Bernie Sanders

[DMX7]

On Hawaii..


On Alaska..


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-alaska-hawaii-washington-221239

What about Clinton's SuperPac? That might not be the whole story.

[Reck]

What about Clinton's SuperPac? That might not be the whole story.

Don't they specialize in attacking the opponent? Hillary is not even bothering to go on the offensive when it comes to Bernie. I doubt her pac is wasting money on what they think is a sure thing.

[z0sa]

What about Clinton's SuperPac? That might not be the whole story.

Thanks, Obama!

Lol ok well the CU ruling isnt his doing, but he certainly didnt hesitate setting precedent.

[Pelicans78]

She won Florida by a huge margin, won Virginia pretty big, had a decent win in Ohio, and another in North Carolina, which will all be critical in this election. The only battleground state Sanders has won soundly was Colorado. I guess some people will count Minnesota too, but they haven't given electoral votes to a Republican presidential candidate since Nixon. Clinton also won big in Louisiana, and could have an outside chance at flipping that state considering how pissed people are at Jindal and since they have a Democratic governor now and had another one before Jindal. I don't buy that Bernie's a stronger candidate than Clinton for the presidency, as much as I think he'd be a far superior president. Clinton is winning the states that matter in this election, not just the red states in the south.

There's little chance that Louisiana will vote for a Democrat. It's a red state overall despite having a Democratic governor who has already become disliked. The biggest reason he one was because the Republican candidate had a scandalous past and was not well-liked across the state. Cruz or Trump will easily win Louisiana.

[spurraider21]

what am i missing.... keep reading that washington has about 100 delegates but as of now they've only allocated like 35

what's the hold-up?

[FkLA]

what am i missing.... keep reading that washington has about 100 delegates but as of now they've only allocated like 35

what's the hold-up?

It can take an extra day or two for them to be allocated sometimes.

[boutons_deux]

Media Unimpressed as Sanders Barely Gets Seventy Per Cent of Vote

NEW YORK — Bernie Sanders failed to impress major media outlets over the weekend as he barely managed to win seventy per cent of the vote in three western primaries.

The major cable networks briefly mentioned Sanders’s vote tallies in Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii but noted that he ran out of steam well shy of eighty per cent.

“There’s no point in sugarcoating it,” one analyst put it. “Rough night for Sanders.”

According to one cable executive, Sanders needs to “put up some big numbers fast” if he expects the networks to continue giving his campaign airtime.

“It’s going to be harder and harder to justify covering him while he’s stuck down in the seventy-per-cent range,” the executive said.

While Sanders campaign officials remain optimistic about the upcoming primary in Wisconsin, media outlets are calling it a “do or die” state after his sputtering finishes over the weekend.

“I think if he limps across the finish line with, say, seventy-five or seventy-nine per cent, it’s going to be time for him to reassess things,” one cable representative said. “That would have to be a wake-up call.”

A spokesperson for CNN could not be reached for comment, as the network was busy preparing a ninety-minute special on the birth of Donald Trump’s new grandchild.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/media-unimpressed-as-sanders-barely-gets-seventy-per-cent-of-vote?mbid=social_facebook

[spurraider21]

lol small text

[boutons_deux]

It can take an extra day or two for them to be allocated sometimes.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1LENP_enUS567US570&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=washinton%20state%20deleagates&eob=m.081yw/D/2/short/m.081yw/

[spurraider21]

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1LENP_enUS567US570&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=washinton%20state%20deleagates&eob=m.081yw/D/2/short/m.081yw/
omg its a conspiracy! how does nobody see this!

lol nice spelling


http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/states/wa/Dem

[Mitch]

Big dick bernie bullying Hillary :lol

Watya think bout this, FkLA

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/clinton-campaign-says-no-more-debates-until-bernie-starts-be-nicer

[Reck]

The one who leads sets the rules.

Sanders has been in panic mode since he lost those 5 states in one night. he's had to to changed his strategy from being a nice old man to pumping out Trump like ads.

[CosmicCowboy]

Poor Hillary getting bullied by Bernie...:lol

[Mitch]

What's she going to tell Putin? "you be nice or ill stop talking to you"

[Reck]

Old man wants to be sly. Wants more debate to get more air time.

NINTH DEBATE Date: April 2016
Location: TBD

TENTH DEBATE Date: May 2016
Location: TBD

There's already a debate scheduled sometime in April so what's he looking for? A debate a week like the republicans?

[FkLA]

Reck, how can you claim that you actually want Bernie to win? You sound like a huge Shillary backer. :lol

The bitch is worried. She's leading and polls have her ahead in NY, but why back down if she's as superior of a candidate as her camp and her corporate overlords like to claim? Bernie had nothing to gain by debating her in NH and he still gave her a debate, then proceeded pummel her in the primary.

[Reck]

Reck (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14412), how can you claim that you actually want Bernie to win? You sound like a huge Shillary backer. :lol

The bitch is worried. She's leading and polls have her ahead in NY, but why back down if she's as superior of a candidate as her camp and her corporate overlords like to claim? Bernie had nothing to gain by debating her in NH and he still gave her a debate, then proceeded pummel her in the primary.

I indentify as a democrat. I am not on anyone's corner per se. Whoever gets the nod on that side, gets my vote november.

She's really not worried about Bernie but she should be. She hasn't spent 2 seconds trying to run ads against him. She's in fact ignoring him mostly.

She's focusing on Trump and the republicans in general. If she's worried she's definitely not showing it. :lol

I already told you why I defend her. Bernie's 14 year old cum bucketers are annoying as fuck. They lack humility.

But really Hillary is in a no win situation. If she takes on Bernie full on, she loses his supporters if she gets the nominee and if she acts like she already won, she'll lose them anyway. Theres no middle ground between her and Bernie supporters. It pisses me off that if she wins, Bernie's supporters are threatening not to go vote for her but if Bernie wins, they want her supporters to go to him?

See what I'm saying? If he wins Hillary supporters will no doubt vote for Bernie out of necesity and out of wanting Trump out. But Bernie's are not even taking that into consideration. They rather risk 4 years or 8 under a Trump presidency. :lol

So its not like I like Hillary more, for me, its about the long term about the country and who is managing it.

[Mitch]

Reck (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14412), how can you claim that you actually want Bernie to win? You sound like a huge Shillary backer. :lol

The bitch is worried. She's leading and polls have her ahead in NY, but why back down if she's as superior of a candidate as her camp and her corporate overlords like to claim? Bernie had nothing to gain by debating her in NH and he still gave her a debate, then proceeded pummel her in the primary.

:lol :tu

Hillary fearing an old man with a loud voice, she should drop out tbh she can't handle Trump or Cruz... maybe Kasich :lol

Bernie has by far the best shot at beating Trump and Cruz is damaged goods if he can even make it that far.

[boutons_deux]

Hillary can only lose less "electability" in a debate, since she and DNC "know" she's already the candidate.

[Reck]

:lol :tu

Hillary fearing an old man with a loud voice, she should drop out tbh she can't handle Trump or Cruz... maybe Kasich :lol

Bernie has by far the best shot at beating Trump and Cruz is damaged goods if he can even make it that far.

Did I hurt your feelers so hard dude? Stop being a little bitch and stop with the indirect snides. I'm here.

And stop pretending you're a democrat. You're a closeted republican whose ashame of the state of the GOP.

[FkLA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0QAewVrR28&feature=youtu.be&t=44

0:44

"I believe this is the most important job in the world. It is the toughest job in the world. You should campaign for every vote. You should be willing to debate anytime, anywhere..."

[Mitch]

Did I hurt your feelers so hard dude? Stop being a little bitch and stop with the indirect snides. I'm here.

And stop pretending you're a democrat. You're a closeted republican whose ashame of the state of the GOP.

The fuck you talking about, Reck? FkLA made a good point about the supposed superior candidate being afraid of Bernie who has been open to debates since day 1.

I live in Cali, hard to be republican in LAC - you need to settle down, tbh.

[Reck]

The fuck you talking about, Reck? FkLA made a good point about the supposed superior candidate being afraid of Bernie who has been open to debates since day 1.

I live in Cali, hard to be republican in LAC - you need to settle down, tbh.

You've been sniping comments at me for days now but whatever you say.

Nothing points to her being afraid. That's a conclusion you and fkla have come to. What's there to be afraid? Everything is favoring her. The numbers, the delegates, the polls her own party, etc.

It says a lot that he needs to win 75% of the primaries in landslides while she needs only 35%. So who's really worry? I dont know but if it was me, I wouldn't be.

