How do Democrats feel about Bernie looking like the eventual nominee?

I can't help but wonder why did the DNC allow a non member to run within the party if they don't want the person to win. It is illogical.

 

Bernie & Liz both want the same things. Both are good spokespersons for the Progressive movement. Each has their own personal weaknesses--as do we all. But either of them would make a far better President, & change our country into a better place for us all to live, than Trump has done. Bernie & Liz have much more in common with each other than differences. I agree with both, & would gladly support either with my vote.

 

Will this complicate things:

 

So you have nothing tangible, just your prejudiced opinion working overtime. That's what I presumed it to be, but wanted to hear you clarify it.

Everyone on the left fantasizes about the evils that lie behind those they hate. That's OK until you start to think fantasies are evidence- and you have no evidence.

 

Jump back to post #80, where I have already addressed the point of "owning the means of production". Or, if you are too lazy to do that- we shall summarize; consider that if I control the price you can sell production at and control the wages you must pay and all the aspects of what you make and how you do business- I own full control of the means of production, without much of the burden of physical ownership. That's even more diabolical that owning the bricks and mortar. And it IS socialism, and it serves every goal of socialism.

 

Unfortunately, probably so. But we have to find a way to reunite before November if we are to have any hope of toppling Trump.

 

Take your post verbatim & apply it from my side to Obama's treatment by Republicans. There are definitely two sides to this coin.

 

His name is Bernie Sanders.....which means his initials are BS.....coincidence?

 

Republicans were calling Obama a Russian property? Have support for that too?

 

I think a lot of people were excited for Donald Trump

 

BS is running for president..... and the democrats are buying it. Nothing new about that, is there?

 

There was no mention of Russia in your post that I responded to, so why include it here? But in response: If any party has a President that's working for them from the White House, it's certainly NOT the Democrats.

 

I thought this started here, where you defined Trump as having some kind of evil relationship to the Russians. Perhaps you forgot, so here it is-

XploreR said: ↑

Trump is a Russiaphile. Russians are primarily Slavic people, & both of Trump's wives were Slavs--from Czechoslavakia & Slovenia. That had to have some impact on him. He worked on getting a tower built in Moscow before he became a candidate for President. That effort was still ongoing thru the campaign, & possibly after the inauguration. Trump not only has a soft spot for Russia, but also admires strong, authoritative leaders--especially Putin. I find it uncomfortable that Trump has demeaned our European allies of decades past, while praising Putin for a variety of things since 2015. Trump has repeatedly attacked NATO as outdated & useless--which it certainly isn't. But weakening NATO is one of Putin's highest goals. Trump is a great help to Putin with that. Also, Trump suddenly & unexpectedly withdrew all Americans from Syria last year. That left a political void for leadership there, & it was both Turkey & Russia that rushed in to fill that void. Trump even stated publicly that he was "OK" with Russians moving in & occupying former American bases & outposts abandoned under his orders. I can't imagine any former President behaving in such a manner.


So you have nothing tangible, just your prejudiced opinion working overtime. That's what I presumed it to be, but wanted to hear you clarify it.

Everyone on the left fantasizes about the evils that lie behind those they hate. That's OK until you start to think fantasies are evidence- and you have no evidence.

 

OK, fine. I didn't realize you were responding to a former post. In the post you cite above, I am simply stating the way I see Trump & his favoritism toward Russia. You are an intelligent man, but I'm confused by your inability to see that connection. Concerned too, to some extent, since that favoritism holds dangers for America that I don't know how to avoid short of replacing Trump. I don't regard myself as a fanciful person. I am scientifically minded, enjoy facts, revere truth, & try my best to be fair & open minded. I base my feelings about Trump on those facts, not just empty prejudice. My concerns are genuine & for the good of the country & all Americans. I feel Trump & his followers are too filled with negative emotions to be of service to this country. They're too extreme. America has thrived from the moderate middle politically. No nation thrives on excess or extremism. Trump is extreme in everything he does. I think that is harmful to America.

