Drumpf said something recently that kinda floored me…
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day…
Drumpf said something recently that kinda floored me…
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day…
It's kind of tragic how nobody takes Al Gore seriously anymore because of South Park.
Thanks South Park for furthering Climate Change denial with your asinine "truth is always some alternative apathetic middle" bullshit!
I find it hard to believe that anyone that would take South Park as their serious source of information on… anything... has much of an opinion that matters in the first place.
I like South Park and they have strong messages sometimes, but... I don't think any given celebrity or public figure has really suffered from being on an episode of SOuth Park. Not for more than the day after the episode airs at any rate.
My view might be skewed because I'm younger and South Park was like THE source of "unbiased" news for my peers growing up.
Drumpf said something recently that kinda floored me…
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day…
Probably just sticking it to Cruz, since Caitlin Jenner is a die-hard conservaturd Cruz supporter.
I find it hard to believe that anyone that would take South Park as their serious source of information on… anything... has much of an opinion that matters in the first place.
I like South Park and they have strong messages sometimes, but... I don't think any given celebrity or public figure has really suffered from being on an episode of SOuth Park. Not for more than the day after the episode airs at any rate.
Yeah Kaiolino is right Robby, South Park definitely had way too much of a political impact on certain sections of Millennials.
@Monkey:
Yeah Kaiolino is right Robby, South Park definitely had way too much of a political impact on certain sections of Millennials.
That's kind of fucked up.
I can understand absorbing Jon Stewart Daily Show as a go-to source (despite being a comedy show) based sheerly on Jon's credibility in spite of himself, and even Colbert because people didn't realize his character was a character…. (that judging by his stint in Lettermna's job was still like 90% him anyway) but... South Park?
I mean, that show's been running for like 20 years now. I was 13 or 14 when it started, and yes there were definitely times where I went "Yeah, they're rightly calling out bullshit on this really stupid thing" or "yup, that's a more appropriate middleground than either extreme" on whatever topic... but I've never ever looked to Parker and Stone as guys who totally knew what was up or should be THE trusted opinion on something. What the hell?
That's kind of fucked up.
I can understand absorbing Jon Stewart Daily Show as a go-to source (despite being a comedy show) based sheerly on Jon's credibility in spite of himself, and even Colbert because people didn't realize his character was a character…. (that judging by his stint in Lettermna's job was still like 90% him anyway) but... South Park?
I mean, that show's been running for like 20 years now. I was 13 or 14 when it started, and yes there were definitely times where I went "Yeah, they're rightly calling out bullshit on this really stupid thing" or "yup, that's a more appropriate middleground than either extreme" on whatever topic... but I've never ever looked to Parker and Stone as guys who totally knew what was up or should be THE trusted opinion on something. What the hell?
It's perhaps less the exact info as the attitude. That sort of middling "heh, both sides suck, I'm gonna stand on the side and smirk" attitude that definitely informed too many dumbs.
Can we go back to Al Gore?
And now they don't vote anymore while wistfully remembering the One True Saviour: Ron Paul.
That quote is always taken out of context. He did have a hand in funding the groups that created the early net. He didn't build it himself, no, but he was actually involved.
If you read something on the internet you have to believe it. It's the same reason I know there's a shadow government behind every election and freedom of choice in the polls is nothing but an illusion.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Drumpf said something recently that kinda floored me…
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day…
It's kinda like finding out the person who spits in your coffee every day "completely" supports your right to shop at any coffee shop despite what his fellow coworkers might think and are opposed to.
Trump is also pro-choice.
He's flipped on that since running in the Republican party though.
He's campaigned hard on a handful of issues that are important to people and struck a cord.
His main thing has been "I'm against big business influencing politics", which happens to be a thing a lot of people Hillary specifically is very guilty of. His main issue is the absolute weakest point Hillary has and the area people feel she is the most unqualified.
That and they've spent years and years trying to make Hillary look awful so a lot of people do have a negative opinion of her, whereas really no one had any opinion about Al Gore… he was just the VP guy.
