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.
Reminds me of these attack ads by Richard Tarrant, the richest man in Vermont. He ran against Sanders on these ridiculous and deceptive attack ads about his voting record, hoping that an ill-informed public would win him the senate seat. Sanders crushed him by more than 30 points. To attack Sanders' integrity and consistency just doesnt work.
Please point out what was deceptive about the piece? To my knowledge, it accurately reported Bernie's votes so that the public is aware of his actual record and not just his attacks on Hillary for issues where he voted the same way. It's clear many people will support him even with this knowledge, but it's not ridiculous and deceptive to put accurate information out there.
You're always crying that not enough people know Bernie. Well, this is part of getting to know Bernie.
Yep, typical response. Was there anything factually wrong in the piece? It's not Bernie Bashing or "pimping for Hillary" to put Bernie's record under the microscope, the way Hillary's has been for decades. I thought everyone was in favor of a well informed electorate who could then make up their own mind?
Yes there is. There is no relevant information posted concerning the votes. They are arguing that if a bill contains a small part that a politician ends up voting for to get a larger item they want passed that they are being hypocritical.
If politicians only voted on bills where they agreed 100% nothing would pass.
Please point out what was deceptive about the piece? To my knowledge, it accurately reported Bernie's votes so that the public is aware of his actual record and not just his attacks on Hillary for issues where he voted the same way. It's clear many people will support him even with this knowledge, but it's not ridiculous and deceptive to put accurate information out there.
You're always crying that not enough people know Bernie. Well, this is part of getting to know Bernie.
Yes, you just prove that Bernie is a pragmatist who must compromise and who understands that he cant get everything he wants done. That is supposed to be the "strength" of Hillary, but when Bernie does it, it is portrayed as hypocritical. Ridiculous.
Saw nothing wrong with Sanders answers in the vid. It was a 46 pages bill and he said some of the provision were unconstitutional. He also said that it was his job to read the bill and weigh if it had more good then bad before coming to a decision. We have congress people now who are not even reading the whole context of the bill and voting. What is worst? I prefer Sanders approach of reading all the context, checking out constitutionality, and if there is enough weight towards the good before voting yes.
Saw nothing wrong with Sanders answers in the vid. It was a 46 pages bill and he said some of the provision were unconstitutional. He also said that it was his job to read the bill and weigh if it had more good then bad before coming to a decision. We have congress people now who are not even reading the whole context of the bill and voting. What is worst? I prefer Sanders approach of reading all the context, checking out constitutionality, and if there is enough weight towards the good before voting yes.
I'm voting for Sanders but it's actually a poor answer. As a politician if you see something as unconstitutional it's your duty to vote no.
I'm voting for Sanders but it's actually a poor answer. As a politician if you see something as unconstitutional it's your duty to vote no.
Sanders did vote no on that 46 page bill that was the whole point of his rivals attack. The Mother Jones hit piece if that"s the best they have they have nothing. Not voting for Sanders, but agree with him at times and think he is a good man and Senator.
Wow, Mother Jones pimping for Hillary. Just when you think you have seen everything.
Is what you are doing dangerous?
Mother Jones is spot on, which is why you aren't attacking the message. You just attack the messenger.
Anyone running for president deserves fair scrutiny - it is the media's duty to do so...yet you ignore the facts and start throwing mud when such scrutiny is delivered.
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.
