Side note: where is Bernie getting all the money?

People who can't afford it are maxing out their credit cards and emptying their savings accounts to give to him bc he has promised them to get them out of their student loan debt.

 

 

A Clinton-Sanders ticket is probably much too old.

 

But is it still a possibility? Sanders might be the best bet to keep some of the Independent voters from Trump as they do appear to have some, even if small, overlap in their draw. On the other hand, Sanders might not want the job.

 

Had Cruz or Rubio gotten the nominee, a Hispanic like Julian Castro probably would have been a favorite, but would he still be a guy near the top of the list?

The overlap between Sanders supporters and Trump supporters is next to zero, and yes that ticket would be too old for most folks.

Plenty of other viable options for VP, Corey Booker would be interesting as would Julian Castro.

Edited March 23, 201610 yr by DaveW

Maybe Sanders has stuck around this long because he believes the popularity of his campaign can act as a liberal mandate for President Clinton. Perhaps he is worried she will be inclined to compromise with the R's if he does not drive that point  home.

 

He's wasting a ton of people's money on a campaign with no hope.  I get that having his voice out there makes some people feel better, but he's got no chance at this.

Yeah, it's really immoral at this stage, for someone who is so damned worried about helping the poor and young people, he certainly doesn't mind taking their hard earned money to flush down his hopeless campaign.

 

He's wasting a ton of people's money on a campaign with no hope.  I get that having his voice out there makes some people feel better, but he's got no chance at this.

He's mainstreaming how many, many people feel - whether or not he wins the nomination - which is worth a couple bucks.   That people are still giving money to Bernie in spite of the remote possibility of his winning the nomination indicates that they are spending their money on something other than Bernie getting the nomination.

 

Yeah, it's really immoral at this stage, for someone who is so damned worried about helping the poor and young people, he certainly doesn't mind taking their hard earned money to flush down his hopeless campaign.

This is so profoundly off-base and simplistic it could have emerged from Trump's twitter account:

 

Bernie takes poor people's money.  Can't win.  Sad! Immoral!

Edited March 23, 201610 yr by PseudoSABR

I doubt he's raising all this money from $20 donations from college kids.

 

He's getting some serious money from somewhere.

 

Yeah, it's really immoral at this stage, for someone who is so damned worried about helping the poor and young people, he certainly doesn't mind taking their hard earned money to flush down his hopeless campaign.

I think the money spent on campaigns, period, whether it be Bernie's grassroots fundraising or the PACs out there today is immoral.

 

A Clinton-Sanders ticket is probably much too old.

 

But is it still a possibility? Sanders might be the best bet to keep some of the Independent voters from Trump as they do appear to have some, even if small, overlap in their draw. On the other hand, Sanders might not want the job.

 

Had Cruz or Rubio gotten the nominee, a Hispanic like Julian Castro probably would have been a favorite, but would he still be a guy near the top of the list?

 

No, he helps her zero. It will be someone from Ohio, Penn, FL, or NC. My money is on FL and a hispanic.

 

Yeah, it's really immoral at this stage, for someone who is so damned worried about helping the poor and young people, he certainly doesn't mind taking their hard earned money to flush down his hopeless campaign.

 

Wow. Having actual discussions about issues that don't get much play, that's party of what he is doing. 

 

Wow. Having actual discussions about issues that don't get much play, that's party of what he is doing. 

Ah yes the good ole "Free college for everyone" and "Don't worry about those loans you legally took out and were old enough to sign for" issues!

 

 That people are still giving money to Bernie in spite of the remote possibility of his winning the nomination indicates that they are spending their money on something other than Bernie getting the nomination.

Or they are just delusional.

 

The overlap between Sanders supporters and Trump supporters is next to zero, and yes that ticket would be too old for most folks.

Plenty of other viable options for VP, Corey Booker would be interesting as would Julian Castro.

 

Polls show 7-10% of Sanders supporters would vote Trump over Clinton:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/13/bernie-sanders-supporters-consider-donald-trump-no-hillary-clinton

 

That's not insignificant. I think the ticket is too old with another unelectable VP in eight years, but he's going to have to at least be a consideration if the Dems agree with the numbers.

 

No, he helps her zero. It will be someone from Ohio, Penn, FL, or NC. My money is on FL and a hispanic.

Yup ...

 

I doubt he's raising all this money from $20 donations from college kids.

He's getting some serious money from somewhere.

He is still claiming that his average donation is somewhere around $37

 

It's not $20 donations from college kids either that is the problem, its when they are maxing out credit cards and using their tuition/savings to donate $5,000-$10,000 to his sunk campaign.

 

I think the money spent on campaigns, period, whether it be Bernie's grassroots fundraising or the PACs out there today is immoral.