Who are you talking to? Obviously that's how he's got to where he is today. That's not the point though. Until he had a few wins under his belt and even after NONE of the major news outlets considered him even an option. ALL of them where framing this as between Hilary and whoever the republicans could come up with. He was viewed as so inconsequential the Republicans didn't even utter his name. Most of the minor news outlets were treating this the same way. People in 2015 and 2014 looking at what would play out in 2016 had this being Hilary's time, no question. Obviously she's the winner who could possibly even contest that. It should have been as clear cut as Gore's run and the republican smear campaign has not really effected Democrats. As Ubiq article shows, they still love Hilary by a lot. I don't think the republican smear campaign has effected independent's opinion of Hilary as much as Hilary being Hilary has. She has long and strong ties with the people responsible for causing the worst recession in recent history. She's also not a progressive, she follows the Democrats when they start moving in a certain direction but she's never at the front. People who typically vote democrat notice these things and probably rank them as more important tests of her character than Benghazi.
Your logic, applied to this situation, is to say you shouldn't HAVE to pick one of those two options and instead, decide to stay in the house and forego letting it be fumigated on principle because you shouldn't HAVE to leave.
While your principles may mean a lot to you, doesn't change the fact that your house is going to be destroyed when those termites get to the important structural beams and the like.
This is a bad analogy. Fumigating will remove the termite problem completely. Temporary inconvenience or loss of money to a hotel are not great options but if I choose either one my termite problem is gone forever. That is not the situation though. A better analogy would be the exterminators only giving me the option of trying to kill the termites with carpenter ants or with fire because both of those options just leave me with more or a different problem instead of solving the problem I started with which is what is happening here. Since those are my options I'm willing to just accept a lose on the house at this point which isn't unreasonable considering it's condition will just steadily deteriorate with either option.
You're right that this is about ideology though. We've had this discussion several times. Hilary will always be not just a viable but welcomed option for you especially considering the position the alternatives would leave you in. I've done my best to explain my reasoning why she is unacceptable at this point and I'm sure you think I'm selfish, naive, etc but just so that you understand I know the stakes. To me they're worth putting you and me and my family and friends all at risk in different ways because in the long run candidates like Hilary are not acceptable leaders. I don't think she will push money out of politics. I don't think she will reign in the banks. I don't think she will reign in domestic spying. I don't see these things as negotiable anymore when it comes to picking a leader. They are essential.
And now they don't vote anymore while wistfully remembering the One True Saviour: Ron Paul.
Only 90s kids remember the original One True Savior: Ralph Nader, whose voters I'm convinced moved from him to the Pauls to Bernie sometime last fall.
…but before Ralph Nader there was Ross Perot, and before Ross Perot there was Ron Paul!
…but before Ralph Nader there was Ross Perot, and before Ross Perot there was Ron Paul!
It's an ouroboros of idiocy.
Okay, finally got more than a few minutes to write.
Explain how the people who are voting for Sanders don't reflect the makeup of the Democratic Party.
Because his weakest performances are with core Democratic voters like women and black voters while his strongest performances are with groups that tend to wind up voting Republican in the general elections?
So Sander's voters don't reflect the Democratic Party and a significant portion of them aren't actually democrats but also they don't think the Democratic Party is out of step with their values. This sounds like independent voters who lean democrat. I used the words "Democratic electorate" instead of Democratic Party because it's important to differentiate the people who vote democrat and the people who consider themselves democrats. Hilary is the party's choice. Among democrats (different from the people who vote democrat) she is number #1. That article you posted further solidifies that she is what Democrats wants. But she's not trouncing Bernie in the way that she should be so like I said the question is, if she so closely embodies everything that Democrats want and stand for why isn't she winning harder.
How hard does she need to win by though? Obama never lead her by anywhere near as many delegates in 2008 as Hillary currently leads Bernie by but people were widely demanding that she drop out of the race. At this point, all she needs is about 20% of the remaining delegates to win the nomination; if the polls for tomorrow's primaries are even close and that last batch of superdelegates break for her, she could actually win the nomination this week. Bernie has to win pretty much every remaining contest by landslide margins and would almost certainly need to convert superdelegates to win even at the convention.
Of the Democratic Primaries since 1980, the only ones where the frontrunner outperformed Hillary were the contests where everybody else dropped out after Super Tuesday. Edwards was a lot closer to Kerry in 2004 than Bernie was to Hillary after Super Tuesday and dropped out anyway.
You brought up brought up Gore but that only makes the situation seem worse to me. What did Gore capture coming off of the Clinton administration that Hilary coming off the Clinton and Obama administration can't?
Well, again, Bradley dropped out after Super Tuesday, which makes thing even more lopsided than they might have been otherwise. The primaries in 2000 were also more front-loaded than this year (which favors the better known candidate) and Bradley didn't have as favorable a schedule besides; he was out of the race months before his home state voted.