[Mitch]

You've been sniping comments at me for days now but whatever you say.

Nothing points to her being afraid. That's a conclusion you and fkla have come to. What's there to be afraid? Everything is favoring her. The numbers, the delegates, the polls her own party, etc.

It says a lot that he needs to win 75% of the primaries in landslides while she needs only 35%. So who's really worry? I dont know but if it was me, I wouldn't be.

You have your opinions, I have mine. We argued before, it went nowhere. Not gonna go at it again.

Haven't been "sniping" you, I shoot from the hip. If I wanted to say something, I'd say it.

[boutons_deux]

Twitter Just Responded to Hillary Clinton’s Refusal to Debate Bernie Sanders



The Bern Report (https://twitter.com/TheBernReport) Retweeted


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1626803938/smalldeepfield_bigger.jpgacgtE ‏@acgtE (https://twitter.com/acgtE) 4h4 hours ago (https://twitter.com/acgtE/status/714603781414060032)

“@TheBernReport (https://twitter.com/TheBernReport):

Clinton: "Usually when I'm speaking in #NewYork (https://twitter.com/hashtag/NewYork?src=hash) I get $225K, what's your offer?"

#ToneDownForWhat (https://twitter.com/hashtag/ToneDownForWhat?src=hash)” YEAAAAAAHHH!!!!!



http://usuncut.com/news/tonedownforwhat-hillary-clinton-ny-debate/

Tone Down for What ? :lol

[spurraider21]

if Krazy Klinton manages to lose to fuckin Trump it would be the biggest failure in recent history for democrats :lol

[Mitch]

if Krazy Klinton manages to lose to fuckin Trump it would be the biggest failure in recent history for democrats :lol

Bigger choke than Gore. That fucker just needed to be professional, let 'ol Bill do a little campaigning for him and not do stupid shit like publicly belittle W

[Reck]

if Krazy Klinton manages to lose to fuckin Trump it would be the biggest failure in recent history for democrats :lol

Except that's not gonna happen.

If polls are to be believed and if the GOP isn't imploding like it has been for months now. I think anyone coming out of the dems side will get it.

Trump has too many deficit to make up. His own party hates him, has a black, hispanic and women problem.

How is he going to manage that gap? :lol

[Reck]

This is what I mean about the Bernie or nothing supporters.


http://youtu.be/RoLNfId2n74

[z0sa]

This is what I mean about the Bernie or nothing supporters.


http://youtu.be/RoLNfId2n74

Hillary is NOT a progressive. Democrats sold out HARD with Shillary.

A simple, plain evaluation of the facts will indicate as much. Which is why people, including myself, question your political stance. That said, I certainly DON'T question your (D) status. :\

[Reck]

Hillary is NOT a progressive. Democrats sold out HARD with Shillary.

A simple, plain evaluation of the facts will indicate as much. Which is why people, including myself, question your political stance. That said, I certainly DON'T question your (D) status. :\

Would I want a more progressive president? Yes, duh.

Would I choose Hillary over Trump? Lol not even a question.

Thats the whole point of the portion of the Bill Maher part. If you don't like Hilarry you swallow that pill and vote for her over Trump. As the guy says later on in the video.

I would be more relaxed about it if Bernie had this on lock but the reality of things is that outside of her getting indicted over the emails, she will be the nominee.

[z0sa]

About the only difference in "effective" policy between Hillary and Trump is immigration reform and pro choice status. The real difference is, Trump realizes when to talk big and when to run away. Hillary thinks she can and SHOULD win every battle. reality is, I've come to find her dangerous, and the DNC is backing her 100%. Which makes her actually MORE dangerous than Trump.

[FkLA]

714822928425025536

My boy Bernie is taking a huge shit on her. :lol

[Mitch]

714822928425025536

My boy Bernie is taking a huge shit on her. :lol

Big dick Bern not putting up with her shit, he should have went hard a long time ago :lol

[Mitch]

She's afraid of this shit, tbh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYZnXkdVkyY

[InRareForm]

Hillary is up two touchdowns in the 3rd quarter and going for field goals at this point.

[rmt]

Bernie should never have taken the emails off the table.

[Mitch]

Bernie should never have taken the emails off the table.

And the woman has the audacity to call Bernie mean when he's not touching the most damning piece of evidence Hillary shouldn't be in office

[DMX7]

And the woman has the audacity to call Bernie mean when he's not touching the most damning piece of evidence Hillary shouldn't be in office

If she thinks Bernie is being mean to her, then imagine how she will react to Putin.

[Mitch]

If she thinks Bernie is being mean to her, then imagine how she will react to Putin.

She will be laughed at, bitch is weaker than self-loathing German Merkel.

I'm all for a female president, tbh, but have a woman who can spit fire. Hillary had spent her campaign dancing around her legal issues and hiding behind liberal media. Conservative media has been soft on her too, she's as protected as it gets. We need somebody who bloodies their knuckles, and yes Trump comes to mind - but he's just too unpredictable, inexperienced and controversial.

[baseline bum]

Hillary is NOT a progressive. Democrats sold out HARD with Shillary.

A simple, plain evaluation of the facts will indicate as much. Which is why people, including myself, question your political stance. That said, I certainly DON'T question your (D) status. :\

Clinton is a check and a balance against a Teabagger House. If Trump, Cruz, or Ryan gets elected they'll almost certainly take the Senate too, and then you will have a completely Republican Washington that's going to get all sorts of crazy shit passed just like they did with Bush, and you'll get another Thomas to replace Scalia and then another Thomas to replace Ginsburg when she retires or dies in the next couple of years. I know you want to hit a grand slam with Bernie, but I'll take a sac fly with Clinton if Bernie doesn't win the nomination.

[djohn2oo8]

Why should she debate him? He is a one issue trick.

[DMX7]

Why should she debate him? He is a one issue trick.

According to who? Her? :lol

[DMX7]

714933426848006144

[djohn2oo8]

According to who? Her? :lol

According to everyone. Motherfucker doesn't even know who actually lives in a ghetto :lol

[djohn2oo8]

714933426848006144

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/11/guess-what-bernie-sanders-actually-has-backerson-wall-street.html

:lol bernie

[FkLA]

Why should she debate him? He is a one issue trick.

How so? Single-payer healthcare, public universities tuition free, immigration reform, reduced interventionist military operations, etc. Go to his website and educate yourself on his platform tbh.


714933426848006144

Bernie pulling out the full-court press on the snake. I love it. :lol

[Reck]

Bernie the dumbass.

Now he gets zero debates, zero exposure.

[Reck]

How so? Single-payer healthcare, public universities tuition free, immigration reform, reduced interventionist military operations, etc. Go to his website and educate yourself on his platform tbh.

He meant Wall Street.

That's the one issue he always brings up. The only issue issue.

He wants to tax them up their ass. That's all he talks about. The rest like college tuition free, single payer healthcare are dependent on him taxing his way out of every promise he's made. First thing is that will never happen. It's a pipe dream.

And second, congress will block every one of his silly ideas flat out. Short of making executive orders he's not going to get anything that he wants done.

Good old Bernie wants to do too much, too soon. That ain't how life works.

[Reck]

http://i68.tinypic.com/14xjy9w.jpg

[insert Bandera's gif here]


EDIT:

What do you think about this FkLA?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/267942-sanders-wont-debate-thursday-unless-clinton-agrees-to-future

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clinton-sanders-unsanctioned-debate

He's done the same shit in the past. She agreed then, so why doesn't he want to now? :lol

[z0sa]

He meant Wall Street.

That's the one issue he always brings up. The only issue issue.

He wants to tax them up their ass. That's all he talks about. The rest like college tuition free, single payer healthcare are dependent on him taxing his way out of every promise he's made. First thing is that will never happen. It's a pipe dream.

And second, congress will block every one of his silly ideas flat out. Short of making executive orders he's not going to get anything that he wants done.

Good old Bernie wants to do too much, too soon. That ain't how life works.

Spoken like a true Shillary fan, thru and thru.

[boutons_deux]

"He meant Wall Street."

BigFinance thieving, fraud, financializaton of BigCorp and the society in general ALL all up to capitalists getting richer while non-capitalists get screwed.

The rigged economy is the root of most peoples' problems, so if it can be derigged, then that would be the root a lots of solutions.

The decline of America is irreversible, reverting from the 1945-1975 exceptional period, to the historical mean of a society controlled, corrupted by extremely wealthy men to benefit only themselves.

