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.
Seriously though, the argument is about the COST of healthcare, not the benefit. IE either we spend money on healthcare, or WE DON'T...and people die.
The problem isn't that we spend money on healthcare, the problem is what healthcare is costing for what we get. And country after country around the world gets comparable healthcare for FAR less then we do.
I specifically provided sympathetic links from the left leaning media, to show you that even they felt his plan was not very sound. That includes the NPR link which kind of gives two sides to the story.
Anyway, I don't want to get bogged down in arguing about the validity of his proposals.
The question was, whether or not he'd beat Cruz.
I say yes, he would. He'd likely beat Trump, too.
People were sick of the establishment of both parties, he appeared anti-Establishment (whether he really is or not).
People in the Rust belt feel that the existing globalization-friendly trade deals were unfair and bad for them. He holds the same views.
People mistrust the Wall Street. Sanders was in a way anti-Wall Street.
Actually, on all of these points, he's closer to Trump than Hillary.
Also, Sanders is a much more likable person than Hillary. He's not a crook using the powers of his office to sell favors to foreign states. He doesn't behave as if he was above the law and above everyone else and deserved to be the President by the virtue of his birth. And I very much doubt he'd call a quarter of the population "deplorable".
I don't know if I'd ever vote for Bernie, but I may have had harder time voting for Trump if Bernie ran. After all, I was never excited to vote for him.
The Democratic Party elite had really, really shot themselves in the foot by rigging the primaries.
He did. That's why he based his campaign on deporting illegals and locking up Hillary. Because he cared what Americans think. Unlike liberals, who ignore what Americans think. And look what it cost them.
Liberals aren't the only ones who don't always care what Americans think. Ted Cruz campaigned on deporting illegals, then went down to the border with Glen Beck and handed out teddy bears to the illegals merrily coming across.
A Sanders/Cruz election would have been an interesting one ..... I'd give a slight edge to Cruz.
To me, "secure the borders" means adding more border agents.
That phrase had meaning 30 years ago perhaps, but everyone uses it now and everyone knows they don't mean it. People wanted to hear that we'd deport illegals and crush sanctuary cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen
To me, "immigration reform" means a comprehensive plan to get it under control (although it's already going away...the recession cured the large influx...no jobs, fewer illegals).
And you're displaying the thinking of the establishment. Only someone who is tone-deaf would try to say to the American people that illegal immigration is solving itself, so don't worry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen
It directly appealed to the white supremacists because anyone could infer anything because of his misspeaking and the tone he used.
And here again, you just claim that his supporters are white supremacists. Also, what you describe was how Obama won. In fact, everything the left is suddenly angry about is how Obama won. Empty catch phrases? Check. Populism? Check. Vague speeches? Check.
He did. That's why he based his campaign on deporting illegals and locking up Hillary. Because he cared what Americans think. Unlike liberals, who ignore what Americans think. And look what it cost them.
You are illogical. Hillary Clinton has not committed a crime. Therefore, she will not be locked up. Which Trump knows. It was just campaign talk to fire up the base, like...
building a wall and making Mexico pay for it (he won't),
repealing Obamacare (he won't),
leaving Social Security as is (he won't),
deporting 11 million illegals (he won't),
he will bring all the manufacturing jobs back so many jobs and more jobs that people will tell him to stop with all the jobs!, etc.
He didn't mean any of those things. He said what it took to get the deal. That's what he does. Then he files for bankruptcy or whatever he has to do to renege on the deal. It's a win-win for him. Which is what Trump is all about. He wins. At least he says he wins.
Most Americans voted for Hillary Clinton and are centrist/moderate.
It matters what ALL Americans think. Even the haters on the right, poor things. They are so filled with rage about vague things, blaming non-whites for their problems. I suppose they're just unhappy with their lives and are open to becoming radicalized like the young male Muslims are being radicalized. But even the far righters' opinions should be taken into account, to try to address what makes them so unhappy. It's not just jobs.
You also missed my point on Trump. I knew what he was TRYING to say, and I AGREED. His problem is that is not what he said. He's not used to being precise in his words, which is a requirement for being President. Words matter. Tone matters. The words and tone he used were vague enough and angry enough that they directly appealed to white supremacists, and Trump was so eager to close the deal that he didn't discourage those votes. Think about that. You voted for someone who wanted to appeal to white supremacists and who isn't careful with what he says and the way he says it.