 

OK, fine. I didn't realize you were responding to a former post. In the post you cite above, I am simply stating the way I see Trump & his favoritism toward Russia. You are an intelligent man, but I'm confused by your inability to see that connection. Concerned too, to some extent, since that favoritism holds dangers for America that I don't know how to avoid short of replacing Trump. I don't regard myself as a fanciful person. I am scientifically minded, enjoy facts, revere truth, & try my best to be fair & open minded. I base my feelings about Trump on those facts, not just empty prejudice. My concerns are genuine & for the good of the country & all Americans. I feel Trump & his followers are too filled with negative emotions to be of service to this country. They're too extreme. America has thrived from the moderate middle politically. No nation thrives on excess or extremism. Trump is extreme in everything he does. I think that is harmful to America.

 

Well that's a unique, and non valid reason that that a Supreme Court decision wouldn't apply: Too old! Can we throw out ALL court decisions from before World War ll? I admit, getting rid of Marbury v. Madison would solve some problems...

But I asked if the legislation prohibited executive branch flexibility on aid and you decided not to address this issue, and since that is THE issue here, you've failed once again.

You know, you are somewhat of a disappointment. You claim to be an economics teacher so I guess I assumed some level of academic rigor from you, but I never see it. You never have substantive responses, merely ones like this one.

Sad!

 

Like every president Bernie would not be able to spend a dime not appropriated and approved by the congress.

 

Best job in government for a shot at a promotion within 4 years Bernie's V.P.!!!!

 

OK - but Trump takes even more money - taking from the poor and giving to the rich. I am not for taking money in the first place - but at least Bernie gives it to Blue Collar - the self reliant folks you were concerned about instead of the 1% like Trump.

 

I am blue collar and I have no illusions that Sanders will give me anything. See, I earn my keep, I am responsible, I pay for my kid's college, I pay for my own healthcare, housing, food, and I have scrimped and saved so I am financially comfortable. Yep, Bernie gonna have his hands deep in my pockets for the last little bit of change rolling around in there.

And even if Bernie was going to give me something, I don't want it. I have no desire to grovel at the government trough for some meager rations doled out by Big Daddy G. Self esteem and self value doesn't come attached to free government programs. Screw that. The self reliant that we are discussing don't need government giving us a damn thing, we need government to leave us, and our money, alone.

 

1) Sure Bernie will have his hands in your pockets - he is a Politician and that is what Politicians do.
2) Trump also has his hand deep in your pocket - so deep - that Trump makes Obama look like a fiscal conservative.

You seem to understand 1 - but not 2.

 

I have never liked Liz much but agree that she shares much in common with Bernie. That said - I really did not dislike Liz either. That was until she started talking about how she wanted to criminalize free speech- freedom of information- freedom of the press - proving herself to be an Establishment wonk

 

How would they do that?

 

Then our conclusions from what we see are substantially different, and we disagree. Trump is different than the kind of president we are use to. I consider that an improvement, not a problem. This is more transparency than change, because Trump is in public showing characteristics that were common in most presidents, but normally not shown to you. Politicians have never shown their real characters; they show you what they think you want to see. Trump was not a politician. He is a strategist on a scale few can grasp, and how he deals with other nations is just that- carefully considered strategic moves. Yes, he is sometime brash, has a strong ego and believes in himself. Actually those are great job qualifications for the office. I think you are wrong about your negative emotions of is supporters- 180 degrees, because I've never in my life seen the negativity that comes from the left and media today. They began that when he announced he would run, and it's never let up. That's totally personal, not a performance judgement. recently a man explained that he went to a Trump rally to see foe himself, and all his friends warned him not to-but he did. He was warmly received, and when he announced he was a democrat wanting to see firsthand, people said "Good for you! Your welcome!. I would treat such a person in just that way too.

That's not harmful to America, it's how we should all act.

 

Bernie wants open borders.