U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-27-2015, 11:30 PM
mm4 mm4 started this thread
 
5,711 posts, read 3,139,212 times
Reputation: 1941

Advertisements

He's not going to let that money go to waste. He may choose to caucus with Democrats but his non-aligned party affiliation means he feels he can take them or leave them. And has already.

 
Old 10-27-2015, 11:47 PM
 
4,572 posts, read 2,977,151 times
Reputation: 3261
I hope the old man goes 3rd party. It's time.
 
Old 10-28-2015, 09:07 AM
 
3,665 posts, read 2,333,227 times
Reputation: 1970
I have predicted dozen's of times that he will go third party about a week after Trump does. Once the idea that the GOp has become "hopelessly fractured" there will be no downside for him to do the same to the Dems. Problem is that no one will get 270 and the house will pick Bush even if he is the 3rd or 4th place vote recipient.
 
Old 10-28-2015, 10:33 AM
 
40,114 posts, read 24,358,043 times
Reputation: 12624
Quote:
Originally Posted by armourereric View Post
I have predicted dozen's of times that he will go third party about a week after Trump does. Once the idea that the GOp has become "hopelessly fractured" there will be no downside for him to do the same to the Dems. Problem is that no one will get 270 and the house will pick Bush even if he is the 3rd or 4th place vote recipient.
I don't think Sanders ever got in the race to win the nomination or the Presidency. I think he got in because he wanted to draw Secretary Clinton out on her positions, possibly move her to the left on some of those positions. The last thing he wants is to split the Democrat vote, and end up with the country having a Republican President. He wants the candidate furthest to the left to win, not only because that's more in line with his own political positions, but also because it's likely that the Supreme Court will have at least one opening in the next four years, and it's in a delicate balance right now.
 
Old 10-28-2015, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Type 0.7 Kardashev
10,577 posts, read 7,276,802 times
Reputation: 37474
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4 View Post
He's not going to let that money go to waste. He may choose to caucus with Democrats but his non-aligned party affiliation means he feels he can take them or leave them. And has already.
Keep clicking those ruby heels together!

There is zero reason to believe that Sanders will run as a third-party candidate. You cling to this fantasy that because Sanders is not a Democrat, he won't support the nominee. Yet he always supports the Democratic nominee. In 2000, he endorsed Gore (not Nader). Ditto with Kerry in 2004, and Obama in 2008 and 2012. Why do you think he's vowed not to harshly attack Clinton? Because he doesn't want to damage the eventual likely nominee.

You've got denial, wishful thinking, and nothing else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed from California View Post
I hope the old man goes 3rd party. It's time.
And that's all you've got - hope in the face of reality.

Like your fantasies about Mitt Romney crushing Obama in 2012:

Quote:
Morris is often wrong but you people have NO idea what's coming your way. There is no enthusiasm for the idiot you elected based on stupidity. Just like 2010, America woke up. Easily 300 electoral votes for Romney.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/26757806-post31.html

We have the ignore feature here for a reason. I've put a good 30-40 of the most insane lefties here on it.

Quote:
When Romney wins with both a popular vote and electoral vote landslide I may take a few off just for the sheer hilarity of it all.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/26705690-post120.html

You're spectacularly wrong, and you put everyone who doesn't join in your demonstrably wrong fantasies on ignore. I guess that's what I'd do, too, if I was terrified of facing reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I don't think Sanders ever got in the race to win the nomination or the Presidency. I think he got in because he wanted to draw Secretary Clinton out on her positions, possibly move her to the left on some of those positions. The last thing he wants is to split the Democrat vote, and end up with the country having a Republican President. He wants the candidate furthest to the left to win, not only because that's more in line with his own political positions, but also because it's likely that the Supreme Court will have at least one opening in the next four years, and it's in a delicate balance right now.
Precisely. The 'tell' was in the first debate, when he completed repudiated the talking point of Clinton's emails. You can't take down the front-runner without attacking her directly, and made he clear that he has no intention of pursuing one of the few potentially useful angles of attack on Clinton.
 