[Reck]

Spoken like a true Shillary fan, thru and thru.

Riiiiiiiiightttt

[Nbadan]

Bamm....

Hard Proof That Hillary Clinton Has Been Losing to Bernie Sanders for a Month Now




The Democratic primary race changed fundamentally — indeed, radically — after March 1st, and the national media’s failure to register this and work it into their polling, projections, and punditry is one of the most wide-ranging, public, and ultimately influential journalistic failures of the last decade. In short, it’s the reason supporters of Bernie Sanders have been tearing their hair out reading national media coverage that reports, and glibly, that the Democratic primary race is effectively over.

So let’s expose that radical sea-change with some hard-data analysis, and thereby, for the first time, circumscribe the effects of the media’s failure to catch it.

In the first month of the current, five-and-a-half month Democratic primary season, Hillary Clinton scored 60 percent of the available delegates — 59.8 percent, to be exact.

Since then, Clinton has edged Sanders in the delegate hunt by a mere 2.2 percent — 51.1 percent to 48.9 percent.

For the sake of brevity, let’s say that it’s been a 51 percent to 49 percent race since March 1st.

If the rather conservative projections for the upcoming Wisconsin and Wyoming votes turn out to be correct, that post-March 1st Clinton lead will narrow to 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent — a one percent differential — heading into the big primary in New York on April 19th. If Sanders over-performs in these two pre-New York votes to any degree — keeping in mind that in Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington he out-performed projections by between 40 and 50 points — he will pull ahead in the post-March 1st delegate count.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/hard-proof-that-hillary-clinton-has-been-losing-to-bernie-sanders-for-a-month-now_b_9567212.html

[Nbadan]

And for those wondering how much weight to give the predictive powers of this columnist, consider this: FiveThirtyEight.com predicted Sanders would win Alaska by 8, Hawaii by 8, and Washington by 17. I predicted Sanders would win each of these states by “between 35 and 50 points.” Sanders won Alaska by 63.2 points, Hawaii by 39.8, and Washington by 45.6. FiveThirtyEight.com predicted Clinton would win Illinois by 10 and North Carolina by 12; I said that these predictions were missing late polling data suggesting a momentum shift for Sanders — and indeed Illinois was decided by only 1.8 percent and Clinton only beat Sanders on Election day in North Carolina by 52 percent to 48 percent.

The projections I made were based on the fact that something fundamental changed in the Democratic primary race after March 1st. The national media would do well to acknowledge this also and start asking what it means for the next two and a half months of Democratic primaries and caucuses.

[FkLA]

He meant Wall Street.

That's the one issue he always brings up. The only issue issue.

He wants to tax them up their ass. That's all he talks about. The rest like college tuition free, single payer healthcare are dependent on him taxing his way out of every promise he's made. First thing is that will never happen. It's a pipe dream.

And second, congress will block every one of his silly ideas flat out. Short of making executive orders he's not going to get anything that he wants done.

Good old Bernie wants to do too much, too soon. That ain't how life works.

And trying to take on Wall Street is a bad thing? Using them as a way to finance a large majority of some of the things he's proposing is a bad thing? Please explain.

He's said plenty of times he won't be able to do it alone. If he becomes POTUS it's up to the people to put politicians that share his progressive views in office. He'll do his part by encouraging people to go out and vote during midterms--the rest is up to us. It'll be a process but it's better than the status quo Shillary will give us.


http://i68.tinypic.com/14xjy9w.jpg

[insert Bandera's gif here]


EDIT:

What do you think about this FkLA (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17213)?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/267942-sanders-wont-debate-thursday-unless-clinton-agrees-to-future

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clinton-sanders-unsanctioned-debate

He's done the same shit in the past. She agreed then, so why doesn't he want to now? :lol

What? In the articles it clearly states he didn't want to do it because (1) she wouldn't agree to additional debates (i.e. NY) and (2) it wasn't sanctioned and the DNC said they would bar candidates from sanctioned debates if they participated in unsanctioned ones. Regardless he gave her a NH debate so it doesn't matter. Will your snake give him one in NY?

[Reck]

And trying to take on Wall Street is a bad thing? Using them as a way to finance a large majority of some of the things he's proposing is a bad thing? Please explain.

He's said plenty of times he won't be able to do it alone. If he becomes POTUS it's up to the people to put politicians that share his progressive views in office. He'll do his part by encouraging people to go out and vote during midterms--the rest is up to us. It'll be a process but it's better than the status quo Shillary will give us.

The point is that certain states will not want anything to do with his drastic changes. Good luck changing the minds of right wing nut cases. That's like convincing them to give up their precious guns. Something that will never happen.




What? In the articles it clearly states he didn't want to do it because (1) she wouldn't agree to additional debates (i.e. NY) and (2) it wasn't sanctioned and the DNC said they would bar candidates from sanctioned debates if they participated in unsanctioned ones. Regardless he gave her a NH debate so it doesn't matter. Will your snake give him one in NY?

He did after his demands were met. So of course he accepted after the fact.

Initially there were a handful of debates. That number increased to 10. He got what he wanted. Hillary's people agreed to his terms.

Now he wants to demand more debates? I think that what Hillary's people are asking is fair giving that they already gave in to his demands to add more debates. If he wants even more debate, then you are expected to accommodate the other's demand.

As I understand it, they already had a debate scheduled for April from their first agreement.

https://www.democrats.org/more/the-2016-primary-debate-schedule

I'm confused as to what else Bernie wants. He's had it his way for a while now.

[Ghazi]

Bernies a nice guy

That's why he won't win :lol

[djohn2oo8]

No one says a thing when Trump skips out on debates.

:lol Afraid of Megyn Kelly

[boutons_deux]

No one says a thing when Trump skips out on debates.

:lol Afraid of Megyn Kelly

afraid? of course, MK is unclean, a bleeder.

[z0sa]

No one says a thing when Trump skips out on debates.

Apples to oranges, but actually :lol nothing could be further from the truth. ANYTHING Trump says instantly becomes news.

[spurraider21]

No one says a thing when Trump skips out on debates.

:lol Afraid of Megyn Kelly
really? nobody said anything about trump skipping debates? lol... that shit made headlines

[Reck]

The Bern is up 4 points on Hillary in the Wisconsin primaries. Close race

[spurraider21]

wisconsin primary is on april 5

[Reck]

wisconsin primary is on april 5

So? New polls just came out. Just pointing that out.

[Pelicans78]

The Bern is up 4 points on Hillary in the Wisconsin primaries. Close race

Cruz is up 10 in that same poll. Winner take all race for 42 delegates

[DMX7]

So? New polls just came out. Just pointing that out.

And I heard a report that she's supposedly withdrawing resources from Wisconsin to lower expectations expecting a loss. What a front-runner!

[spurraider21]

So? New polls just came out. Just pointing that out.
your wording in that post implied the primary was live and ongoing

[Reck]

And I heard a report that she's supposedly withdrawing resources from Wisconsin to lower expectations expecting a loss. What a front-runner!

She's banking on New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland. That's when she expects to finish him off.

[DMX7]

She's banking on New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland. That's when she expects to finish him off.

She knows she has the super delegates in her pocket. Establishment wins in this party.

[Pelicans78]

She knows she has the super delegates in her pocket. Establishment wins in this party.

Not necessarily. Barack didn't have the superdelegates at first until he started to pull away with the primaries. If Bernie can get going, those superdelegates could change her mind. But that whole process is a farce.

[Reck]

Not necessarily. Barack didn't have the superdelegates at first until he started to pull away with the primaries. If Bernie can get going, those superdelegates could change her mind. But that whole process is a farce.

At this point, didn't Obama just had a mere 100 lead on her?

She's doubled that on Bernie. Crazy.

He's been killing it the past 3 weeks and he still is 250 or so delegates back.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

Thanks for all the shekels you stupid goyim

http://i.imgur.com/YxTX3sv.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/1Fnr3pl.jpg

[Reck]

That's a mean looking cah.

[Nbadan]

The whole Jew thing is :rolleyes

Bernie path to victory...

The State of the Race


As of March 29, there have been 2,304 pledged delegates awarded - or 57% of those available.

1,747 pledged delegates are up for grabs in the remaining contests.

Hillary Clinton currently leads Bernie Sanders by 228 pledged delegates.

2,026 pledged delegates are required to win a majority.

http://polichart.com/interactives/bern-path

Bernie needs to win 56.5% of remaining delegates,

[FkLA]

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/quinnipiac-24174

Ruh roh, Reck. Here comes Bernie. Shillary's lead slashed from 30+ to 12 in NY with still plenty of time before the primary.

