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?

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

I am not going to quibble with the percentages, but the idea that cronyism results from people advocating for de-regulation seems weird, if not outright wrong, to me. If there is deregulation, as in the government loses power over an area - then I am not sure how there can be corrupt cronyism. Increasing regulation, adding regulation, or enforcing regulation are ways corrupt cronyism comes into play. As oes just basic government contracting.

Again, not to say there are not problems with de-regulation - but corrupt cronyism is not one of them.

Start with Halliburton and work backwards

 

[SystemShock]

That one is a bit much Fidel was not good at all yet was not all bad by any stretch of the imagination.

We can sit here and debate the merits of Castro's actions, but you tell that to the refugiados.

Batista who the us government backed was just as extreme if not more than Fidel he just was not in bed with Russia.

Batista was in bed with the mob, sold all the sugar to american companies contracts that kept his people stupid and ungodly poor for his gain personal gain.

Batista took over Cuba with a military coup in 1952 before the scheduled election that year. That was because he was a distant third. So he just took it kinda like Fidel did.

You know the cold war sucked but the usa backing Batista and allowing him to in essence run over his people for his and corporate sugar and the mob gain was not at all good.

The thing is, no one remembers Batista.

 

[SaintForLife]

How Does Bernie Pay for His Major Plans? | Bernie Sanders Official Website

We are taking on powerful interests who will do and spend whatever it takes to stop us. Change never happens from the top down. Chip in to join the political revolution today.

berniesanders.com

"You would need even more revenue than he is proposing to fully offset those costs,” says Jared Bernstein, an economist and senior fellow at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities who is generally sympathetic to Sanders’s agenda. “It is not realistic to believe you can get all those revenues from the top 1, 5, or 10 percent [of households]. You would have to go down further than that. The rest of it has to come from a broader base of taxpayers or it has to go on the deficit.”

The Sixty Trillion Dollar Man

The price of Bernie Sanders’s agenda could be his biggest general-election weakness. But his rivals haven’t yet forced him to explain how he’d cover the full cost.

amp-theatlantic-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[SaintForLife]

For the past 40 years Republicans have intentionally engaged in a policy of coopting values voter issues into a makeshift coalition whose purpose it seems is tax cuts and preferential legal treatment for the rich and business.

I don't think it's even debatable and while Democrats are certainly not perfect, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find us good examples of Democrats favoring policies that kill people, hurt the environment or favor billionaires over the working class.

But you can try.

Newsflash: Both parties are in bed with big business and the rich. It's only the Democrats that try to hide it.

 

[Beach Friends]

So, do any of the folks here thinking of voting for Bernie have retirement accounts?

I wonder what the news of a Bernie election would do to the stock market?

 

[Heathen]

So, do any of the folks here thinking of voting for Bernie have retirement accounts?

I wonder what the news of a Bernie election would do to the stock market?

Or vote for anyone who isn't beholden to corporate puppeteers.. I'm sure there will be quite the backlash.

 

[SystemShock]

So, do any of the folks here thinking of voting for Bernie have retirement accounts?

I wonder what the news of a Bernie election would do to the stock market?

Last election, my broker told me, if Sanders won, he was moving to Costa Rica

 

[t_rav_82]

So, do any of the folks here thinking of voting for Bernie have retirement accounts?

I wonder what the news of a Bernie election would do to the stock market?

Just invest in the healthcare sector. You’ll be fine.

 

[dtc]

I am not going to quibble with the percentages, but the idea that cronyism results from people advocating for de-regulation seems weird, if not outright wrong, to me. If there is deregulation, as in the government loses power over an area - then I am not sure how there can be corrupt cronyism. Increasing regulation, adding regulation, or enforcing regulation are ways corrupt cronyism comes into play. As oes just basic government contracting.

Again, not to say there are not problems with de-regulation - but corrupt cronyism is not one of them.

It's no deregulation per se, rather regulation or regulatory reform aimed at benefiting a certain target.

republicans call eliminating protections against dumping coal slag into rivers and creeks deregulation, but it's not so much as it is an intentional subsidy to one particular donor.

It's exactly what I'd call corrupt cronyism.

Look at Louisiana and Texas with the "deregulation" that allows chemical companies to refuse to declare or secure the materials they keep on site even to fire departments. People have died and areas polluted over the past few years as a direct result while firemen sat helplessly not knowing what was inside. That's not deregulation. That's targeted regulatory change aimed at benefiting a singular type of donor.

 

[dtc]

I thought you were talking about corrupt cronyism.
Democrats certainly had a very large hand in the bank bailouts. And did you look at Obama's Energy Department. Might be the poster child for modern federal cronyism.

Bank bailouts aren't deregulation. And the "deregulation" wasn't so much a simple removal of restrictive law as it was a targeted policy aimed at benefiting another singular sort of donor.

Hell, what other explanation can be found for removing the fiduciary responsibility from financial planners to their clients?

Did Democrats pass that or was it Democrats who fought it?

 

[The moose]

Last election, my broker told me, if Sanders won, he was moving to Costa Rica

Well tell him to get packing!

It is pretty safe to say anybody blue wins they are gonna make his life hell.

