EXCUSE ME?!..The OFFICIAL Bernie Sanders For President 2016 Thread

BustinScales510 said:
Just out of curiosity, if things were reversed and Sanders was ahead and all of the Hillary Clinton supporters were gushing with excitement over how they werent going to vote for him in the general and would either write in Clinton or vote for Trump do you think there wouldnt be any backlash about that?

Edit* And that "PUMA" thing from the 2008 election was nowhere near the scale of the bernie or bust cult
Click to expand...
"I'm not going to vote for Sanders because he's too progressive!"

I would love to hear a Clinton supporter say that

In that scenario, their opposition to Sanders wouldn't be based on reason, it would be based in either spite since Clinton didn't win or having actual conservative political opinions that are closer to Trump, whereas Sanders supporters who choose not to vote for Clinton are doing it because as progressives, they do not feel like she represents progressive political ideals. So in other words, it wouldn't make very much sense - logically speaking - for Clinton supporters who say they're progressives to write her name in or vote Trump, it makes perfect sense for Sanders supporters to sit this one out unless you live in a swing state since she doesn't represent them
londonfog said:
Telling people the truth is not shitting on them. Bernie will not get the nod. I say this and all hell breaks out from the Bernie clan. My wife and daughter both voted Bernie. I would vote for him IF he was the one in the general. He is not going to be. Why I'm I wrong for telling the truth. Bernie fans needs to get over it.
Click to expand...
You just said he doesn't even know how to break up the banks based on that bullshit Washington Post article that the mainstream media took out of context, you're denigrating his policy positions to make his supporters look uninformed which was exactly the point of pushing that false narrative in the first place. You stopping just short of calling schuy a retard for screwing up her voting registration that disqualified her from voting for Sanders when the exact same thing happened to hundreds of thousands of voters in Arizona and New York and you're calling people babies for not bending over backwards for Clinton just because she's the likely democratic nominee..

Yeah man, you are shitting on them, and I can tell you this, that sure as hell won't change anybody's mind, so maybe think about that
 
Padawanbater2 said:
"I'm not going to vote for Sanders because he's too progressive!"

I would love to hear a Clinton supporter say that

In that scenario, their opposition to Sanders wouldn't be based on reason, it would be based in either spite since Clinton didn't win or having actual conservative political opinions that are closer to Trump, whereas Sanders supporters who choose not to vote for Clinton are doing it because as progressives, they do not feel like she represents progressive political ideals. So in other words, it wouldn't make very much sense - logically speaking - for Clinton supporters who say they're progressives to write her name in or vote Trump, it makes perfect sense for Sanders supporters to sit this one out unless you live in a swing state since she doesn't represent them

You just said he doesn't even know how to break up the banks based on that bullshit Washington Post article that the mainstream media took out of context, you're denigrating his policy positions to make his supporters look uninformed which was exactly the point of pushing that false narrative in the first place. You stopping just short of calling schuy a retard for screwing up her voting registration that disqualified her from voting for Sanders when the exact same thing happened to hundreds of thousands of voters in Arizona and New York and you're calling people babies for not bending over backwards for Clinton just because she's the likely democratic nominee..

Yeah man, you are shitting on them, and I can tell you this, that sure as hell won't change anybody's mind, so maybe think about that
Click to expand...
Telling the truth is not shitting on them. Can you tell me how Bernie will break up big banks ?
How can you call yourself an informed voter when you don't even know the rules to cast a vote. No reason for Sky not knowing she had to registered to a party in order to vote in that party election. She lives in a state with a closed primary, know the damn rules. Nothing new.

Again I ask how does Bernie plan on breaking up the banks ?
 
londonfog said:
Telling the truth is not shitting on them. Can you tell me how Bernie will break up big banks ?
How can you call yourself an informed voter when you don't even know the rules to cast a vote. No reason for Sky not knowing she had to registered to a party in order to vote in that party election. She lives in a state with a closed primary, know the damn rules. Nothing new.