[boutons_deux]

Bill Clinton Says His Superdelegate Vote Will Go To Sanders If He Wins Nom

"It happened last time,” Clinton told the newspaper. “Last time I did what my candidate asked, I voted for Barack Obama."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-clinton-superdelegate-vote-sanders?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

[spurraider21]

Bill Clinton Says His Superdelegate Vote Will Go To Sanders If He Wins Nom

"It happened last time,” Clinton told the newspaper. “Last time I did what my candidate asked, I voted for Barack Obama."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-clinton-superdelegate-vote-sanders?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29



that literally doesn't matter. he's saying he'd only switch if bernie already clinched it, in which case his switch wouldn't matter at all

[boutons_deux]

that literally doesn't matter. he's saying he'd only switch if bernie already clinched it, in which case his switch wouldn't matter at all

If no one asked him, yes, doesn't mattter, but pretty dumb (he's gaffed a few times already) to volunteer it.

[spurraider21]

If no one asked him, yes, doesn't mattter, but pretty dumb (he's gaffed a few times already) to volunteer it.
the point is, who cares if he's going to change a vote ONLY if he knows the vote will have no impact on the nomination?

[DMX7]

Not a great moment for the peoples' champ

dC4Pvm6Oj4A

[Nbadan]

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/quinnipiac-24174

Ruh roh, Reck. Here comes Bernie. Shillary's lead slashed from 30+ to 12 in NY with still plenty of time before the primary.

Pretty much what we have been seeing since March 5th....a late Bernie surge......boys, Bernie splits NY and it's a whole new ballgame....

[Mitch]

Not a great moment for the peoples' champ

dC4Pvm6Oj4A

Can't blame her, she knows she's bought and has no defense - only choice is just to get angry at people pointing out the truth.

[Nbadan]

Second poll shows Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz with primary leads
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinal


Madison— For the second day in a row, a new poll shows Bernie Sanders leading Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz with the narrowest of edges over Donald Trump in the fiercely contested Wisconsin presidential primaries.

The new survey by Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm, is similar in many respects to results released Wednesday by the Marquette University Law School poll.

The Public Policy poll shows Sanders, the Vermont senator, leading Clinton, the former secretary of state, 49% to 43% with 8% of voters undecided. That compares to Wednesday's Marquette poll that showed Sanders leading 49% to 45%.
...
Former President Bill Clinton will be in Appleton on Friday and both Hillary Clinton and Sanders will be in Milwaukee on Saturday. Sanders is campaigning in Sheboygan and Green Bay on Friday, Eau Claire on Saturday and Madison on Sunday.

Read more: http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/second-poll-shows-bernie-sanders-ted-cruz-with-primary-leads-b99697882z1-374144971.html

Bernie needs to sweep Wisconsin.....

[InRareForm]

Actually I like how she got upset there, seems more genuine compared to debates where she sounds fake tbh..

[Reck]

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/quinnipiac-24174

Ruh roh, Reck (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14412). Here comes Bernie. Shillary's lead slashed from 30+ to 12 in NY with still plenty of time before the primary.

Who actually expects it to be a 40 something point win? :lol

She'll still hold serve here. But this is pretty good. He needs to win here by double margin.

[Shastafarian]

Actually I like how she got upset there, seems more genuine compared to debates where she sounds fake tbh..

Except she was lying to that young woman. Clinton really gets mad when you point out the record she's not proud of...

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

[Reck]

Not a great moment for the peoples' champ

dC4Pvm6Oj4A

Nice plant by the Sanders campaign.

Old man is playing dirty now. Too late.

[Mitch]

Bern might not even need to do anymore campaigning, the FBI is planning to question Hillary.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/31/fbi-finishes-email-examination-ready-to-interview-hillary/

[Reck]

Bern might not even need to do anymore campaigning, the FBI is planning to question Hillary.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/31/fbi-finishes-email-examination-ready-to-interview-hillary/

Do you really believe that? :lol

The fact the investigation is "finished" and she's not in handcuffs and will get "interview" instead speaks differently.

[Mitch]

Do you really believe that? :lol

The fact the investigation is "finished" and she's not in handcuffs and will get "interview" instead speaks differently.

Examination of evidence is finished, not investigation. The director will conduct interviews and then make their recommendation to the DA.

[Reck]

Examination of evidence is finished, not investigation. The director will conduct interviews and then make their recommendation to the DA.

If they were going to shackle her, she'd be in cuffs now. No point in interviewing her or anyone else. The evidence examination is finished. The next step is to make some arrests, not interviews.

Or you jail then interview. Not sure how it goes but this is unsual. This sounds more like an exit interview instead of an inpending arrest.

[Mitch]

If they were going to shackle her, she'd be in cuffs now. No point in interviewing her or anyone else. The evidence examination is finished. The next step is to make some arrests, not interviews.

Or you jail then interview. Not sure how it goes but this is unsual. This sounds more like an exit interview instead of an inpending arrest.

I'm only stating what the FBI is doing, not inputting my opinion on the probability of her being indicted. Just saying if she does get indicted, Bernie can relax.

I will say, though, that it's not unusual for the super rich or high ranking political officials to evade detention until they have been convicted.

[FkLA]

Who actually expects it to be a 40 something point win? :lol

She'll still hold serve here. But this is pretty good. He needs to win here by double margin.

55-45 would be ideal. Any win would be good though since itd be his 8th win in a row. He'd have all the momentum heading into the home stretch.

I also read 500,000 new voters ages 18-25 registered in Cali. They're probably not registering to vote for the snake. :wow

[Reck]

55-45 would be ideal. Any win would be good though since itd be his 8th win in a row. He'd have all the momentum heading into the home stretch.

I also read 500,000 new voters ages 18-25 registered in Cali. They're probably not registering to vote for the snake. :wow

That is really eye opening.

The problem is that California will not play a part if she goes on to win New York (Even if they split) and then go on to sweep Pennsylvania, Maryland and whatever other states vote on the 26.

Man I cant wait for that day. Those primaries will affect both candidate. I think we will see a clear winner by then.

Or Hillary will be in jail by then. :lol

[DMX7]

Nice plant by the Sanders campaign.

Old man is playing dirty now. Too late.

How can we trust someone (Hillary) with such poor temperament with nuclear weapons? :lol

[FkLA]

8500 in Pittsburgh:

http://i.imgur.com/FkMmN1V.jpg



27000 in NYC:

http://i.imgur.com/MM11Clf.jpg?1

[Reck]

How can we trust someone (Hillary) with such poor temperament with nuclear weapons? :lol

I dont think they'll even come into play.

Has she even brought them up?

[DMX7]

I dont think they'll even come into play.

Has she even brought them up?

Media won't let it up with Trump, but she'll never get asked the hard questions.

[vy65]

So it seems like you’re saying Bernie’s voters have a slightly unrealistic sense about the political process. And that this is driven—

I didn’t say slightly.

OK.

Bernie Sanders has been in Congress for 25 years with little to show for it in terms of his accomplishments and that’s because of the role he stakes out. It is harder to get things done in the American political system than a lot of people realize, and what happens is they blame the people in office for the system. And that’s the same with the Tea Party. It’s “I voted for these Republicans, we have a Republican Congress, we voted for them, they took over Congress, they didn’t accomplish anything.” You gotta win at least two elections in a row.


I think that part of the argument that people like Sanders would make is that, the financial system is corrupt fundamentally and that we don’t want to merely make it slightly more stable—

Well if that’s the case it’s even dumber than I thought. The financial system is people lending money to other people so they can do things. I do think that he overstates it when he says, “they’re all corrupt.” It’s simply not true. And by the way, when it comes to specifics, the only specific I have heard is Glass-Steagall, which makes very little change in the finance system.

I think he gets a pass from the media. Other than Glass-Steagall, what did he propose in 2009 and 2010 when he was a senator when we were dealing with this? The answer is nothing. Why haven’t you looked at his record?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/03/barney_frank_is_not_impressed_by_bernie_sanders.ht ml

[z0sa]

Actually I like how she got upset there, seems more genuine compared to debates where she sounds fake tbh..

You like how genuine she sounds when she directly lies? lol ok

[InRareForm]

what politician doesnt lie tbh

[z0sa]

what politician doesnt lie tbh

So you dont care about fist pumping for a lie, just as long as the politician is fired up about when he or she says the lie.

