The Bernie Sanders Is Probably [Now Not] Going To Be The Nominee Thread (1 Viewer)

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

We have a running thread about the 2020 Democratic race at large, but 538 is now showing that Bernie Sanders has a nearly 50% chance of carrying a majority of delegates into the Democratic National Convention (with the current runner up being "no one has a majority" at close to 40%). At some point in the near future--maybe as soon as Super Tuesday next week when he wins California--it will be time to acknowledge that Sanders is the probable nominee and there is nothing Biden or Bloomberg or anyone else in the race now can do to stop it. So, what happens then?

I know that the Trump voters will say he's crazy and use that as their excuse for voting for Trump (who they were voting for anyway under any circumstance, let's all be clear and honest about that). But how does everyone else feel about it?

 

[samiam5211]

"I'm afraid that someone will make things up that are easily proven to be untrue" is a gutsy argument for a Trump supporter to use.

But you can understand why they would expect people to do that. We all make the mistake of assuming other people are more like us than they really are about certain things.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Maybe. But if I was Trump I would be 100% convinced that even if there was nothing untoward in those returns my opponents (including the overwhelming majority of the media) would spin anything they could against me.

Remember Rachel Maddow's show where she was so giddy that she had tax info to share and it ended up being a nothingburger?

Well, yes, that's what opponents do, try to spin things against you. That's exactly what Trump did, and what every opponent has done ever.

Obviously, he didn't need to show his taxes, and people can choose if they want to trust him, but I find it really weird that people who supposedly couldn't stand Clinton because of all the corruption would vote for someone who could not verify a number of aspects of his finances.

 

[Beach Friends]

"I'm afraid that someone will make things up that are easily proven to be untrue" is a gutsy argument for a Trump supporter to use

Well, yes, that's what opponents do, try to spin things against you. That's exactly what Trump did, and what every opponent has done ever.

Obviously, he didn't need to show his taxes, and people can choose if they want to trust him, but I find it really weird that people who supposedly couldn't stand Clinton because of all the corruption would vote for someone who could not verify a number of aspects of his finances.

And I can't believe someone would vote for a socialist or a man who is apparently suffering from dementia.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

And I can't believe someone would vote for a socialist or a man who is apparently suffering from dementia.

It's a crazy world. People voted for Trump so can you really be surprised by anything at this point?

 

[Beach Friends]

It's a crazy world. People voted for Trump so can you really be surprised by anything at this point?

Not really. It's hard to believe that out of a country of over 300 million our choices look like they do.

Hell, I have seen it all levels from City Council on up.

Idiots you would not hire for night shift manager get elected when you think there is no possible way.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Not really. It's hard to believe that out of a country of over 300 million our choices look like they do.

Hell, I have seen it all levels from City Council on up.

Idiots you would not hire for night shift manager get elected when you think there is no possible way.

Extremism gets rewarded so that's what we get. It's the free market at work.

 

[dtc]

Maybe. But if I was Trump I would be 100% convinced that even if there was nothing untoward in those returns my opponents (including the overwhelming majority of the media) would spin anything they could against me.

Remember Rachel Maddow's show where she was so giddy that she had tax info to share and it ended up being a nothingburger?

I think that POTUS ought to adhere to at least the highest standard of conduct and that any refusal to stand up to the standard of previous presidents of either party is an assault on the dignity of the office of the president.

I see no redeeming moral feature of Trump and his refusal to live up to the standards his predecessors have observed as a matter of course tells us that he is unable to do so.

There are posts on this forum about Hillary's emails being on a private server and there are posts like yours which excuse Trump from adhering to any standard. There's a conflict there, but it's hard to see for those who believe Mexico is paying for a wall that hasn't been built.

 

[Beach Friends]

I think that POTUS ought to adhere to at least the highest standard of conduct and that any refusal to stand up to the standard of previous presidents of either party is an assault on the dignity of the office of the president.

I see no redeeming moral feature of Trump and his refusal to live up to the standards his predecessors have observed as a matter of course tells us that he is unable to do so.

There are posts on this forum about Hillary's emails being on a private server and there are posts like yours which excuse Trump from adhering to any standard. There's a conflict there, but it's hard to see for those who believe Mexico is paying for a wall that hasn't been built.

