did you take the time to find and read the full text of what Sanders voted "no" on? Or did you just rush here as fast as you could to repost the tweet here without bothering to learn anything for yourself?

 

[SaintForLife]

This is meaningless information without knowing the full text of what was being voted on.

Surely, you know that people stick unrelated amendments into every bit of legislation that gets voted on. You do know that, right?

It's possible and likely that Sanders voted no on the audit legislation, because somebody attached a non-starter amendment to it.

Did you take the time to find and read the full text of what Sanders voted "no" on? Or did you just rush here as fast as you could to repost the tweet here without bothering to learn anything for yourself?

Before you typed all that you could have easily checked the ammendment yourself.

https://www.congress.gov/amendment/118th-congress/senate-amendment/1055/text?s=a&r=17

There's nothing like you are talking about.



What's your excuse now?

 

[LA - L.A.]

Before you typed all that you could have easily checked the ammendment yourself.

https://www.congress.gov/amendment/118th-congress/senate-amendment/1055/text?s=a&r=17

There's nothing like you are talking about.



What's your excuse now?

What's your excuse for constantly misrepresenting things?

See if you can follow what is actually going on here and why Saunders voted the way he did.

1. The Ukrainian Inspector General oversight provision was an amendment to: S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024. It was not a separate piece of legislation like you and your sources falsely implied that it was.
2. Sanders has made it clear that he is going to vote no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 as it currently is.
3. Why would Sanders vote yes on an amendment to S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 when he's going to vote no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024? It would be dumb to vote yes on any amenments to a bill you're ultimately going to vote no on. It's a no brainer that anyone should be able to understand.

Anyone who is honest and open minded can read Saunders explanation of why he's voting no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 here:

Sanders opposes 'bloated' Pentagon budget | Vermont Business Magazine

vermontbiz.com

These are the summary of Sander's reasons he's voting against S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024. He goes into greater detail on each point in the article.

First, more military spending is unnecessary. The United States remains the world’s dominant military power and is in no danger of losing that position.

Second, the Pentagon cannot keep track of the dollars it already has, leading to massive waste, fraud, and abuse in the sprawling military industrial complex.

Sanders second reason above shows that he does want accountability from the Pentagon all across the board, not just with Ukraine.​

Third, much of this additional military spending will go to line the pockets of hugely profitable defense contractors—it is corporate welfare by a different name.

You can watch his entire speech on the Senate floor here.


Sanders is very much in favor of making the Pentagon account for everything, not the false opposite that @SaintForLife and his sources are trying to trick people into believing.

What kind of horrible person lies about what another person is actually in favor of and against?

 

[SaintForLife]

What's your excuse for constantly misrepresenting things?

See if you can follow what is actually going on here and why Saunders voted the way he did.

1. The Ukrainian Inspector General oversight provision was an amendment to: S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024. It was not a separate piece of legislation like you and your sources falsely implied that it was.
2. Sanders has made it clear that he is going to vote no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 as it currently is.
3. Why would Sanders vote yes on an amendment to S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 when he's going to vote no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024? It would be dumb to vote yes on any amenments to a bill you're ultimately going to vote no on. It's a no brainer that anyone should be able to understand.

Anyone who is honest and open minded can read Saunders explanation of why he's voting no on S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 here:

Sanders opposes 'bloated' Pentagon budget | Vermont Business Magazine

vermontbiz.com

These are the summary of Sander's reasons he's voting against S.2226 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024. He goes into greater detail on each point in the article.

Sanders second reason above shows that he does want accountability from the Pentagon all across the board, not just with Ukraine.​

You can watch his entire speech on the Senate floor here.


Sanders is very much in favor of making the Pentagon account for everything, not the false opposite that @SaintForLife and his sources are trying to trick people into believing.

What kind of horrible person lies about what another person is actually in favor of and against?

The defense bill that Sanders said he will vote against that will definitely be approved. His reasoning basically spells out the need for an inspector general

First, more military spending is unnecessary. The United States remains the world’s dominant military power and is in no danger of losing that position.

Second, the Pentagon cannot keep track of the dollars it already has, leading to massive waste, fraud, and abuse in the sprawling military industrial complex.

Third, much of this additional military spending will go to line the pockets of hugely profitable defense contractors—it is corporate welfare by a different name.

He knows the bill will definitely pass yet he voted against an inspector general that would address the exact reasons why he will vote against it. Lol.

Did you even realize that you posted Bernie contradicting himself?

The defense bill will definitely pass so why wouldn't he vote for an inspector general that would address his reasoning for voting against the bill. It's comical.

Why did every Democrat except for two vote against making sure that the Ukraine money is properly spent?

 

[LA - L.A.]

The defense bill that Sanders said he will vote against that will definitely be approved. His reasoning basically spells out the need for an inspector general

But he's not going to vote in approval of it. He's only responsible for his vote, not the vote of others. He's not obligated to vote in favor of anything just because "it's going to pass."

