"Feel the Bern": The BERNIE SANDERS Thread - Part 1

[Fenrir]

It is being a realist in today's government ..... but also I don't think even Bernie KNOWS HOW to create and implement the things he is proposing .... he is simply stating what he wants our government to be....which in a country that is still very much slightly to the right of center and I mean slightly right, it is not going to happen. When Hillary gets the nod, listen to her rhetoric it will move very much to the center. Bernie would never do that...which is fine I wouldn't have a problem with it, but he would not get elected I don't care what the polls say right now.........we just haven't gotten there yet.....we are moving that direction but we aren't there yet.....I say at least another 20 years....before that kind of an agenda is give the mandate of the people's vote. Obama didn't even have that mandate.....is mandate was change... and the NEW factor.......his second term came because of nothing more than a forfeit by the republican candidate
We just aren't there....and I don't believe that Bernie, as much as I like the guy, is the person to get us even close.

I understand being realist and pragmatic, but after a certain point, come on, enough is enough. After a certain point, you have to stop thinking only about what is achievable and start working towards what you want. Sure, radical changes don't happen overnight and it usually comes in the form of incremental improvements but we won't even get that and there will be no progress if we aren't principled about it.

 

[Fenrir]

People act like Sanders is the first to bring this to the front and that John McCain didn't run on this issue and had a legislative history of fighting for campaign finance reform.

As far as I remember, no he didn't...and I will gladly and happily eat my words if you point me to his speeches or rallies during the 2008 election cycle where he raised the issue of money in politics. If he truly did, then count me in the McCain camp from this point onwards.

 

[TheBat812]

I understand being realist and pragmatic, but after a certain point, come on, enough is enough. After a certain point, you have to stop thinking only about what is achievable and start working towards what you want. Sure, radical changes don't happen overnight and it usually comes in the form of incremental improvements but we won't even get that and there will be no progress if we aren't principled about it.

1000 times this. Everything in life is compromise and negotiation - if you don't start off as far as your idealistic heart will take you and then work towards a realistic compromise, you will end up with half hearted, ultimately good intentioned, but flawed things like health care. If you go full steam ahead, you'll get maybe 50% there, but if you start out with a compromised proposal, you'll probably end up with 25% of what you wanted. To just accept today's system is sad - of course he can't unilaterally change the system - but by continuing to make it a huge issue in both his administration and for the people, change is much more likely to come than some tepid acceptance of the terrible system we have allowed to come to being.

 

[Kelly]

Not in this political climate...

 

[DDS]

It is being a realist in today's government ..... but also I don't think even Bernie KNOWS HOW to create and implement the things he is proposing .... he is simply stating what he wants our government to be....which in a country that is still very much slightly to the right of center and I mean slightly right, it is not going to happen. When Hillary gets the nod, listen to her rhetoric it will move very much to the center. Bernie would never do that...which is fine I wouldn't have a problem with it, but he would not get elected I don't care what the polls say right now.........we just haven't gotten there yet.....we are moving that direction but we aren't there yet.....I say at least another 20 years....before that kind of an agenda is give the mandate of the people's vote. Obama didn't even have that mandate.....is mandate was change... and the NEW factor.......his second term came because of nothing more than a forfeit by the republican candidate
We just aren't there....and I don't believe that Bernie, as much as I like the guy, is the person to get us even close.

I agree with much of this. Sanders' biggest contribution has been bringing socialism back into the lexicon and as a thing that can be seriously considered, as well bringing economic equality and campaign financing even closer to the light. But his ideas won't actually happen soon. Someone else will be his standard bearer, and all the young Sanders-lovers will get older, gain more influence (hopefully learn how to actually participate in the system in meaningful ways too), and probably vote them in. That hypothetical future candidate will be seen as a left-wing Reagan.

 

[Kelly]

i agree with much of this. Sanders' biggest contribution has been bringing socialism back into the lexicon and as a thing that can be seriously considered, as well bringing economic equality and campaign financing even closer to the light. But his ideas won't actually happen soon. Someone else will be his standard bearer, and all the young sanders-lovers will get older, gain more influence (hopefully learn how to actually participate in the system in meaningful ways too), and probably vote them in. That hypothetical future candidate will be seen as a left-wing reagan.

b-i-n-g-o!

 

[summerteeth]

I agree with much of this. Sanders' biggest contribution has been bringing socialism back into the lexicon and as a thing that can be seriously considered, as well bringing economic equality and campaign financing even closer to the light. But his ideas won't actually happen soon. Someone else will be his standard bearer, and all the young Sanders-lovers will get older, gain more influence (hopefully learn how to actually participate in the system in meaningful ways too), and probably vote them in. That hypothetical future candidate will be seen as a left-wing Reagan.

All the young Sanders' supporters will start getting older and start making money, buy houses, and have children and then be wary of high taxes. Especially now that minimum wage is going up all across the country.