Old 10-28-2015, 10:45 AM
 
12,639 posts, read 7,316,536 times
Reputation: 7449
Sanders' only reason for being in the race is to function as a GOTV effort for Hillary. He proved it when he gave away the best weapon he had against Hillary - the argument that she is corrupt and dishonest.

He is not going third party. He'll endorse her (again) at some point.
 
Old 10-28-2015, 11:12 PM
mm4 mm4 started this thread
 
5,711 posts, read 3,139,212 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I don't think Sanders ever got in the race to win the nomination or the Presidency. I think he got in because he wanted to draw Secretary Clinton out on her positions, possibly move her to the left on some of those positions. The last thing he wants is to split the Democrat vote, and end up with the country having a Republican President. He wants the candidate furthest to the left to win, not only because that's more in line with his own political positions, but also because it's likely that the Supreme Court will have at least one opening in the next four years, and it's in a delicate balance right now.
That's a nice, wishful rationalization. He's not so concerned that he's also drawing attention to Hillary's failings to a frustrated progressive base she needs to win that was let down, again, in the last cycle by the progressive left's own dark underbelly. The highly regarded North Carolina pollsters PPP have both a putative Trump and a Carson winning against her in the general.

He's made of money right now, drawing crowds. No war whoops into the microphone--and nothing beholden to the Democratic Party.

If Lieberman would do it, most certainly Bernie would. Enjoy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The last thing he wants is to split the Democrat vote, and end up with the country having a Republican President.
(Ralph Nader?) Hahaha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
Sanders' only reason for being in the race is to function as a GOTV effort for Hillary. He proved it when he gave away the best weapon he had against Hillary - the argument that she is corrupt and dishonest.

He is not going third party. He'll endorse her (again) at some point.
He's the gentleman Vermonter, running an upbeat, positive campaign.
 
Old 10-29-2015, 03:37 AM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
6,616 posts, read 10,675,825 times
Reputation: 5762
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I don't think Sanders ever got in the race to win the nomination or the Presidency. I think he got in because he wanted to draw Secretary Clinton out on her positions, possibly move her to the left on some of those positions. The last thing he wants is to split the Democrat vote, and end up with the country having a Republican President. He wants the candidate furthest to the left to win, not only because that's more in line with his own political positions, but also because it's likely that the Supreme Court will have at least one opening in the next four years, and it's in a delicate balance right now.
Unfortunately, I agree ... except that a split vote, in any direction, would not necessarily lead to a president of this or that party, it's more complicated than that.

As a wish-list item, I would love to see both Sanders and Trump make third and fourth party bids, it would be healthy for democratic participation in US politics.

But it won't happen.

I expect Mrs. Bill to string Sanders and his supporters along with her mouth, then once she obtains power she will pursue her own agenda and that of Mr. Bill's power group, while continuing to string Sanders and his supporters along with her mouth, maybe throwing them a few sops here and there.

Come to think of it, not much different than the current president and the power group that put him there.
 
Old 10-29-2015, 06:42 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,554 posts, read 17,643,245 times
Reputation: 15630
He can go rant and rave in the Greens. He's as much of a loon as Nader is. Should be a fun little show. A couple of rich little, bitter, old men ranting and raving and raving about "injustice".
 
Old 10-30-2015, 06:30 AM
 
66,501 posts, read 30,325,536 times
Reputation: 8670
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4 View Post
That's a nice, wishful rationalization. He's not so concerned that he's also drawing attention to Hillary's failings to a frustrated progressive base she needs to win that was let down, again, in the last cycle by the progressive left's own dark underbelly.
Here's what I don't get about Dems/liberals... If they want the U.S. to be a more progressive country, why doesn't their platform include taxing like the more progressive countries?

Other countries don’t have a “47%” - The Washington Post

https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/cho..._Labels_.0.jpg

How Sweden and other Scandinavian and European countries fight inequality - regressive rather than progressive taxes

Pay close attention to the charts.

PLUS, Scandinavian and European countries have no FATCA laws as does the U.S. Their rich are legally able to hide wealth, income, profits, and gains in foreign accounts so that they're completely tax-free. And many have eliminated the inheritance tax.

Quote:
The highly regarded North Carolina pollsters PPP have both a putative Trump and a Carson winning against her in the general.
Interesting...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top