Did you even realize that you posted Bernie contradicting himself?

He didn't contradict himself. He wants full accountability all across the Pentagon, not just parital measures with Ukrainian accountability. He's tired of casting his vote in favor of half-measures.

You can disagree with him on whether or not he should vote for it because it will pass, but his not voting for any of it is consistent with what he is saying.

The defense bill will definitely pass so why wouldn't he vote for an inspector general that would address his reasoning for voting against the bill. It's comical.

What's tragic is your seemingly complete inability or unwillingness to understand what someone has actually said.

Sanders very clearly said his reasoning is that he wants complete Pentagon accountability and will not vote for anything less than that complete accountability. A provision for accountability just over Ukraine is less than complete Pentagon accountability, so Sanders is doing exactly what he says by not voting for the bill.

Sanders never said he just wants accountability for Ukraine. If Sanders had said he just wants accountability for Ukraine, then and only then, would what he's saying not be consistent with how he's voting. You keep falsely trying to imply that Sanders is voting against what he actually said he wants.

Why did every Democrat except for two vote against making sure that the Ukraine money is properly spent?

You'd have to do some research to find out their reasons. Did you bother doing any research to find out why each one of them voted the way they did?

I doubt that you did, because truly informing yourself before speaking is not what you normally do. You just make false accusations no matter how unfounded or poorly founded that they are.

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[LA - L.A.]

What are the facts of the case and what reason did the DA give for dropping the charges?

 

[bird]

The defense bill that Sanders said he will vote against that will definitely be approved. His reasoning basically spells out the need for an inspector general




He knows the bill will definitely pass yet he voted against an inspector general that would address the exact reasons why he will vote against it. Lol.

Did you even realize that you posted Bernie contradicting himself?

The defense bill will definitely pass so why wouldn't he vote for an inspector general that would address his reasoning for voting against the bill. It's comical.

Why did every Democrat except for two vote against making sure that the Ukraine money is properly spent?

Do we not have auditors already? Why a special inspector general For Ukraine? Why, because conservative azzhats love Putin and hate Ukraine.

 

[SaintForLife]

Do we not have auditors already? Why a special inspector general For Ukraine? Why, because conservative azzhats love Putin and hate Ukraine.

Yeah only conservative azzhats would want to ensure that they money is going to the right places and it's being used in the right way.

 

[bird]

Yeah only conservative azzhats would want to ensure that they money is going to the right places and it's being used in the right way.

Failure again. How much did conservative azzhats bleat about money blown in Iraq and Afghanistan? This was not, is not and never will be about money “going to the right places and it being used in the right way.” This is about conservative azzhats wanting to embarrass Biden and paying obeisance to Putin.

Have the intellectual honesty to admit it. Beyond that if Trump or somer other conservative azzhat had been at the beginning of this war of aggression by Putin and wanted to send money and materiel to Ukraine we would not have heard one peep from you or any other conservative azzhat.

 

[SaintForLife]

Cut off from the Tweet:

Only 31% strongly agree with the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'

Does the left think the 1st ammendment is optional? Who are the authoritarians again?

 

[bird]

Cut off from the Tweet:

Only 31% strongly agree with the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'

Does the left think the 1st ammendment is optional? Who are the authoritarians again?

Ask Jefferson.

 

[MT15]

Cut off from the Tweet:

Only 31% strongly agree with the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'

Does the left think the 1st ammendment is optional? Who are the authoritarians again?

The people trying to ban books, taking away freedoms from women, trying to erase history they don’t like, and punishing corporations who say things they don’t like are the authoritarians in this country. It isn’t a close call.

 

[SaintForLife]

The people trying to ban books, taking away freedoms from women, trying to erase history they don’t like, and punishing corporations who say things they don’t like are the authoritarians in this country. It isn’t a close call.

Do you agree or disagree with these?

47% of Dems say free speech should be legal 'only under certain circumstances.

34% of Dems say Americans 'have too much freedom'

75% of Dems say government has a responsibility to censor 'hateful' social media posts

Only 31% strongly agree with the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'

IMO it's very disturbing poll results.

 

[MT15]

Do you agree or disagree with these?

47% of Dems say free speech should be legal 'only under certain circumstances.

34% of Dems say Americans 'have too much freedom'

75% of Dems say government has a responsibility to censor 'hateful' social media posts

Only 31% strongly agree with the statement, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'

IMO it's very disturbing poll results.

I haven’t seen the poll, do you have a clean link to the actual questions and responses? You can get any sort of poll result you want by wording and context clues in the questions as well as how you pick the respondents.

 

[MT15]

I read one paragraph of the article about the poll. I saw this:

“Overall, 9 in 10 voters in the U.S. think First Amendment protections for freedom of speech is a good thing, while only 9% think it is a bad thing,” said pollster Spencer Kimball, who directed the RCP survey. “This is agreed upon across the demographics, like party affiliation, age, and race.”

This suggests to me that your concern is misplaced.