Ok

[FkLA]

what politician doesnt lie tbh

The great Bernard Sanders tbh.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk7olRYfzzc

:cry

[FkLA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpm4rjejFgQ

:bobo

[Reck]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpm4rjejFgQ

:bobo

If anything that shows how fucking stupid the republicans are.

Fucking HOMOS. :lmao

[FkLA]

If anything that shows how fucking stupid the republicans are.

Fucking HOMOS. :lmao

That guy was definitely a POS.


Cunningham resigned from the House on November 28, 2005, after pleading guilty to accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery) and under-reporting his taxable income for 2004. He pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime)) to commit bribery, mail fraud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_fraud), wire fraud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_fraud) and tax evasion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion). He was sentenced to eight years and four months in prison and was ordered to pay $1.8 million inrestitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restitution).[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Cunningham#cite_note-sentence-1) On June 4, 2013, Cunningham completed his prison sentence and he currently lives in Arkansas.

[DMX7]

The great Bernard Sanders tbh.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk7olRYfzzc

:cry

I love this man -- he's a totally underappreciated liberal lion!

[boutons_deux]

Not a great moment for the peoples' champ

dC4Pvm6Oj4A

calling Bernie a liar? He's lying about her being in BigFinance's, about being in BigCarbon's pocket? She's a Repug moderate, neocon, neoliberal (deregulation), pro-business tool. Her "can get things done" "incrementalism" is managing (masking) the continued decline of the 99% and the unstoppable ascension of the 1% to which she belongs.

As Pres, she won't even try to do shit about beefing up CFPB, SEC, increase regs on BigFinance, she won't even try to do shit about BigCarbon subsidies, nor maintaining, increasing Fed renewable incentives.

She's a wealthy neoliberal committed managing the decline of 99%.

[Reck]

Boutons is fucking weird man. In one thread he's for Bernie and in the other hes white knighting for her.


Y'all Hillary haters gonna take a big one up the poop shoot.



the writer consulted with national security legal specialists.

Just like the PP witch hunt, the Benghazi witch hunt, the birther shit, the HRC email witch hunt will come up with nothing, but Repugs and you rightwingnuts will deny that truth like you deny AGW, Darwin, and all kinds of other FACTS.

I mean, :lmao

[Reck]

FkLA Your boy Cenk is on CNN. :lol

[DMX7]

USA TODAY: Bernie Sanders raises $44 million in March

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/04/01/bernie-sanders-raises-44-million-march/82505272/

[Reck]

USA TODAY: Bernie Sanders raises $44 million in March

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/04/01/bernie-sanders-raises-44-million-march/82505272/

106 millions on chip ins donations? There's more to it then that.

Kind of hard to believe this was done on the back of 27 bucks per. Umm

[DMX7]

106 millions on chip ins donations? There's more to it then that.

Kind of hard to believe this was done on the back of 27 bucks per. Umm

He's tapping some of the same donors for multiple contributions as well.

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/hillary-clintons-support-_b_9579544.html


Hillary Clinton’s Support Among Nonwhite Voters Has Collapsed

On February 27th, Hillary Clinton led Bernie Sanders among African-American voters by 52 points.
By March 26th, she led (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR131/filters/SC_RACE:2) Sanders among African-Americans by just nine points.

And today, Public Policy Polling, a widely respected polling organization, released a poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/WisconsinPrimaryPoll33116.pdf) showing that Sanders leads Clinton among African-American voters in Wisconsin by 11 points.

It’s all part of a dramatic national trend that has seen Clinton’s support among nonwhite voters dwindle to well under a third of what it was just a month ago — not nearly enough support to carry her, as it did throughout the Deep South, to future electoral victories in the Midwest and Northeast.

So no, it’s not a coincidence that, in the 18 state primary elections since March 1st, Bernie Sanders has won on Election Day in 12 of them.

(That’s right: Bernie won among live and provisional ballots in Arizona, Illinois, and Missouri.)

Of Clinton’s five post-March 1st Election Day wins, four (Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, and North Carolina) were in the South, and were made possible by a level of support among nonwhite voters that Clinton no longer enjoys. Indeed, this coalition was already collapsing when Clinton won in Florida and North Carolina on March 15th. At the polls in North Carolina on Election Day, Clinton won just 52 percent to 48 percent, including the tens of thousands of provisional ballots cast (which, still being counted, have gone, as expected, 57 percent for Senator Sanders). In Florida, the 36-point edge Clinton held in the first three weeks of early voting (February 15th to March 7th) dwindled to a 13.4-point edge among those who made their decision regarding who to vote for from March 8th to March 15th.

In short, the Clinton campaign is in the midst of an historic collapse — much of it due to the unraveling of support for Clinton among nonwhite voters — and the national media has yet to take any notice.

Clinton’s 48-point lead in New York less than two weeks ago is now just a 12-point lead (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ny/ny03312016_N39pgrw.pdf), according to the latest Quinnipiac Poll. That poll shows Sanders with approximately 300 percent more support among African-American voters in New York than he had in Mississippi earlier this month.

Meanwhile, in the only poll taken in Indiana, Sanders is said to be beating Clinton handily. (http://www.washtimesherald.com/news/sanders-campaign-works-to-lure-labor-support/article_e017bb33-731b-504a-8423-7ac7998f4d40.html)

Sanders is leading by 8 points (http://www.thedaonline.com/news/article_3ea72244-f63a-11e5-9121-a3b1c130ceea.html) in West Virginia.

And the only polling done so far in Kentucky — among nearly 1,000 students at the University of Kentucky — has Sanders up on Clinton there by more than 70 points (http://www.kykernel.com/news/hearing-their-voices-poll-shows-uk-political-views/article_56e6e24a-e104-11e5-8e34-7b9b339b0955.html).

But what the latest Reuters polling (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR131/filters/SC_RACE:2) underscores is that even Clinton’s support in the South has collapsed.

Between February 27th and March 26th, Clinton’s lead among Southerners — the group whose primary votes (and thus delegates) comprise the entirety of her 228-delegate lead over Bernie Sanders — decreased from 15 points to just 6. Given the percentage of Southern Democrats who are African-American, even without cross-tabs available there is reason to believe Clinton’s declining numbers among nonwhite voters are partially responsible for this decline. Certainly, it was the strength of Clinton’s support among this polling demographic that assured Clinton of massive delegate hauls in nearly every Southern state: according to CNN exit polling (http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/al/Dem), on March 1st black voters in Mississippi favored Clinton by 77 points, in Georgia by 71 points, in Virginia by 68 points, in Texas by 68 points, in Tennessee by 79 points, in Arkansas by 66 points, and in Alabama by a whopping 85 points.

Now that Clinton’s lead among black voters nationwide is fluctuating between the high single-digits and the mid-teens, it appears the sort of voting margins among nonwhite voters that made Clinton’s present delegate lead possible are never coming back.

Case-in-point: last week, Sanders beat Clinton in three of the ten most diverse states (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/bernie-sanders-just-trounced-hillary_b_9551782.html) in America (Hawaii, Washington, and Alaska) by 39.8 points, 45.6 points, and 61.5 points, respectively.

Yet even after “Western Saturday,” the media clung to its narrative that Sanders cannot win among nonwhite voters, arguing — sometimes implicitly, often explicitly — that only strong performances among African-American voters would be sufficient to dislodge the narrative the fourth estate has run with about Sanders since late 2015. Indeed, after the release of the latest Marquette University poll in Wisconsin, Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight.com tweeted (https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/715277524515815424), “All I see on the Democratic side is the Marquette poll matching the demographic expectations .”

In fact, the poll showed Clinton leading Sanders among all nonwhite voters by a mere 16 percent (https://law.marquette.edu/poll/).

Again, as a point of comparison, Clinton beat Sanders by 82 points among nonwhite voters in Alabama, by 66 in Arkansas, 62 in Georgia, 71 in Tennessee, 48 in Texas, and 52 in Virginia.

Outcry among Sanders supporters at the false narrative regarding Sanders and nonwhite voters continues to go unheard, even as, today, Public Policy Polling data showed the Senator beating Clinton among black voters in Wisconsin by 11 points. Instead of a mass mea culpa from the media, Sanders supporters were confronted with a [I]Chicago Tribune column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-delegates-nomination-20160331-story.html), published today, that says of polling in the Democratic primary race, “Of course polls can change, but there’s no particular reason to believe they will.”

No reason indeed.