 

[The moose]

We can sit here and debate the merits of Castro's actions, but you tell that to the refugiados.



The thing is, no one remembers Batista.

Well I guess he was not Hitler then?

I guess he saw Americans using his people for back breaking labor and all the money went elsewhere while the people could not read or had any healthcare options what so ever.

I know a horrible guy.

 

[Intensesaint]

It's going to be interesting to hear Sanders defend Cuba and Castro during a presidential debate.

 

[SystemShock]

Well I guess he was not Hitler then?

I guess he saw Americans using his people for back breaking labor and all the money went elsewhere while the people could not read or had any healthcare options what so ever.

I know a horrible guy.

Again, if you want to debate the virtues of Fidel Castro's regime, we can do that. But the point is not how we feel about Castro, the point is how Cubans living in the U.S. feel about Castro, and how they feel about people exalting his virtues.

Yes, healthcare is free in Cuba, they were actually at the forefront of AIDS treatment (how they handled it, not drugs necessarily); you can go from kindergarten to a PhD for free in Cuba... but the living conditions aren't what you'd call optimal.

I remember the first time I went to Cuba, 1983... it was surreal. Walking through the tourist areas, it was like walking into a run down time capsule of the 1950's. Walking outside the tourist areas, women were offering me sex for jeans, pantyhose, makeup. I befriended a young couple who were walking by when some girl who looked 15-16 was offering me sex for merchandise I could by at the tourists shops, and immediately chastised her for what she was doing. After apologizing to me and talking a bit, they agreed to show me around the city, away from the tourists spots. They reluctantly took the money I offered them, because they needed it. I asked them what they did in Cuba. The guy was a lawyer, the woman a doctor. They took me to this club of locals... they were playing mambo, and people were dancing, but I have never seen such a somber crowd dancing to such happy music. How can you dance to mambo with no expression on your face?

Anyway...

 

[SaintForLife]

For the past 40 years Republicans have intentionally engaged in a policy of coopting values voter issues into a makeshift coalition whose purpose it seems is tax cuts and preferential legal treatment for the rich and business.

I don't think it's even debatable and while Democrats are certainly not perfect, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find us good examples of Democrats favoring policies that kill people, hurt the environment or favor billionaires over the working class.

But you can try.

Democrats once represented the working class. Not any more | US elections 2016 | The Guardian

amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Key Democrat Leaders Have Pocketed Millions From Pharma

The top House Republican also received more than $1 million from drugmakers since 2007.

www.thedailybeast.com

Fortune 500 companies giving the most money to Republicans, Democrats

These Fortune 500 companies' employees donated a ton of money to Republicans and Democrats over the past decade.

www-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[Beach Friends]

Again, if you want to debate the virtues of Fidel Castro's regime, we can do that. But the point is not how we feel about Castro, the point is how Cubans living in the U.S. feel about Castro, and how they feel about people exalting his virtues.

Yes, healthcare is free in Cuba, they were actually at the forefront of AIDS treatment (how they handled it, not drugs necessarily); you can go from kindergarten to a PhD for free in Cuba... but the living conditions aren't what you'd call optimal.

I remember the first time I went to Cuba, 1983... it was surreal. Walking through the tourist areas, it was like walking into a run down time capsule of the 1950's. Walking outside the tourist areas, women were offering me sex for jeans, pantyhose, makeup. I befriended a young couple who were walking by when some girl who looked 15-16 was offering me sex for merchandise I could by at the tourists shops, and immediately chastised her for what she was doing. After apologizing to me and talking a bit, they agreed to show me around the city, away from the tourists spots. They reluctantly took the money I offered them, because they needed it. I asked them what they did in Cuba. The guy was a lawyer, the woman a doctor. They took me to this club of locals... they were playing mambo, and people were dancing, but I have never seen such a somber crowd dancing to such happy music. How can you dance to mambo with no expression on your face?

Anyway...

Yeah, a friend of mine went fishing in Cuba during the last year. The guide made much more money from his tips and said that his home was periodically raided to ensure that he did not have too much personal property. I am sure that any excess they took went right to the downtrodden.

The photos he took were surreal- it looked like a mix of, like you said, the 1950's, and the 1800's.

But, I guess the theory is that all those people willing to risk their lives to flee on makeshift rafts just really did not want to learn to read.

 

[SaintForLife]

I know during the Obama years there was a lot of talk of a civil war in the Republican party. Now we hear similar discussions about the Democratic party, but this is quite extreme.

Greenwald points out how the Democrats constant hyperbolic claims about Trump ring hollow if this article is accurate. I'm guessing the big donors and special interests are scared about what a Sanders's presidency would do to their profits, the economy, and their power.

 

[Port City JJ]

There are plenty of DINOS, RINOS, and you can just about paint any party with any brush you want at this point. Plenty of Democrats supporting legislation to benefit corporate donors in various sectors with net negative effects for people (Joe Manchin for example I freaking hate Joe Manchin).

There is NO party collectively working for the working class.

I'd agree with DTC assessment that the republican party's practices in the last 40 years have done far more to damage the working class than the democrats.