Of course then Gore tried to distance himself from Bill and to "be his own man" for some stupid reason.
As I recall, the media pushed the narrative that he had to do that and the Gore campaign unfortunately bought into it, which was a terrible idea since the media hated Al Gore and didn't particularly care who knew it.
There's plenty of stories out there about how the media complained incessantly in 2000 about the Gore campaign; how they were affronted by the fact that media relations tables would have coffee and doughnuts instead of the more elaborate fare the Bush campaign put out, how folksy and authentic Dubya was in giving them individual nicknames and how stiff and fake Gore was because he just wanted to give a speech and move on to the next site, and just how many of them just hated to even hear Al talk at all. I think it was Cokie Roberts that said she cringed every time she heard his voice.
House Cruz and House Kaisch have put aside their differences, or similarities, in order to form an alliance to stump House Trump.
I don't think Trump would get enough delegates anyway but this certainly removes a lot of chance from the equation. Unless it backfires but I'm not sure what the chances of that are.
…but before Ralph Nader there was Ross Perot, and before Ross Perot there was Ron Paul!
Nader and Perot both siphoned votes from Democrats though (but only 2000 was close enough for it to actually hurt) while Paul's supporters were always Republicans who just didn't want to admit it.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
House Cruz and House Kaisch have put aside their differences, or similarities, in order to form an alliance to stump House Trump.
The real time to have done that would have been back before March 15th when it would have given Cruz North Carolina and Missouri and put a massive dent in Trump's numbers. As is, he's probably not going to get the majority he needs but will have the most votes and delegates of the three by a good margin.
As I recall, the media pushed the narrative that he had to do that and the Gore campaign unfortunately bought into it, which was a terrible idea since the media hated Al Gore and didn't particularly care who knew it.
There's plenty of stories out there about how the media complained incessantly in 2000 about the Gore campaign; how they were affronted by the fact that media relations tables would have coffee and doughnuts instead of the more elaborate fare the Bush campaign put out, how folksy and authentic Dubya was in giving them individual nicknames and how stiff and fake Gore was because he just wanted to give a speech and move on to the next site, and just how many of them just hated to even hear Al talk at all. I think it was Cokie Roberts that said she cringed every time she heard his voice.
Good lord the pettiness.
I mean, that show's been running for like 20 years now. I was 13 or 14 when it started, and yes there were definitely times where I went "Yeah, they're rightly calling out bullshit on this really stupid thing" or "yup, that's a more appropriate middleground than either extreme" on whatever topic… but I've never ever looked to Parker and Stone as guys who totally knew what was up or should be THE trusted opinion on something. What the hell?
I can't believe there would ever be a time I'd say this but Robby, you have too much faith in our generation.
Trump sticks up for Tom Brady. Trump also said that Bobby Knight will endorse him. Between them, these three form a perfect Axis of Dickishness.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
There's going to be Democratic town halls on MSNBC starting in about five minutes. Bernie will be from 8-9 and Hillary from 9-10.
They should fine Brady 4 more games for being a trump liker
Rex Ryan is also a Trump supporter, making The Donald 2 for 2 in recruiting the worst of football to his cause.
@Cyan:
Rex Ryan is also a Trump supporter, making The Donald 2 for 2 in recruiting the worst of football to his cause.
Now all you need is for Tim Tebow (or barring that) Johnny Manziel to profess their admiration and intentions to vote for Trump.
For some reason, I picture Ryan Leaf as a Scott Walker guy.
Anyway, the GOP candidates are doing their part to keep big money out of politics… by being so awful that even the Koch brothers want nothing to do with them.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/charles-koch-won-t-attend-gop-convention
Also, Cruz is apparently vetting Carly Fiorina as a potential running mate.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/carly-fiorina-being-vetted-by-cruz-for-vp
For some reason, I picture Ryan Leaf as a Scott Walker guy.
Anyway, the GOP candidates are doing their part to keep big money out of politics… by being so awful that even the Koch brothers want nothing to do with them.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/charles-koch-won-t-attend-gop-convention
When the white billionaire capitalists are turning tail from the party that has been retrofitted to serve their interests, something is going horribly wrong.
For some reason, I picture Ryan Leaf as a Scott Walker guy.
LOL
“We're not interested in politics. We’re interested in moving us towards a culture and policies that will enable people to improve their lives.”