Three weeks ago, Sanders won Michigan while losing among nonwhite voters by 29 points. So the 16-point deficit reported by Marquette and the 11-point advantage reported by PPP constitute dramatic improvements for Sanders over even a recent winning performance in the Midwest — in fact, Sanders’ most important win of this election season. This bodes well for Sanders’ future performance in other key Midwestern states like Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Indiana.

As for Sanders’ performance among nonwhite voters in the Northeast — where New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey voters will head to the polls in the coming weeks — it’s always been substantially stronger than the media, again inexplicably stuck on Deep-South exit polls, has claimed it to be.

In Massachusetts, Sanders lost the nonwhite vote by only 18 points, per CNN exit polling. In New Hampshire, where close to 20,000 nonwhite voters cast ballots back in February, Sanders actually won the nonwhite vote 50 percent to 49 percent.

In short, when the media — which seems to be reporting election results as though today were the “SEC Primary” — indicates that Sanders is in trouble in upcoming states with slightly more diverse populations, it’s not clear what recent numbers they’re looking at. Though the nonwhite voting population in the upcoming primaries and caucuses is exclusively a Midwestern and Northeastern one, the media appears to be ignoring all extant data from Wisconsin, Michigan, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire in favor of exit polls from states — like Alabama — that are nothing like these four politically, culturally, or in any other respect.

For those wondering about the exit polls in the Midwestern states that voted in mid-March — for instance, Illinois, Ohio, and Missouri — we can say that these, too, show that Clinton’s lead among nonwhite voters outside of the Deep South is nothing like it was in those red-state strongholds.

In Illinois, Sanders won Latino voters 50 percent to 49 percent and lost African-American voters by a percentage (-40) midway between his recent, improved performance in Wisconsin and his March 1st performance in the Deep South (-73.5 average). These numbers were born out also in Missouri, where Sanders lost African-American voters by 35 points and nonwhite voters by 23 points. These data aren’t surprising or disheartening for Sanders or his supporters — indeed, the figures, taken together, are almost algebraic — given that Sanders lost African-American voters by 73.5 points on March 1st, 40 points on March 15th, and was ahead in Wisconsin among this group by 11 points by March 31st.

In other words, nonwhite voting offers the media a clear and unambiguous narrative about Sanders — an unmissable trajectory — if only they’re willing to see it.

And the same dramatic trajectory — albeit in the opposite direction — is evident for Clinton.

Indeed, putting aside for a moment her loss of support among African-American voters, Clinton has offered the media a narrative of her domination among Latino voters that likewise has taken a serious hit of late.

While Clinton won early voting in Arizona — which took place around the time of voting in the Deep South — by a 25.4 percent margin, Election Day and provisional ballots (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/29/1507858/-Sanders-likely-to-gain-2-6-net-delegates-in-AZ) in the heavily Latino state (which all came in as Sanders was decimating Clinton’s lead among nonwhite voters in mid-March) favored Sanders 51.4 percent to 48.6 percent (82,470 votes for Sanders, 77,849 for Clinton). Given that Arizona has the sixth-largest Latino population of any American state (http://www.pewhispanic.org/fact-sheets/2016-state-election-fact-sheets/latinos-in-the-2016-election-arizona/), it’s exceedingly difficult to imagine Sanders beating Clinton in non-early voting there by nearly 3 points without performing exponentially better among Latinos than he had at the beginning of the month (e.g., his 42-point loss (http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/tx/Dem) among Latinos in Texas on March 1st, which contributed substantially to his 32-point loss in the state).

It’s worth noting, too, that Arizona still has thousands of predominantly Sanders-voter provisional ballots to count, so the Senator’s 3-point margin in Election Day and provisional voting there is almost certain to widen. And the counties now giving him the largest additional margin in provisional voting are counties with sizable populations of Latino voters.

In short, there simply is no evidence available to suggest that Hillary Clinton’s robust coalition of nonwhite voters still exists — certainly not in anything like the form it was just four weeks ago. How else to explain an 82-point margin among nonwhite voters in Alabama, and similar margins in every other Southern state, on March 1st, and just a 6-point lead among all Southern Democrats (who are, depending upon the state, between 27 percent and 71 percent African-American) on March 26th?

Indeed, even where Clinton now outperforms Sanders among nonwhite voters, the margin — when and as there is one — is perfectly in keeping with competitive politics in the contemporary era. And it is dwarfed, as it happens, by Sanders’ lead among other key groups, notably voters under 30 (particularly Latino voters under 30) and independent voters.

The Clinton-Sanders tilt remains at a stage in which nearly all the real-time data favors Sanders, and all the television and print coverage favors Clinton because of a delegate lead she built up during Deep-South voting a month ago. The race as it is being reported therefore bears no relation to the race as it is, which is why the Clinton camp has all but pulled out of Wisconsin — anticipating a sizable loss there that will emphasize the momentum (actual and internals-supported) Sanders developed in Mountain-state and Western voting over the past two weeks.

Consider: in North Carolina two weeks ago, Sanders handily defeated Clinton among white voters (+9) and narrowly lost among all voters on Election Day (-4). However, the Senator’s performance (-61) among African-American voters — many of whom voted early, well before March 15th — doomed him to lose the state as a whole by 13.8 percent.

If Sanders had had the African-American support during early voting (and some Election Day voting) in North Carolina that he enjoys today, he would have lost all voting in North Carolina by fewer than four and a half points — 52.7 percent to 47.3 percent (514,447 for Clinton, 460,828 for Sanders). But here’s the key: in a Midwestern or Northeastern state, rather than a Southern one — indeed, in any state with racial and ethnic demographics in the middle 50 percent of American states — those same internals would result in a massive Sanders win.

Which, as it happens, is what the State of Wisconsin may well be for Sanders in just five days.

In other words, hold onto your hats, folks.

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/hillary-clintons-support-_b_9579544.html


Hillary Clinton’s Support Among Nonwhite Voters Has Collapsed

On February 27th, Hillary Clinton led Bernie Sanders among African-American voters by 52 points.
By March 26th, she led (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR131/filters/SC_RACE:2) Sanders among African-Americans by just nine points.

And today, Public Policy Polling, a widely respected polling organization, released a poll (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/WisconsinPrimaryPoll33116.pdf) showing that Sanders leads Clinton among African-American voters in Wisconsin by 11 points.

It’s all part of a dramatic national trend that has seen Clinton’s support among nonwhite voters dwindle to well under a third of what it was just a month ago — not nearly enough support to carry her, as it did throughout the Deep South, to future electoral victories in the Midwest and Northeast.

So no, it’s not a coincidence that, in the 18 state primary elections since March 1st, Bernie Sanders has won on Election Day in 12 of them.

(That’s right: Bernie won among live and provisional ballots in Arizona, Illinois, and Missouri.)

Of Clinton’s five post-March 1st Election Day wins, four (Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, and North Carolina) were in the South, and were made possible by a level of support among nonwhite voters that Clinton no longer enjoys. Indeed, this coalition was already collapsing when Clinton won in Florida and North Carolina on March 15th. At the polls in North Carolina on Election Day, Clinton won just 52 percent to 48 percent, including the tens of thousands of provisional ballots cast (which, still being counted, have gone, as expected, 57 percent for Senator Sanders). In Florida, the 36-point edge Clinton held in the first three weeks of early voting (February 15th to March 7th) dwindled to a 13.4-point edge among those who made their decision regarding who to vote for from March 8th to March 15th.

In short, the Clinton campaign is in the midst of an historic collapse — much of it due to the unraveling of support for Clinton among nonwhite voters — and the national media has yet to take any notice.

Clinton’s 48-point lead in New York less than two weeks ago is now just a 12-point lead (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ny/ny03312016_N39pgrw.pdf), according to the latest Quinnipiac Poll. That poll shows Sanders with approximately 300 percent more support among African-American voters in New York than he had in Mississippi earlier this month.

Meanwhile, in the only poll taken in Indiana, Sanders is said to be beating Clinton handily. (http://www.washtimesherald.com/news/sanders-campaign-works-to-lure-labor-support/article_e017bb33-731b-504a-8423-7ac7998f4d40.html)

Sanders is leading by 8 points (http://www.thedaonline.com/news/article_3ea72244-f63a-11e5-9121-a3b1c130ceea.html) in West Virginia.

And the only polling done so far in Kentucky — among nearly 1,000 students at the University of Kentucky — has Sanders up on Clinton there by more than 70 points (http://www.kykernel.com/news/hearing-their-voices-poll-shows-uk-political-views/article_56e6e24a-e104-11e5-8e34-7b9b339b0955.html).