Meh, I think the biggest chumps on this planet are people who donate to campaigns (unless they are able to donate enough where they can call in a favor etc)

 

Polls show 7-10% of Sanders supporters would vote Trump over Clinton:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/13/bernie-sanders-supporters-consider-donald-trump-no-hillary-clinton

 

 

Currently Bernie bros HATE Clinton, since she is the one thing standing in his way currently. Once he bows out that 7-10% number will more or less disappear once they actually start focusing on Trump (instead of Hilary)

 

Meh, I think the biggest chumps on this planet are people who donate to campaigns (unless they are able to donate enough where they can call in a favor etc)

Well, that kind of giving to campaigns is even worse, imo. I want that kind of money out of it. Until it is, one has to raise and spend however possible in order to compete.

Well, on the bright side it's keeping the trolls off the streets.

 

 

Currently Bernie bros HATE Clinton, since she is the one thing standing in his way currently. Once he bows out that 7-10% number will more or less disappear once they actually start focusing on Trump (instead of Hilary)

I'm not sure that most of those likely wouldn't have voted anyway, and won't vote for either in November, so it's pretty negligible

 

 

Well, on the bright side it's keeping the trolls off the streets.

Yeah ... pretty scary running into these late at night after drinking too much ...

 

http://movies.mxdwn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Troll-Dolls.jpg

 

Yeah ... pretty scary running into these late at night after drinking too much ...

 

http://movies.mxdwn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Troll-Dolls.jpg

Almost like Gardy-gnomes.

 

I'm not sure that most of those likely wouldn't have voted anyway, and won't vote for either in November, so it's pretty negligible

Yeah, and chances are he will give Hilary his support eventually anyways.

He's mainstreaming how many, many people feel - whether or not he wins the nomination - which is worth a couple bucks.   That people are still giving money to Bernie in spite of the remote possibility of his winning the nomination indicates that they are spending their money on something other than Bernie getting the nomination.

Eh, you could argue the same about Trump, does that make it ok? At some point sinking your supporters money into a lost cause is delusional at best, irresponsible at worst.

 

I'd make the same argument against Kasich.

 

Eh, you could argue the same about Trump, does that make it ok? At some point sinking your supporters money into a lost cause is delusional at best, irresponsible at worst.

I'd make the same argument against Kasich.

Yes, it's okay.  It's not a moral issue, and painting it as such, seems, well irresponsible. 

 

Plenty of people give their money to so-called 'lost causes'.  It's their decision to make.  Bernie's message has value, even if his candidacy doesn't.   To use an old and brash analogy: Even if this battle is lost, some are fighting to win a war. 

Edited March 23, 201610 yr by PseudoSABR

 

Ah yes the good ole "Free college for everyone" and "Don't worry about those loans you legally took out and were old enough to sign for" issues!

Have you watched any of Bernie's speeches lately? (I doubt that you have.)  This is but one point of a whole platform of issues having to do with wealth disparity.  It matters to some of us, even if it doesn't matter to you, Dave.  You're continual use of pejorative declarations ("immoral!" "delusional!"), don't help the conversation, if you don't have substance to add, please just shut up.

 

Eh, you could argue the same about Trump, does that make it ok? At some point sinking your supporters money into a lost cause is delusional at best, irresponsible at worst.

I'd make the same argument against Kasich.

 

I think the difference with Kasich is, that he is a dark horse for the nominee if Trump doesn't clinch by the convention.

 

Also, the mainstream Republicans will probably do anything at this point to keep him in to take as many votes away from Trump in an effort to keep him from clinching.

 

He's wasting a ton of people's money on a campaign with no hope.  I get that having his voice out there makes some people feel better, but he's got no chance at this.

I think it's an important campaign to run, even if he has little to no shot of winning the nomination.

 

The Democratic Party needs a real leftist candidate to remind the party they have a base and it's not happy with how things have turned out over the past decade. Bernie Sanders is reminding the party they've drifted to the center on almost all the issues and many people aren't happy about it.

 

And Sanders, unlike you-know-who, is running an issues-focused campaign without bluster. He's making a point and it's a valid one.

 

Have you watched any of Bernie's speeches lately? (I doubt that you have.)  This is but one point of a whole platform of issues having to do with wealth disparity.  It matters to some of us, even if it doesn't matter to you, Dave.  You're continual use of pejorative declarations ("immoral!" "delusional!"), don't help the conversation, if you don't have substance to add, please just shut up.

People need to stop crying about wealth disparity and start doing something about it. Sanders offers no real plausible solutions, it's all just:

 

"Let's take on the banks!"

ok, how?

"Let's get rid of student loans?"

Ok? How?

"Free college for all!"

Ok? How?

"Free Healthcare for all!"

Ok? How?

 

Sanders has accomplished NIL in the senate. And has accomplished NIL in his "campaign"

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Democratic Party needs a real leftist candidate to remind the party they have a base and it's not happy with how things have turned out over the past decade.

Actually the "base" has been just fine, which is why Hilary has been and continued to be a lock to win the nomination.  Bernie has successfully tapped into the lazy and irresponsible group of millennials who want everything handed to them, don't want to be held accountable (take my student loans away please!) and want to live in a fictional utopia where hard work doesn't matter.