I'd do it if I thought she had a prayer.
I'd do it if I thought she had a prayer.
So you're writing in Bernie...I'd do it if I thought she had a prayer.
She DOES NOT REPRESENT ME, and stop trying to tell me what is best for me, it's condescending and it's wrong.So you're writing in Bernie...
At least she's running for president.
lol. I'm not acting like I didn't have you on ignore for the past year. I did. Because for the longest time you had a ridiculously childish sig that took up half the fucking screen space. I didn't feel like scrolling to read just one fucking comment. Then I forgot you even existed, and since I don't have anyone on ignore (except you at the time) I didn't think to check. But randomly I noticed there was an "ignored comment" link, and clicking it I found that you had taken down your ridiculously childish gigantic signatures, so I took you off ignore.Don't pretend you haven't had me on ignore for a year over my signature.
Such a petulant child.
Did you always act this way when you didn't get what you want growing up? You must've been a little monster at grocery checkout.
Umm, wow, that was not very informative at all. Especially that bit about economically deprived Bernie followers. An alternative view on who constitutes the bulk of Bernie babies can be found here:Second half;
The irony of his plea is that Bernie supporters represent a much larger downtrodden group of their own: working-class members of the Democratic Party who have essentially been dispossessed of an electoral voice by the party’s shifting interests over the last three decades. Bernie’s candidacy was an attempt to shift the Democratic Party back to its roots of truly standing for the working class. This friend of mine had a chance to show solidarity with those voters by supporting a candidate who was every bit as progressive on social issues as Hillary, but who also had a strong agenda for empowering the working class. Instead, he chose to support the next corporate shill churned out for mass consumption by Democratic leadership.
The really frustrating part of all of this is that he wouldn’t even do right by the working class when there was no cost him personally. If Bernie had won, this guy would have gotten a candidate who supported all of the socially progressive policies he wanted, but a Hillary win means that those working class Democrats won’t be getting a candidate who supports their progressive economic policy needs. He actively helped the mainstream of the Democratic Party thwart the interests of progressive working class voters. Then he turned around and used an exploitative personal plea to urge people that he wouldn’t stand with to put personal differences aside and stand with him. It takes powerful blinders to not see the hypocrisy there.
The people who constitute the Democrats’ upper middle class base don’t get it. They never will. Their struggle is not the working class’s struggle. Their issues can be solved by a game of inches. The working class needs to move miles. The problem in this election is that they were able to convince so many from the working class that doing what is best for them is what is best for everyone in the country. They have that in common with Republican leadership. It’s a con-job on par with trickle-down economics. Touché, upper middle class. Touché.
That said, Bernie is just the beginning of a massive sea change. Much like Republicans, Democratic leadership’s days of getting away with this are preciously numbered.
Umm, wow, that was not very informative at all. Especially that bit about economically deprived Bernie followers. An alternative view on who constitutes the bulk of Bernie babies can be found here:
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11649054/bernie-sanders-working-class-base
This trope has become the conventional wisdom in the media, with the Wall Street Journal, the Nation, The Huffington Post, and a host of other outlets (including me at Vox) stating as fact that downscale whites have formed a crucial piece of Sanders's base.
This interpretation makes for an interesting narrative, but it's missing the real story. Sanders's victories aren't being powered by a groundswell of white working-class support, but instead stem from his most reliable base since the start of the primary: young voters.
Because young voters also tend to have lower incomes, the massive age gap between Sanders and Clinton has sometimes looked to observers like a gap in economic class, according to political scientists Matt Grossmann and Alan Abramowitz.
But the most salient divide in the primary is not between rich and poor. It's between young and old — and between white and black.
The point of this article is that Bernie babies are white, young and either still in college or recent graduates. Which puts the lie to the crap you just consumed about a whole lot of space with. The point in your posting was that Bernie babies represent the working class, which means that the Democrats are just as much a part of the ruling status quo as Republicans. I call bullshit on this. Bernie babies represent a coddled white youth demographic. They are just getting started in the working world and find it haaarddd. Oddly enough, some are willing to sell out the real working class in order to protest their condition.
You call bullshit on what, that the democratic establishment is just as corrupt as the republican establishment?The point of this article is that Bernie babies are white, young and either still in college or recent graduates. Which puts the lie to the crap you just consumed about a whole lot of space with. The point in your posting was that Bernie babies represent the working class, which means that the Democrats are just as much a part of the ruling status quo as Republicans. I call bullshit on this. Bernie babies represent a coddled white youth demographic. They are just getting started in the working world and find it haaarddd. Oddly enough, some are willing to sell out the real working class in order to protest their condition.
Your words, not mine.You call bullshit on what, that the democratic establishment is just as corrupt as the republican establishment?
If Clinton represents the working class, why do voters who make less money support Sanders and voters who make more money support Clinton?
That would seem to be a pretty good indication of who actually represents whom
Bernie represents the DNC and he's with Hillary though. That's wrong. I mean unless you're a democrat. Nothing wrong with that, no need for the denial.She DOES NOT REPRESENT ME, and stop trying to tell me what is best for me, it's condescending and it's wrong.