But what the latest Reuters polling (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR131/filters/SC_RACE:2) underscores is that even Clinton’s support in the South has collapsed.

Between February 27th and March 26th, Clinton’s lead among Southerners — the group whose primary votes (and thus delegates) comprise the entirety of her 228-delegate lead over Bernie Sanders — decreased from 15 points to just 6. Given the percentage of Southern Democrats who are African-American, even without cross-tabs available there is reason to believe Clinton’s declining numbers among nonwhite voters are partially responsible for this decline. Certainly, it was the strength of Clinton’s support among this polling demographic that assured Clinton of massive delegate hauls in nearly every Southern state: according to CNN exit polling (http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/al/Dem), on March 1st black voters in Mississippi favored Clinton by 77 points, in Georgia by 71 points, in Virginia by 68 points, in Texas by 68 points, in Tennessee by 79 points, in Arkansas by 66 points, and in Alabama by a whopping 85 points.

Now that Clinton’s lead among black voters nationwide is fluctuating between the high single-digits and the mid-teens, it appears the sort of voting margins among nonwhite voters that made Clinton’s present delegate lead possible are never coming back.

Case-in-point: last week, Sanders beat Clinton in three of the ten most diverse states (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/bernie-sanders-just-trounced-hillary_b_9551782.html) in America (Hawaii, Washington, and Alaska) by 39.8 points, 45.6 points, and 61.5 points, respectively.

Yet even after “Western Saturday,” the media clung to its narrative that Sanders cannot win among nonwhite voters, arguing — sometimes implicitly, often explicitly — that only strong performances among African-American voters would be sufficient to dislodge the narrative the fourth estate has run with about Sanders since late 2015. Indeed, after the release of the latest Marquette University poll in Wisconsin, Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight.com tweeted (https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/715277524515815424), “All I see on the Democratic side is the Marquette poll matching the demographic expectations .”

In fact, the poll showed Clinton leading Sanders among all nonwhite voters by a mere 16 percent (https://law.marquette.edu/poll/).

Again, as a point of comparison, Clinton beat Sanders by 82 points among nonwhite voters in Alabama, by 66 in Arkansas, 62 in Georgia, 71 in Tennessee, 48 in Texas, and 52 in Virginia.

Outcry among Sanders supporters at the false narrative regarding Sanders and nonwhite voters continues to go unheard, even as, today, Public Policy Polling data showed the Senator beating Clinton among black voters in Wisconsin by 11 points. Instead of a mass mea culpa from the media, Sanders supporters were confronted with a [I]Chicago Tribune column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-delegates-nomination-20160331-story.html), published today, that says of polling in the Democratic primary race, “Of course polls can change, but there’s no particular reason to believe they will.”

No reason indeed.

Three weeks ago, Sanders won Michigan while losing among nonwhite voters by 29 points. So the 16-point deficit reported by Marquette and the 11-point advantage reported by PPP constitute dramatic improvements for Sanders over even a recent winning performance in the Midwest — in fact, Sanders’ most important win of this election season. This bodes well for Sanders’ future performance in other key Midwestern states like Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Indiana.

As for Sanders’ performance among nonwhite voters in the Northeast — where New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey voters will head to the polls in the coming weeks — it’s always been substantially stronger than the media, again inexplicably stuck on Deep-South exit polls, has claimed it to be.

In Massachusetts, Sanders lost the nonwhite vote by only 18 points, per CNN exit polling. In New Hampshire, where close to 20,000 nonwhite voters cast ballots back in February, Sanders actually won the nonwhite vote 50 percent to 49 percent.

In short, when the media — which seems to be reporting election results as though today were the “SEC Primary” — indicates that Sanders is in trouble in upcoming states with slightly more diverse populations, it’s not clear what recent numbers they’re looking at. Though the nonwhite voting population in the upcoming primaries and caucuses is exclusively a Midwestern and Northeastern one, the media appears to be ignoring all extant data from Wisconsin, Michigan, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire in favor of exit polls from states — like Alabama — that are nothing like these four politically, culturally, or in any other respect.

For those wondering about the exit polls in the Midwestern states that voted in mid-March — for instance, Illinois, Ohio, and Missouri — we can say that these, too, show that Clinton’s lead among nonwhite voters outside of the Deep South is nothing like it was in those red-state strongholds.

In Illinois, Sanders won Latino voters 50 percent to 49 percent and lost African-American voters by a percentage (-40) midway between his recent, improved performance in Wisconsin and his March 1st performance in the Deep South (-73.5 average). These numbers were born out also in Missouri, where Sanders lost African-American voters by 35 points and nonwhite voters by 23 points. These data aren’t surprising or disheartening for Sanders or his supporters — indeed, the figures, taken together, are almost algebraic — given that Sanders lost African-American voters by 73.5 points on March 1st, 40 points on March 15th, and was ahead in Wisconsin among this group by 11 points by March 31st.

In other words, nonwhite voting offers the media a clear and unambiguous narrative about Sanders — an unmissable trajectory — if only they’re willing to see it.

And the same dramatic trajectory — albeit in the opposite direction — is evident for Clinton.

Indeed, putting aside for a moment her loss of support among African-American voters, Clinton has offered the media a narrative of her domination among Latino voters that likewise has taken a serious hit of late.

While Clinton won early voting in Arizona — which took place around the time of voting in the Deep South — by a 25.4 percent margin, Election Day and provisional ballots (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/29/1507858/-Sanders-likely-to-gain-2-6-net-delegates-in-AZ) in the heavily Latino state (which all came in as Sanders was decimating Clinton’s lead among nonwhite voters in mid-March) favored Sanders 51.4 percent to 48.6 percent (82,470 votes for Sanders, 77,849 for Clinton). Given that Arizona has the sixth-largest Latino population of any American state (http://www.pewhispanic.org/fact-sheets/2016-state-election-fact-sheets/latinos-in-the-2016-election-arizona/), it’s exceedingly difficult to imagine Sanders beating Clinton in non-early voting there by nearly 3 points without performing exponentially better among Latinos than he had at the beginning of the month (e.g., his 42-point loss (http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/tx/Dem) among Latinos in Texas on March 1st, which contributed substantially to his 32-point loss in the state).

It’s worth noting, too, that Arizona still has thousands of predominantly Sanders-voter provisional ballots to count, so the Senator’s 3-point margin in Election Day and provisional voting there is almost certain to widen. And the counties now giving him the largest additional margin in provisional voting are counties with sizable populations of Latino voters.

In short, there simply is no evidence available to suggest that Hillary Clinton’s robust coalition of nonwhite voters still exists — certainly not in anything like the form it was just four weeks ago. How else to explain an 82-point margin among nonwhite voters in Alabama, and similar margins in every other Southern state, on March 1st, and just a 6-point lead among all Southern Democrats (who are, depending upon the state, between 27 percent and 71 percent African-American) on March 26th?

Indeed, even where Clinton now outperforms Sanders among nonwhite voters, the margin — when and as there is one — is perfectly in keeping with competitive politics in the contemporary era. And it is dwarfed, as it happens, by Sanders’ lead among other key groups, notably voters under 30 (particularly Latino voters under 30) and independent voters.

The Clinton-Sanders tilt remains at a stage in which nearly all the real-time data favors Sanders, and all the television and print coverage favors Clinton because of a delegate lead she built up during Deep-South voting a month ago. The race as it is being reported therefore bears no relation to the race as it is, which is why the Clinton camp has all but pulled out of Wisconsin — anticipating a sizable loss there that will emphasize the momentum (actual and internals-supported) Sanders developed in Mountain-state and Western voting over the past two weeks.

Consider: in North Carolina two weeks ago, Sanders handily defeated Clinton among white voters (+9) and narrowly lost among all voters on Election Day (-4). However, the Senator’s performance (-61) among African-American voters — many of whom voted early, well before March 15th — doomed him to lose the state as a whole by 13.8 percent.

If Sanders had had the African-American support during early voting (and some Election Day voting) in North Carolina that he enjoys today, he would have lost all voting in North Carolina by fewer than four and a half points — 52.7 percent to 47.3 percent (514,447 for Clinton, 460,828 for Sanders). But here’s the key: in a Midwestern or Northeastern state, rather than a Southern one — indeed, in any state with racial and ethnic demographics in the middle 50 percent of American states — those same internals would result in a massive Sanders win.

Which, as it happens, is what the State of Wisconsin may well be for Sanders in just five days.