Again I ask how does Bernie plan on breaking up the banks ?
Click to expand...
Padawanbater2 said:
Instating the Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Exist Act and reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act would be a good start
Click to expand...
 
Padawanbater2 said:
"I'm not going to vote for Sanders because he's too progressive!"

I would love to hear a Clinton supporter say that

In that scenario, their opposition to Sanders wouldn't be based on reason, it would be based in either spite since Clinton didn't win or having actual conservative political opinions that are closer to Trump, whereas Sanders supporters who choose not to vote for Clinton are doing it because as progressives, they do not feel like she represents progressive political ideals. So in other words, it wouldn't make very much sense - logically speaking - for Clinton supporters who say they're progressives to write her name in or vote Trump, it makes perfect sense for Sanders supporters to sit this one out unless you live in a swing state since she doesn't represent them
Click to expand...
The bernie or bust thing is very rarely referenced with "except in swing states" included. In fact when Cenk Uygur (sp?) said that in one of the 20+ daily pro Bernie/Hillary bashing TYT videos he was basically pilloried in the comment section. I think youre being overly generous by saying that none of it is out of spite when she is called bitch,cunt, shillary, and whore on a regular basis in this thread alone
 
BustinScales510 said:
The bernie or bust thing is very rarely referenced with "except in swing states" included. In fact when Cenk Uygur (sp?) said that in one of the 20+ daily pro Bernie/Hillary bashing TYT videos he was basically pilloried in the comment section. I think youre being overly generous by saying that none of it is out of spite when she is called bitch,cunt, shillary, and whore on a regular basis in this thread alone
Click to expand...
The only reason people should vote for her in swing states is because of the Supreme Court nominations
londonfog said:
and tell me exactly the how Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Exist Act works. What is the plan details ?
Click to expand...
"SEC. 3. BREAKING-UP TOO BIG TO FAIL INSTITUTIONS.

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, but not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall break up entities included on the Too Big To Fail List, so that their failure would no longer cause a catastrophic effect on the United States or global economy without a taxpayer bailout.

(b) Consultation With Other Regulators.—In carrying out the requirement of subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the primary financial regulatory agency of the entity to be broken up."
 
Padawanbater2 said:
The only reason people should vote for her in swing states is because of the Supreme Court nominations

"SEC. 3. BREAKING-UP TOO BIG TO FAIL INSTITUTIONS.

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, but not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall break up entities included on the Too Big To Fail List, so that their failure would no longer cause a catastrophic effect on the United States or global economy without a taxpayer bailout.

(b) Consultation With Other Regulators.—In carrying out the requirement of subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the primary financial regulatory agency of the entity to be broken up."
Click to expand...
so what determines if a bank is too big, who makes this decision ? Is it the Secretary of the Treasury solely ? How do you go about breaking them up. Nothing you just paste covers any of these questions
 
londonfog said:
so what determines if a bank is too big, who makes this decision ? Is it the Secretary of the Treasury solely ? How do you go about breaking them up. Nothing you just paste covers any of these questions
Click to expand...
"SEC. 2. COMPILATION AND REPORT ON INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE TOO BIG TO FAIL.

(a) Compilation.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Financial Stability Oversight Council shall compile and submit to the Secretary of the Treasury a list of entities that it deems Too Big To Fail, which shall include, but is not limited to, any United States bank holding companies that have been identified as systemically important banks by the Financial Stability Board (in this Act referred to as the “Too Big To Fail List”).

(b) Submission To Congress And The President.—Upon receipt of the Too Big To Fail List, the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit the List to Congress and the President."

You should probably read the bill..
 
Padawanbater2 said:
"SEC. 2. COMPILATION AND REPORT ON INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE TOO BIG TO FAIL.

(a) Compilation.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Financial Stability Oversight Council shall compile and submit to the Secretary of the Treasury a list of entities that it deems Too Big To Fail, which shall include, but is not limited to, any United States bank holding companies that have been identified as systemically important banks by the Financial Stability Board (in this Act referred to as the “Too Big To Fail List”).