 

[summerteeth]

Actually, after Daily News' hit-piece, quite a few outlets came forward and pointed out that it was actually the Daily News reporters and editors who didn't know what they were talking about:

http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-pres...go-nuts-over-bernie-sanders-lack-of-specifics
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/0...-knows-something-about-breaking-up-banks.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-daily-news_us_5704779ce4b0a506064d8df5
http://usuncut.com/politics/ny-daily-news-argument-destroyed-cnn/

Although my point about Sanders not knowing how reinstating Glass-Steagall would effectively take much of the risk out of the too-big-to-fail banks by either forcing them to only invest in safe asset classes such as treasuries or split their investment banking and brokerage divisions from their consumer banking divisions which would essentially be "breaking them up".

Aside from that, Sanders was actually right about Dodd-Frank and the Federal Reserve and the Daily News' assertion that he didn't know what he was talking about was a blatant lie.


Kindly enlighten me on his record. I am not being sarcastic. It's a genuine request. I'd rather not waste my time slogging through endless webpages when simply asking someone who knows much more about Kasich's positions over the years on different issues (as you clearly seem to) is faster and more convenient.



Please, don't talk about TARP. If I start on that, it'll consume this entire thread. And if you are a pro-business conservative, then you are doubly a hypocrite for supporting it because it took away the most important mechanism in laissez-faire capitalism for enforcing discipline in a free market enterprise: the consequences of failure. After decades of imposing the Washington Consensus around the world which financially and economically crippled dozens of countries, these self-serving "champions" of capitalism who lambasted regulation and government interference in every single breath, ultimately had the nerve, the UTTER NERVE, to come begging government for help.

The VA scandal is most definitely an example of incompetence on his part, but not wrong judgment, unless of course you point to me instances where he voted against legislation to solve the VA issue or something like that. I'll look into your point about DOMA. Other than that, you really haven't given sufficient examples of how he has "been wrong plenty of times". Even if you are right about DOMA, it would revise my opinion about him a bit, but as long as he is the only one not getting bought out by special interests and raising the issue of money in politics on a national platform, he'll have my support.

You will be hard pressed to find any economist worth his salt to say that TARP wasn't important in stabilizing the financial markets and ending the recession and Sanders voted against that measure.

I am a conservative, yes, but I also think it's stupid to only make decisions based on your ideals instead of approaching the situation with the best solution. You should always look at what's the best way to solve the problem. It was clear that in the midst of a huge recession laissez-faire capitalism wasn't going to fix the problem because the markets broke themselves at that point in time. Letting the banks fail would have plunged us into a depression and Bernie voted ostensibly to do just that when he voted against TARP. It was poor judgement and it was his ideals that blinded him to the best possible solution. That he didn't think it was fair or just in his mind even if it was going to end the recession.

It also doesn't mean that markets or capitalism are always bad. Things are always more nuanced. It's why I voted for Obama in 2008 because I thought he'd be more likely to push for government intervention.

I would say the VA scandal was an error in judgement. He places too much faith in government programs and was very slow to believe that it could be failing our veterans. He failed to act on reports saying that their was a waitlist and instead defended the VA.

DOMA
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/...riage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html

I misread earlier but he didn't support gay marriage just said it was a state issue, he was a supporter of civil unions.

 

[summerteeth]

As far as I remember, no he didn't...and I will gladly and happily eat my words if you point me to his speeches or rallies during the 2008 election cycle where he raised the issue of money in politics. If he truly did, then count me in the McCain camp from this point onwards.

McCain has been one of the biggest voices for campaign finance reform same with Lindsay Graham. This is a bipartisan issue, Bernie is not the only voice on this matter, I know his supporters think this is the case but it's not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEaF4yNYVkY

See Chance, not all Bernie supporters are apparently aware of McCain-Feingold.

 

[chaseter]

Clintons are connected to a Lobbying firm named in the Panama Papers through a Russian bank. Get her Bernie!

 

[Matt]

Bernie is becoming a Bernie Bro

 

[Schlosser85]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

 

[DDS]

All the young Sanders' supporters will start getting older and start making money, buy houses, and have children and then be wary of high taxes. Especially now that minimum wage is going up all across the country.

Maybe, but there is evidence that American culture is becoming gradually more left-leaning, and also that people are doing all those things you listed less frequently than previous generations.

 

[summerteeth]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

I know right? My girlfriend and I were saying the same thing this morning.

 

[Matt]

Maybe, but there is evidence that American culture is becoming gradually more left-leaning, and also that people are doing all those things you listed less frequently than previous generations.

There really isn't all that much evidence of that. That is to say, Sanders's rise to prominence this cycle is no more reflective of a national shift than Trump's rise is reflective of a shift to conservatism. Both are fads that were caused by an array of factors (liberal disappointment with Obama, racism, sexism, frustration following 8 years of Congressional deadlock due to both sides being ridiculously stubborn, etc). At the end of the day, America shifts back and forth a little bit, but we're probably always going to remain a fairly centrist country, by an large.