BTW, did you know a federal judge just ruled that she is going to have to testify by deposition on issues surrounding surrounding her secret little email system? I think that came down today.

Let the good times roll.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

And I can't believe someone would vote for a socialist or a man who is apparently suffering from dementia.

Slippery slope yesterday, whataboutism today. Any other fallacious arguments you want to make?

 

[The moose]

BTW, did you know a federal judge just ruled that she is going to have to testify by deposition on issues surrounding surrounding her secret little email system? I think that came down today.

Let the good times roll.

Yep this will be how many times? How many hours testifying?

Yet the trumpster can't do it once because he would do time because he is allergic to the truth.

 

[not2rich]

And I can't believe someone would vote for a socialist or a man who is apparently suffering from dementia.

Box #3 is Trump, so a socialist or demented person - as bad as those choices may seem in isolation - can seem comparatively not so bad. So, if a socialist or demented person wins - good job, Republicans!

 

[Beach Friends]

Y

Slippery slope yesterday, whataboutism today. Any other fallacious arguments you want to make?

Yeah, before you pay yourself on the back about the slippery slope call out you should review Bernie's policies. I was going off of what he says he intends to do.

And what I think is a fallacy is believing that a Marxist is going to stop going to the left when the country has said we have had enough "revolution."

It's all for naught anyway, the DNC itself knows that Bernie's policies are suicidal. They will stop him, and then we'll see if Bernie's revolution takes the violent path his mentally and physically weak radical followers keep promising. I hope the good folks of Milwaukee pay their property insurance premiums. [Mod Edit-unnecessary]

 

[wardorican]

Not really. It's hard to believe that out of a country of over 300 million our choices look like they do.

Hell, I have seen it all levels from City Council on up.

Idiots you would not hire for night shift manager get elected when you think there is no possible way.

The public sucks.

NSFW. George Carlin was dead on (except for the voting and complaining part).

 

[Beach Friends]

The public sucks.

NSFW. George Carlin was dead on (except for the voting and complaining part).

Lol, yeah he was wrong about that but to me it was the funniest part The absurdity of it made the joke IMO

 

[Heathen]

It'd be interesting to see how many folks would call FDR a 'radical, extremist, marxist, communist'. He pedaled the same ideas. But hey, whatever sounds scary and thus strokes the ego more. That feels good, so who cares if it makes sense or not.

America.... Gotta love it.

 

[Beach Friends]

It'd be interesting to see how many folks would call FDR a 'radical, extremist, marxist, communist'. He pedaled the same ideas. But hey, whatever sounds scary and thus strokes the ego more. That feels good, so who cares if it makes sense or not.

America.... Gotta love it.

If you suggested that Bernie would be no more radical than FDR it would only confirm my concerns. The top tax rate under FDR went from 25% to 94%, attempts to stack the Supreme Court, tremendous government spending that had little effect on unemployment which remained in the 20% range until the outbreak of WWII, buying votes with tac dollars, corruption through the WPA, heavy handed cronyism, 4 term President, built a massive bureaucracy that he used for his own political benefit, used the IRS against media publishers who opposed him, internment camps, his "second bill of rights" (which was really the imposition of obligations).

In short, bad example.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

If you suggested that Bernie would be no more radical than FDR it would only confirm my concerns. The top tax rate under FDR went from 25% to 94%, attempts to stack the Supreme Court, tremendous government spending that had little effect on unemployment which remained in the 20% range until the outbreak of WWII, buying votes with tac dollars, corruption through the WPA, heavy handed cronyism, 4 term President, built a massive bureaucracy that he used for his own political benefit, used the IRS against media publishers who opposed him, internment camps, his "second bill of rights" (which was really the imposition of obligations).

In short, bad example.

This is why it’s impossible to take you guys seriously- you harrump about all these FDR problems and refuse to apply the same metric to your boy
I have my problems with FDR mostly with the FHA & redlining but WPA is an (mostly) an unqualified success and is probably an analog to the Marshal plan - it HAD to be done and more than likely HAD to be done the way it was bc HUAC was a wrecking ball

 

[Beach Friends]

The WPA HAD to be used to reward political friends, punish opponents and further entrench political power? I don't think so.