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.
The crony capitalist vs the socialist. Two things that have destroyed many countries. It would be historically awful and destroy this country.
On the contrary, you show your ignorance. FDR, Truman and JFK built this country. And this is the policy platform that the establishment democrats have abandoned since the 80s, in order to grovel the rich and the powerful. Bernie represent the old school FDR democrats. A national health care system will not destroy the country. Quite the opposite. The current system will bankrupt the country.
On the contrary, you show your ignorance. FDR, Truman and JFK built this country. And this is the policy platform that the establishment democrats have abandoned since the 80s, in order to grovel the rich and the powerful. Bernie represent the old school FDR democrats. A national health care system will not destroy the country. Quite the opposite. The current system will bankrupt the country.
FDR was a pragmatist, like Hillary. Progressive means making progress, even when it has to be incremental, and not railing about ideological purity and ignoring political reality. Bernie is not an FDR pragmatic progressive.
Quote:
It's time for a reality check. The Democratic party, which Sanders shunned for some 20 odd years, has helped push, in recent years, some of the greatest liberal reforms. Whether we consider the huge gains of the LGBTQ community, post-2008 reforms in the financial system, or the advent of the most liberal Healthcare legislation yet (the ACA), the progress pushed by Democratic leaders is not negligible.
Granted, we have not made enough progress. Americans still suffer from a lack of good healthcare, overly expensive college tuitions, discrimination, and a host of other issues. But the idea that Democrats have been too soft in pushing for change is simply false. Taking a look at just a few of the bills authored by Democrats in Congress, it is clear that the party's stance is far more liberal than the Obama administration's accomplishments would indicate. Why? Because Obama only had a Democrat-controlled Congress for two years. And when he virtually begged for his supporters to vote Democrats into office in midterm elections, Americans (as always) showed up to the polls in disappointingly low numbers and effectively deprived the President of the chance to continue rolling out huge progressive reforms like the ACA or Dodd-Frank. Democrats--and the President--had effectively been stopped in their tracks. Where were the Bernie supporters that call themselves "real" progressives then?
Of course he has been attacked. His policies are to the right of Franklin D Roosevelt, yet that wont stop you from your absurd hyperbole. I remember the Hillarybots also used this absurd fear mongering if Obama was nominated. Just admit it. You hate social democracy.
But the discussion was whether Hillary is the better candidate in swing states because she won the loyal democrats in the swing states (African Americans, lifelong Democrats etc).
You know nothing about me, maybe you should check some of my posts in other threads and then tell me I hate 'social democracy'. If Sanders were nominated I would do everything I could to get him elected, but he won't be nominated and that's a fact. I think he started out with a noble purpose, to push the party to the left, but when he started winning some primaries he drank the kool aid and now he can't bring himself to face the reality that he will not be the nominee so he's become a spoiler and IMO getting more irritating by the day.
FDR was a pragmatist, like Hillary. Progressive means making progress, even when it has to be incremental, and not railing about ideological purity and ignoring political reality. Bernie is not an FDR pragmatic progressive.
In fact, Al Smith was the one who in the Dem primary of 1932 against FDR labeled himself as the pragmatist and realist (like all corporate puppets do). FDR was ridiculed and demonized as a socialist. Al Smith was the pro-business candidate and he later called the New Deal anti-American and anti-business. Thank goodness the people chose FDR and not the Hillary clone Al Smith.
Regarding Sanders, Vermont love what he has done for them, so you clearly dont know what you are talking about when you claim he is "railing about ideoogical purity" at the expense of the people of Vermont.
I find it absurd that people use the rights for the LGBTQ community and ACA as arguments against Sanders. Gay rights didnt happen incrementally, it was extremely fast change, and we can thank people like Sanders for that. Regarding, ACA, Sanders was one of the architects behind it and we can thank Sanders for the billions in community health centers that is serving millions of Americans every year.
Over the years, Sanders has tucked away funding for health centers in appropriation bills signed by George W. Bush, into Barack Obama’s stimulus program, and through the earmarking process. But his biggest achievement came in 2010 through the Affordable Care Act. In a series of high-stakes legislative maneuvers, Sanders struck a deal to include $11 billion for health clinics in the law.
The result has made an indelible mark on American health care, extending the number of people served by clinics from 18 million before the ACA to an expected 28 million next year.
As one would expect, the program was largely met with plaudits from patients and public health experts, but it has also won praise from even the biggest Obamacare critics on Capitol Hill.
Nope. Polls said Hillary would win Indiana by bigger margin than she has in California. She's been on a losing streak ever since.
Her cavalier attitude about workers jobs has severely wounded the woman.
No they didn't. They averaged at 6.8 points in Indiana. She is leading in California by an average of 9.7 points. Kentucky is a closed primary with a similar demographic breakdown of Ohio. I don't know where you are getting he is leading there. He has a hard time in any states that hold closed primaries and/or have large numbers of minorities.
No they didn't. They averaged at 6.8 points in Indiana. She is leading in California by an average of 9.7 points. Kentucky is a closed primary with a similar demographic breakdown of Ohio. I don't know where you are getting he is leading there. He has a hard time in any states that hold closed primaries and/or have large numbers of minorities.
He's beating Hillary in regions with many Asians, Native Americans, Muslims and other minorities though. And young minorities of all backgrounds love him.
Nope. GA has bigger population than NC, but less delegates. Michigan has far more delegates but has less population than either state. So point proved wrong.
And it doesn't make a difference because the Dems will win that state regardless.
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.
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.