That said, Bernie is just the beginning of a massive sea change.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/sanders-endorsement-chatter-225198Sanders confirms endorsement chatter
07/06/16
“You’re not denying the report that there are talks about a possible endorsement?” Hayes asked.
Sanders replied: “That’s correct.”
Name recognition, establishment favoritism, big money donors/superPACs, media bias, voter suppression, registration limits...Your words, not mine.
I took issue with the mischaracterizations found in ty's article that he copied and pasted in its entirety. But I do not take issue with that Sanders positions regarding corruption and the need for policies to reverse the decline unto marginalization of the middle class.
I call bullshit that Bernie Babies represent the working poor or working classes or lower economic classes. Bernie Babies are mostly young, white, male and well educated. They do not represent the working poor in terms of future prospects. Most people start off life earning less than the average wage earner. Well educated white men do very well later on in life and there is no reason to think anything has changed regarding this fact.
To say the Democrats who support Hillary are all represented by the top 10% of income earners is also bullshit. She has support of almost 90% of Black and Latino voters. Tell me with a straight face that those voters were mostly from the top 10% of income group. Union workers also show strong support for Hillary. That she brought in the tradesmen, the non-white vote as well as many that are well-off are facts that the article completely missed.
Regarding your question about why do voters supporting Sanders make less money? I will repeat a line from my earlier posting because you must have missed it:
Because young voters also tend to have lower incomes, the massive age gap between Sanders and Clinton has sometimes looked to observers like a gap in economic class, according to political scientists Matt Grossmann and Alan Abramowitz.
I find posts that contain the entire content of an article annoying. And so, I just post the pertinent bits with a link so that people can read it for themselves as well as to show that I'm not cherry picking from the article just to prove a point.
Name recognition, establishment favoritism, big money donors/superPACs, media bias, voter suppression, registration limits...
All things that helped Clinton secure the nomination. The reasons minorities support Clinton at higher rates than Sanders extend into socioeconomic and even religious issues, as Clinton supporters love to point out "they're the same on more than 90% of the issues", so if you're implying that Sanders, the man who walked with MLK while Clinton was busy being president of the young Republicans at Wellesley College, is somehow worse on racial issues, please explain how. Seeing as Sanders has a good reputation when it comes to racial issues and there's nothing in his history that would tarnish that, the reason why blacks and minorities would support Clinton at higher rates than him would seem pretty obvious; she's a more moderate democrat than Sanders, and blacks and minorities are also generally more moderate democrats. They tend to hold organized religion in higher regard and they tend to oppose LGBT rights at higher rates than whites. Supporting Sanders over Clinton largely comes down to being more progressive over being more moderate. Young people, white people, males as well as the highly educated tend to be more liberal. Which isn't to say Sanders doesn't have strong support outside those demographics, because he does, particularly among young women.
I think it's pretty disingenuous to try to spin this as if to make it seem like the only people who support Sanders are young, affluent rich kids who don't have anything better to do with their time than bitch about how haaaaarrrrd they have it. Give me a fucking break with that bullshit. You know as well as I do whether you admit it or not this movement is supported by vast amounts of poor and middle-class people of all colors, ages and genders.
Except that every Bernie supporter I know has put their college years behind them long ago. It's the 90% of us that need him, young, old, of all ethnicities.Umm, wow, that was not very informative at all. Especially that bit about economically deprived Bernie followers. An alternative view on who constitutes the bulk of Bernie babies can be found here:
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11649054/bernie-sanders-working-class-base
This trope has become the conventional wisdom in the media, with the Wall Street Journal, the Nation, The Huffington Post, and a host of other outlets (including me at Vox) stating as fact that downscale whites have formed a crucial piece of Sanders's base.
This interpretation makes for an interesting narrative, but it's missing the real story. Sanders's victories aren't being powered by a groundswell of white working-class support, but instead stem from his most reliable base since the start of the primary: young voters.
Because young voters also tend to have lower incomes, the massive age gap between Sanders and Clinton has sometimes looked to observers like a gap in economic class, according to political scientists Matt Grossmann and Alan Abramowitz.
But the most salient divide in the primary is not between rich and poor. It's between young and old — and between white and black.
The point of this article is that Bernie babies are white, young and either still in college or recent graduates. Which puts the lie to the crap you just consumed about a whole lot of space with. The point in your posting was that Bernie babies represent the working class, which means that the Democrats are just as much a part of the ruling status quo as Republicans. I call bullshit on this. Bernie babies represent a coddled white youth demographic. They are just getting started in the working world and find it haaarddd. Oddly enough, some are willing to sell out the real working class in order to protest their condition.
a more progressive platform
Bernie is an independent who caucuses with the democratic party. There is a difference.Bernie represents the DNC and he's with Hillary though. That's wrong. I mean unless you're a democrat. Nothing wrong with that, no need for the denial.
We need to raise taxes on capital gains.