(b) Submission To Congress And The President.—Upon receipt of the Too Big To Fail List, the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit the List to Congress and the President."

You should probably read the bill..
Click to expand...
I have and I would suggest you give this a read
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/09/bernie-sanders-break-banks-too-big-fail
 
londonfog said:
I have and I would suggest you give this a read
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/09/bernie-sanders-break-banks-too-big-fail
Click to expand...
Sanders' argument is "The financial institutions are bigger now than they were before the financial crisis, they should be broken up so that if they fail again, taxpayers won't have to bail them out to save the global economy from going into another recession, and we should work together towards that goal.."

The counterargument to that from the article you linked is "Nobody really knows how to do that, it'll be really hard and people will probably make mistakes along the way.."

Welp, I'm convinced! I guess there's nothing we can do.. let's just put a person into office who has taken millions of dollars from the exact same financial institutions that caused the recession and let's hope she'll do a better job at regulating them, I'm absolutely sure there are no problems with that plan
 
Padawanbater2 said:
Sanders' argument is "The financial institutions are bigger now than they were before the financial crisis, they should be broken up so that if they fail again, taxpayers won't have to bail them out to save the global economy from going into another recession, and we should work together towards that goal.."

The counterargument to that from the article you linked is "Nobody really knows how to do that, it'll be really hard and people will probably make mistakes along the way.."

Welp, I'm convinced! I guess there's nothing we can do.. let's just put a person into office who has taken millions of dollars from the exact same financial institutions that caused the recession and let's hope she'll do a better job at regulating them, I'm absolutely sure there are no problems with that plan
Click to expand...
Just pointing out you can't have a plan without a plan
 
vote for Clinton, I'm sick of this legacy shit the presidency is not a royal line. two bushes, and a third in the mix. this is the same BS that Big corps do, they hire family not promote. you get your dipshit smack addict son running the company though assistants, who should be getting paid what this moron is being paid, just to be related to the top echelon of the company.

it does not matter who the president is, that once honorable job, is now a thankless face to bounce all the fucked up shit corporate America is doing to the American people.

there was a time, at a BBQ long ago, were both repubs and dems enjoyed constructive debates over some bourbon, rare steaks, and cigarettes. but no one disrespected the president because it wasn't fucking civilized.

now fucking honey boo boo can call the president a moron on TV, and people think its funny.
 
Padawanbater2 said:
Instating the Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Exist Act and reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act would be a good start
Click to expand...

WITH TEETH, this time; executives caught breaking the law go to prison for ten years minimum and forfeit their entire fortunes whether gained by the crime or not, and claw back wherever it might have been stashed.

In addition, the offending corporation pays massive fines, TO COME DIRECTLY FROM SHAREHOLDER VALUE. Either stock or dividends, preferred stocks and bonds are on the hook too; make the shareholders pay and I guarantee we will never see shit like this again!
 
Padawanbater2 said:
Sanders' argument is "The financial institutions are bigger now than they were before the financial crisis, they should be broken up so that if they fail again, taxpayers won't have to bail them out to save the global economy from going into another recession, and we should work together towards that goal.."

The counterargument to that from the article you linked is "Nobody really knows how to do that, it'll be really hard and people will probably make mistakes along the way.."

Welp, I'm convinced! I guess there's nothing we can do.. let's just put a person into office who has taken millions of dollars from the exact same financial institutions that caused the recession and let's hope she'll do a better job at regulating them, I'm absolutely sure there are no problems with that plan
Click to expand...






To be fair, Hillary did say she will " tell them to knock it off!"

images.jpg
 
I'm not buying the Supreme Court Justice line, That numbnuts Bush had the court in his favor and still couldn't make much of a difference..Abortion is never getting overturned, Alcohol prohibition has a better chance at getting reinstituted.. All these justices are pretty centrist and useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top