 

[DDS]

There really isn't all that much evidence of that. That is to say, Sanders's rise to prominence this cycle is no more reflective of a national shift than Trump's rise is reflective of a shift to conservatism. Both are fads that were caused by an array of factors (liberal disappointment with Obama, racism, sexism, frustration following 8 years of Congressional deadlock due to both sides being ridiculously stubborn, etc). At the end of the day, America shifts back and forth a little bit, but we're probably always going to remain a fairly centrist country, by an large.

I would argue the gradual acceptance of gay rights alone is evidence of a gradual left-leaning culture, as well as adding socialism back into the lexicon, which I don't think will just go away in 2020 and beyond.

 

[Matt]

I would argue the gradual acceptance of gay rights alone is evidence of a gradual left-leaning culture, as well as adding socialism back into the lexicon, which I don't think will just go away in 2020 and beyond.

It is no more of evidence than accepting non-Angelo whites, Jews, black people, and women into society. That is simply social progress, not a shift in the political paradigm. As to adding socialism into the lexicon, it hasn't really been embraced all that much. Even assuming Bernie Sanders has won over 50 % of the Democratic Party (he hasn't, but lets assume)...that is less than 25 % of the country. How many of those people are voting for him because he is a trendy, hashtag candidate? How many are children who will outgrow these ideas? I submit that quite a few are. And as these kids grow up or move onto the next trend, we will shift back into the middle.

Its also important to account for how much of Sanders's support is anti-Clinton rather than pro-Sanders. This was an election with a very small field. Most Democrats stayed out due to the presumption of Clinton. That frustrated a lot of people, viewing it as a corrupt process. Had Jim Webb had the social media and grassroot savvy of Sanders, I dare say he would have enjoyed largely the same result, despite being further right than Clinton.

It is a matter of timing and circumstance, not an overall shift, IMO.

 

[chaseter]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

My hopes are that it ruins political careers (which it's already doing).

 

[Ms. Marvel]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

You're not the only one, I agree with this.

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

You're not the only one, I agree with this.

The best part about the Panama papers is Putin acting like his House of Cards counterpart about the whole thing.

 

[Marvolo]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

You're not the only one.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Am I the only one who can't be arsed about the Panama Papers?

Wow, a bunch of rich people hide money in offshore bank accounts. Gasp. Shock. Duh.

Is this anything everybody hadn't already assumed?

I agree because of a lack of action. If there was going to be real action, it would be a rather large deal.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

My hopes are that it ruins political careers (which it's already doing).

Right. It's about finally having proof. And being able to hold them accountable.

 

[Kelly]

I would argue the gradual acceptance of gay rights alone is evidence of a gradual left-leaning culture, as well as adding socialism back into the lexicon, which I don't think will just go away in 2020 and beyond.

I think it is the term "left leaning" that is the problem with this statement...IMHO.

Is there a shift in the mindset of people as far as "some" social issues? Yes, definitely....does it constitute a left-lean? I don't think so...at least not for a few more decades. Those types of paradigm shifts will be felt for quite a while, but a full on lean towards one side or the other will take decades to see. Using your example of "gay rights" as someone who is a Christian and is in strong favor of Gay Rights, I see both sides of this issue on a daily basis. Yes, you are seeing our country move toward a stronger stance in favor of Gay Rights, but I do not believe that it is a Paradigm change in the minds of a great many, I think that the great many are those that have simply said, "hey, not really my thing, but to each their own". In order to have such a shift where we see an actual lean, you must have a Paradigm change in the minds of people, not just a hush over the crowd, so to speak. If that makes sense.... lol

 

[summerteeth]

I think it is the term "left leaning" that is the problem with this statement...IMHO.

Is there a shift in the mindset of people as far as "some" social issues? Yes, definitely....does it constitute a left-lean? I don't think so...at least not for a few more decades. Those types of paradigm shifts will be felt for quite a while, but a full on lean towards one side or the other will take decades to see. Using your example of "gay rights" as someone who is a Christian and is in strong favor of Gay Rights, I see both sides of this issue on a daily basis. Yes, you are seeing our country move toward a stronger stance in favor of Gay Rights, but I do not believe that it is a Paradigm change in the minds of a great many, I think that the great many are those that have simply said, "hey, not really my thing, but to each their own". In order to have such a shift where we see an actual lean, you must have a Paradigm change in the minds of people, not just a hush over the crowd, so to speak. If that makes sense.... lol

Yeah, most Republicans my age that I know are pro gay rights. I think it's more of a generational thing than a Republican/Democrat issue at this point.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/10/61-of-young-republicans-favor-same-sex-marriage/