I haven't smelt this much bullshit since my 5th grade class went down to Pennsylvania.
Also, Cruz is apparently vetting Carly Fiorina as a potential running mate.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/carly-fiorina-being-vetted-by-cruz-for-vp
I don't think the country is ready for that much stupid or ugly.
They should fine Brady 4 more games for being a trump liker
As long as he doesn't vote for him it's sort off a tree falling in the woods. I doubt that Brady being the all american superhero that he is actually agree with Trump on most things. To me in the grand scheme off things though, a president's personal values and prejudices will usually not be reflected in the policies and the things that go down.
EDIT:
Man, I digressed like hell. Most of this post isn't meant for you just my general thoughts haha..
And in all honesty, thinking that Trump is alone amongst the presidential candidates and politicians to think that we should build walls around Mexico I feel is a bit naive. Trump is just saying it loudly and I honestly prefer to know when a person is prejudice. People who keep quiet about it or lie about it are many times worse and if we're lucky, we might actually get a few blogs and intelligent writers who take the time to actually prove that Trump is factually wrong. Because we can call him an asshole all we want, it's not going to change anyone's mind. We need to engage his argument and own this thing. Not get mad about it.
There is just too many other things going on that a president can't handle without ( like my guy Mark from Parks and Recreation say ) ''cutting a lot of red tape''. And this is my problem with the way we Americans view presidents:
We think that just because they promise us things they will absolutely be able to get it through. Even if they are adamant about doing this, clearly Obama was unable to do what he said he would. Assuming this is because Obama just stopped caring about it and not look in the political undergrowth's administration is foolish. It doesn't matter who is president.
Even if Trump did get elected, how the hell is he going to organize a wall being built at the U.S. mexican border and not make the rich people that commonly vote republican tear their hair out with how much of their money he has to take in taxes? And it's not like building a wall like this is something you just order and then wait a few turns like a video game. It's a yearly long process that will be halted severely by just how difficult it is to administer things in government. Not to mention the fact that while this wall is being built, there is still going to be alot of illegals who walk straight pass it and flee to Texas or California.
And I feel like even if Trump talks a lot of shit, just like every other politician, every once in a while he makes a fair point ( and I think alot of people who dislike him and rightfully so forgets that he potentially can ). He earned a few cool points from me at the very least when he said that hiring people should just be as easy as shaking the boss hand and then go about the day. I thought that was actually real off him to do. That's the type of stuff I want my president to believe in. Too bad it had to be Trump.
But yeah, all of these things aside: when somebody is right, there is no point to fight him when he do. Even if you're the worst person in the universe, if you say something that is indeed true, that should somehow be aknowledged.
Im a fan of Bernie myself but I think this video is pretty on-point:
So the East Coast Theater continues, with the following order of battle:
Connecticut
The truck stop between Maryland and New Jersey that gets congressional representation for some reason
Murdaland
Pennsylvania
The mob's personal cash reserve, also known as "Rhode Island"
Connecticut, Maryland, and Pennsylvania have been called for Trump. Maryland has been called for Hillary.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Bernie is on and beating the delegates drum while talking about independents not being able to vote in the closed Democratic primary.
He's given up on the idea of winning this without superdelegates.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
Rhode Island also called for Trump. NBC says he has Delaware. Clean sweep for Il Douche.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
NBC projects Delaware for Hillary.
Northeastern aversion to Evangelical bullshit is paying off; Cruz is coming in behind Kasich in all states tonight.
@Cyan:
Northeastern aversion to Evangelical bullshit is paying off
As Trump's performance shows, they have no problem with the regular version though.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@CNN:
11% of Sanders voters would not vote for him in November if he was the nominee.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Fox is calling Pennsylvania for Hillary.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
AP also calls Pennsylvania for Hillary.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
AP calling Rhode Island for Bernie.
Very disappointed in PA. I actually had someone from the Sanders campaign knock on my door the other day and a couple of my friends were even out canvasing for him. I haven't talked to one person who liked Hilary. Granted I don't talk to many people but the numbers for this are really disappointing.
Time to change my party back and wait angrily till Hilary takes office.
Hillary's voters are generally older so you won't run into them or see them doing things like that as often.
Man, that Australian (?) guest on The Young Turks is a goddamn hero. Jesus Christ I knew they were bad, but the meltdown they've been having tonight is legendary.
EDIT: @Donald:
I'm, like, a very smart person.