We do know that there are things for certain he WILL do, in accordance with directions from the elites (yes, he is one of the elites...not a populist...ivy league....born with silver spoon in mouth..lives in several golden digs..got out of serving in the military):
**Lower taxes a LOT for the mega-wealthy (he will throw a bone to the middle class to keep them quiet, but this will be a huge tax giveaway to corporations and the top 5% or so...this will add a trillion or so to the deficit);
**He WILL work to get the fiduciary rule abolished (the rule that says a financial institution or advisor acts in a fiduciary capacity with its clients, so that it must have the clients' interests at heart the most) (think about why someone would want to abolish this...who paid for this to be abolished?);
**Roll back those regulations that were put in place after the Great Recession to prevent another recession. (think about why he wants that; remember that he doesn't suffer during a recession; he MAKES money during a recession by buying real estate at reduced prices).
Liberals aren't the only ones who don't always care what Americans think. Ted Cruz campaigned on deporting illegals, then went down to the border with Glen Beck and handed out teddy bears to the illegals merrily coming across.
A Sanders/Cruz election would have been an interesting one ..... I'd give a slight edge to Cruz.
Ted Cruz's real problem was he was too dry and cerebral. Voters, sadly, don't have the time or patience to listen to him analyze and demolish a liberal policy. Which he will. They prefer a guy who just says "deport Mexicans." I mean, you can say Cruz's problem was that, but Trump hired illegals and farmed out work overseas. It didn't matter. We can sit here and re-litigate the election all day. What is fact is that nobody on either side wanted to be in a debate with Cruz. Not Trump, not Hillary. Cruz would demolish them both. The problem is the voters don't care about that.
Suppose for a moment that the party runners up had won the primary instead of Trump and Clinton. Suppose that it had been Ted Cruz as the Republican nominee and Bernie Sanders as the Democrat nominee.
Who do you think would have won? Cruz may be considered by some to be too far to the Right but Sanders may be considered by some to be too far to the Left.
There is still a stigma to being known as Socialist in this country. Sanders could have referred to himself as what he is, a Roosevelt Democrat. I didn't pay close attention to Cruz's candidacy but I suspect he would have taken the FOX news position on Social Security and Medicare.
By being anti Wall Street, Sanders would have captured some of the swing states and the entire mid-west.
Sanders. He is unrealistic and out of touch with reality, but his ideas sound wonderful if they were possible. He could have stirred the millennial vote that Clinton was unable to do.
I am independent but lean conservative/republican most of the time, However I had issues with Cruz. I did not trust him. Similar to Hillary. Like Hillary I believe a lot of dirt would be dug up on Cruz. Bernie, as ridiculous as he can be, appears to be very clean. He did not use politics to become extraordinarily wealthy.
I agree with others, as president Bernie woudl do - Nothing. No one would really take him seriously. IN this election, we were pretty much looking for the least scummy person or the one who would do the least damage - Bernie is a good choice for both.
I really do not expect Trump to do much at all either. Like Bernie, he is out of touch with reality and no one will take him seriously. He is not going to lead the party in control, most of the party dislikes him. He will either do what he is told, or he will flail away and complain endlessly (same as Bernie woudl have done). Neither one seems to have any real understanding of what a president can and cannot do, or what is practical.
The other reason Bernie would have won is if Trump did not win the nomination, he would have run independently, and drawn off 20% or more of the conservative vote.
I still think Trump should put Bernie on his cabinet. It would be good for the country. Reduce some of the divisiveness and in certain positions, Bernie could do a great job. Lincoln did that (included opposition members in his cabinet). It made his life difficult, but was one of the smartest things he did.
Suppose for a moment that the party runners up had won the primary instead of Trump and Clinton. Suppose that it had been Ted Cruz as the Republican nominee and Bernie Sanders as the Democrat nominee.
Who do you think would have won? Cruz may be considered by some to be too far to the Right but Sanders may be considered by some to be too far to the Left.
Why and who cares? Who would have won if megatron and Optimus prime ran against each other?
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.
Sanders Was Foolish