Hillary's voters are generally older so you won't run into them or see them doing things like that as often.
I was just trying to explain how the energy in the city was very pro-bernie, I don't think I conveyed that very well but wherever you saw political activity it was usually associated with Bernie. He had a huge turnout at Temple University a week or two ago. So big they had to extend the event. I didn't think he would win the state but I was hoping the numbers in Philly would reflect that kind of energy but they didn't.
To celebrate/cope with The Donald's ascent to the nomination, here's a Twitter account making fun of Bill Kristol (also known as "Rubio Is The Future" Man)
Man, that Australian (?) guest on The Young Turks is a goddamn hero. Jesus Christ I knew they were bad, but the meltdown they've been having tonight is legendary.
I missed out on all that. What happened?
Time to change my party back and wait angrily till Hilary takes office.
Not necessarily. If people like you have your way, it'll be President Donald J. Trump or Ted Cruz taking office….. Right now I can't honestly think of which is worse...
All this election has done for me as a young black voter (because it's not only young white men who are frustrated with the party contrary to what Hillary supporters have been trying to tell me online) is further drive in that the Democratic party isn't interested whatsoever in spearheading progressive policies and would rather continue tip toeing along moderate and conservative lines while throwing people bones with liberalism on some race/gender/sexuality issues.
Bernie Sanders had legitimate policies and beliefs that could have drawn young voters like myself and others in to actually be invested in the future of the party, but instead they chose to follow along the same lines and in the process they've fully cut me off from even considering to join for the time being.
All this election has done for me as a young black voter, is convince me that the Democratic party isn't interested whatsoever in spearheading progressive policies and would rather continue tip toeing along moderate and conservative lines while throwing people bones with liberalism on some race/gender/sexuality issues.
Bernie Sanders had legitimate policies and beliefs that could have drawn young voters like myself and others in to actually be invested in the future of the party, but instead they chose to follow along the same lines and in the process they've fully cut me off from even considering to join for the time being.
After the California Primary I will most likely be changing my affiliation to independent.
@Demon:
Not necessarily. If people like you have your way, it'll be President Donald J. Trump or Ted Cruz taking office….. Right now I can't honestly think of which is worse...
Then the democrats should have put up a candidate the people found worth voting for rather than playing this end of the world candidate ultimatum over again.
That's who the blame should go towards, I have every right to abstain from voting for Hillary (though I'm probably just going through a tantrum right now and will feel morally obligated to vote for her come November).
After the California Primary I will most likely be changing my affiliation to independent.
Don't accidentally join the American Independent Party! Evidently that's a hilariously common mistake. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/thousands-voters-register-wrong-party
After the California Primary I will most likely be changing my affiliation to independent.
I'm like 90% sure you can vote Democrat in the California primaries as an independent. IIRC Democrats left it open but Republicans decided to make theirs closed.
Im a fan of Bernie myself but I think this video is pretty on-point:
As another Bernie fan, that was hilarious.
Also, this is what the election will be for the next four years and seven months.
Not necessarily. If people like you have your way, it'll be President Donald J. Trump or Ted Cruz taking office….. Right now I can't honestly think of which is worse...
Save the fear mongering for the general or don't even bother with it at all. Trump and Cruz can barely pull their own party together much less entire country nationally.
They don't have a chance.
We have these elections every four years (and more frequently than that, when it comes to whether a Governor's, State Senators or Rep, or US Senator or Representatives seat is up).
Bernie Sanders was not the second coming and his not being elected is not the apocalypse. If you're still going to be living in the country in four years, or eight years –and many of us I presume are-- remember this moment well.
It is not the day the world ended.
I'm a young professional with huge student loan debt and poor job prospects. So really, I was sympathetic to Bernie Sander's campaign.
But Democrat or Republican, this election will affect more than income inequality. For some perspective:
-The future of the Affordable Care Act
-Up to three seats in the Supreme Court (at a guestimate, some of those Justices are really getting up there in years.)
-A woman's right to choose
-Repairing the Voting Rights Act
-Affirmative action
-How the US handles Climate Change
-Campaign finance reform (via Citizen's United (for starters))
-How the US responds to potential further destabilization of the Middle East
-The US response to illegal immigration and deportation
-The raising of the minimum wage
-Treatment of muslims & muslim americans
-The government's responsibility to the LGBTQ community
-Whatever foolishness Donald Trump can think to make an issue out of, a list of offenses too long to name.
-And more. You'll note that a majority of the items on this list are handled by the Supreme Court, which -if nothing else- is one of the best reasons imaginable to vote.
It is disappointing that the Democratic party is not a lightning rod of progressivism, but until this election, it hasn't been pushed to be. The onus is on us, as concerned citizens to hold not just our presidential nominees accountable, but officials in all elected offices, and to pay attention what they do even when the media circus isn't in town. Republicans swept the midterm elections because folks stayed HOME. I should think that if NOTHING ELSE, the past eight years should have informed us that staying home and not voting is the most catastrophic thing that could happen if progressive interests are your interest!
Using their majorities in the House and Senate, congressional Republicans blocked aid to 9/11 first responders, voted against student loan refinancing, voted against mandatory paid family & medical leave,
shut down the government (a charge lead by Ted Cruz!) attempted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, over and over again, and are currently blocking a president's Supreme Court nominee, after filibustering almost as many executive branch nominees in Obama's two terms as have been blocked in US history (82 by 2013 under President Obama vs roughly 86 under all other presidents), which has had disastrous consequences for the agencies they're attached to. Hell, a Republican held Senate could block Democratic Supreme Court nominees indefinitely if so inclined; there's no rule in the Constitution that says there has to be nine justices.
I'm not saying that anyone here would do this, but by disengaging from the political process because it's not perfect, and by holding all Democratic officials accountable for the behavior of the DNC OR one president or one presidential nominee, regardless of their voting records or what have you, you feed into a oversimplified narrative of the two parties–and what they do for your interests. Is America's two party system perfect? Gods no. Does it matter which party gets elected to office? Gods, yes. Yes it does.
And I understand the frustration towards the Clintons very deeply; I share them. But even without considering the superdelegates-- she's winning because people are voting for her. I may not prefer it, but I can accept it. Better luck next time. And Hillary Clinton, for her part, has been raising money for other Democratic Congressional candidates to change the political landscape so this kind of Congressional cocblocking can't happen for the next four years; and it's probably the most important thing she could be doing right now. She even said recently that roughly half her presidential cabinet will be women. I'm very down with that, depending on who she picks.
But if you don't like Hillary, your job is now to hold her feet to the fire and scrutinize her decisions & the promises she made on the campaign trail.
And Hillary Clinton, for her part, has been raising money for other Democratic Congressional candidates to change the political landscape so this kind of Congressional cocblocking can't happen for the next four years; and it's probably the most important thing she could be doing right now.
This is a really good point that's been easy to overlook in the Sanders' fervor (which I was/am certainly a part of) but that definitely matters. My desire to see Republicans kicked out of power on every front is a powerful motivator. Losing the POTUS general election and both houses (and consequently SCOTUS for the remainder of RBG's lifespan) would be less a finger in their eye and more a dagger to the gut that- if it didn't destroy the GOP as we know it- would certainly force a paradigm shift.
Save the fear mongering for the general or don't even bother with it at all. Trump and Cruz can barely pull their own party together much less entire country nationally.
They don't have a chance.
W. didn't have much of chance til some scheming and planning on the part of his camp and
the GOP along with some stupid from people "with nothing else better to do in a general
election" gave him one.
Im a fan of Bernie myself but I think this video is pretty on-point:
!
That's a good one! By this point, I'm just hoping he follows his strategy of trying to bring Hillary a bit more to the left and make some concessions.
And damn, that woman became pretty unsympathetic to me. Don't really know why…but yeah.
@CCC:
- if it didn't destroy the GOP as we know it- would certainly force a paradigm shift.
"We'll oppose the justice appointment because we have to hate on anything Obama/democrat related and throwing a tantrum is the only way to get things done!"
Please, less of that in the future.
Bernie Sanders was not the second coming and his not being elected is not the apocalypse. If you're still going to be living in the country in four years, or eight years –and many of us I presume are-- remember this moment well.
It is not the day the world ended.
That's a very important point, and it applies to Trump too. No president has ever brought about the apocalypse.
Having said that… these things don't help Bernie supporters feel good about Hillary:
http://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-seems-to-have-burned-bernie-but-thats-not-really-what-happened/ http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/why-was-election-justice-usa-removed-from-facebook-censored-back-who-new-york-lawsuit-voter-fraud-purged/
Hillary needs to come out and condemn the election fraud in New York. If she does that, I can support her.
Edit: She also needs to condemn this garbage.