In other words, hold onto your hats, folks.

African Americans finally waking up to all of the terrible shit the Clinton's have done to them over the years.

[spurraider21]

why did you need to quote the whole thing a second time :lol

[TheSanityAnnex]

why did you need to quote the whole thing a second time :lol

Bumping up my post count. Now that I've retired my ChumpDumper account I need to get another to the 99,999 milestone.

[Nbadan]

Bumping up my post count. Now that I've retired my ChumpDumper account I need to get another to the 99,999 milestone.

....that would make you a Troll God IMO.....

[Reck]

http://41.media.tumblr.com/e62f2109c933f250e5416ec06bd4c077/tumblr_o4yin508WQ1tlhiy6o1_1280.png

:lol

Straight up G.

[Reck]

"According to the latest tallies from Center for Responsive Politics (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries.php?ind=E01&type=f&src=c), Clinton's campaign has received $307,561 from people who work for oil and gas interests so far in the presidential race. Sanders has received nearly six times fewer dollars — $53,760."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/apr/01/sorting-out-clintons-fossil-fuel-contributions/

http://i68.tinypic.com/mw8ax4.gif

So this nigga is accusing someone of taking money from oil industries but he has too. :lmao

What the fuck?

I mean he has taken way less, but he's taken money so anyone explain dis shit to me. :lol

[hater]

Bernie would actually put up a fight vs. TRUMP. Thank god Shillary is gonna be the nomine :lmao

[DMX7]

Bernie would actually put up a fight vs. TRUMP. Thank god Shillary is gonna be the nomine :lmao

He would destroy Trump. The polls show that. Trump, on the other hand, is going to crush Hillary once he actually starts on her. :toast

[InRareForm]

False. Woman voters will make sure they don't vote for trump.

[Reck]

He would destroy Trump. The polls show that. Trump, on the other hand, is going to crush Hillary once he actually starts on her. :toast

So he's just going to pull the women, black and hispanic vote out of his ass?

Each of those group has an unfavorable of him in the 80s. :lol

[boutons_deux]

Robert Reich: Here’s why mainstream media marginalizes Bernie Sanders

if you read the Washington Post or the New York Times, or watch CNN or even MSNBC, or listen to the major pollsters and pundits, you’d come to the same conclusion as my friend. Every success by Bernie is met with a story or column or talking head whose message is “but he can’t possibly win.”

Or the media simply ignore Sanders. Early on, the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review note (http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cjr.org%2Fanalysis%2Fb ernie_sanders_underdog.php&t=OTExMWE1YjcwNWQzNjY2ZTgxYzQ3OTQwYTg2MDc3Nzg5ZWJl OWRkYSxlUjVIVlJMTA%3D%3D)d that Sanders’ candidacy had been ignored by the mainstream media “as nearly as they could a sitting U.S. senator who entered the presidential race.”

Some Sanders supporters speak in dark tones about a media conspiracy against Bernie. That’s baloney. The mainstream media are incapable of conspiring with anyone or anything. They wouldn’t dare try. Their reputations are on the line. If the public stops trusting them, their brands are worth nothing.

The real reason the major media can’t see what’s happening is because the national media exist inside the bubble of establishment politics, centered in Washington, and the bubble of establishment power, centered in New York.

As such, the major national media are interested mainly in personalities and in the money behind the personalities.

Political reporting is dominated by stories about the quirks and foibles of the candidates, and about the people and resources behind them.

Within this frame of reference, it seems nonsensical that a 74-year-old Jew from Vermont, originally from Brooklyn, who calls himself a Democratic socialist, who’s not a Democratic insider and wasn’t even a member of the Democratic Party until recently, who has never been a fixture in the Washington or Manhattan circles of power and influence, and who has no major backers among the political or corporate or Wall Street elites of America, could possibly win the nomination.

But precisely because the major media are habituated to paying attention to personalities, they haven’t been attending to Bernie’s message – or to its resonance among Democratic and independent voters (as well as many Republicans).

The major media don’t know how to report on political movements that emerge from the hopes and frustrations of millions of Americans.

Movements don’t fit into the normal political story about which candidate is up and who’s down.

The major media have come to see much of America through the eyes of the establishment. That’s not surprising.

After all, they depend on establishment corporations for advertising revenues,

their reporters and columnists rely on the establishment for news and access,

their top media personalities socialize with the rich and powerful and are themselves rich and powerful, and

their publishers and senior executives are themselves part of the establishment.

So it’s understandable that the major media haven’t noticed how determined Americans are to reverse the increasing concentration of wealth and political power that have been eroding our economy and democracy. And it’s understandable, even if unjustifiable, that they continue to marginalize Bernie Sanders.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/robert-reich-heres-why-mainstream-media-marginalizes-bernie-sanders/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Nbadan]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/apr/01/sorting-out-clintons-fossil-fuel-contributions/

http://i68.tinypic.com/mw8ax4.gif

So this nigga is accusing someone of taking money from oil industries but he has too. :lmao





What the fuck?

I mean he has taken way less, but he's taken money so anyone explain dis shit to me. :lol


Not that similar....


The Huffington Post article from July 17, 2015, cited by Sanders found that "nearly all of the lobbyists bundling contributions for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign have at one time or another worked for the fossil fuel industry." It links to 40 registered lobbyists but only offers details on some donors who still work for the industry.

There's a difference between a contribution and a payoff....someone is feelin the Bern...

[boutons_deux]

Hillary Clinton attacks Bernie Sanders for being a “single issue” candidate:

“If we broke up the big banks tomorrow would that end racism? Would that end sexism? Would that end discrimination against the L.G.B.T. community? Would that make people feel more welcoming to immigrants overnight?”


What she fails to see is that ending the dominance of Wall Street, large corporations, and billionaires over American politics is the prerequisite to everything else that needs doing. We can’t hope to reverse climate change as long as big money has a strangle hold on our democracy.

We can’t overcome structural racism, sexism or discrimination against the LGBT community, or achieve equal opportunity and upward mobility for the poor, unless we reclaim our government from the moneyed interests.

We can't rebuild the middle class when giant corporations and Wall Street make the rules.

We can’t have a sensible foreign policy when giant military contractors have disproportionate influence.

We can’t have a sensible health care system without limiting the power of pharmaceutical companies and for-profit insurers.
In other words, the only way toward an economy that works for all of America and not simply for the powerful and privileged is by way of a democracy that’s responsive to all of America, and not only the powerful and privileged.

And the only means of achieving a democracy that’s responsive to all of America is by reducing the power of the moneyed interests.

This is what Bernie Sanders’s “political revolution” is all about.

This is not “single-issue” politics. It is essential to the politics we must create in America.

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/?fref=nf


Yep, Hillz won't even attempt to TOUCH her paymasters in BigFinance.

[z0sa]

People who call Bernie a single issue candidate are either too lazy or too stupid to simply follow the money.

[Reck]

"Over the course of the last week, we have offered three specific dates for a debate in New York, all of which the Sanders campaign rejected," Clinton's national press secretary, Brian Fallon, said in a statement today. "The Sanders campaign needs to stop with the games."
The Clinton campaign offered to debate Sanders on Monday, April 4 at 7:30 p.m., as well as on Thursday, April 14, and on ABC News' "Good Morning America (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/entertainment/tv/good-morning-america.htm)" on Friday, April 15 -- a date and time the Sanders campaign had originally signed off on, Fallon said.

"Senator Sanders and his team should stop the delays and accept a debate on April 14 on the morning of April 15th," Fallon added in the statement.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-accuses-bernie-sanders-playing-games/story?id=38106197

LOL Bernie

[boutons_deux]

Sanders wins most delegates at Clark County convention

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders scored a surprise victory over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Saturday at the Clark County Democratic Convention, where Sanders won the largest number of delegates a month after losing the Nevada caucuses.

Long lines, a packed convention center and the controversial suspension of the county party’s credentials chair threatened to disrupt the operation of the convention throughout the day. But after five hours of registration and check-in, thousands of people had packed into the Cashman Center, and by early evening, the delegates had been counted and Sanders announced as the winner.

The county convention was the second in a three-step process for Nevada to choose its delegates to send to the Democratic National Convention this summer.

The first was the February caucuses, the results of which are used to apportion 23 of the delegates Nevada will send to the national convention.

The second step, the county convention, is when delegates are selected to the state convention in May.

The third step is the state convention, when 12 more delegates are apportioned based on attendees’ preferences.

Nearly 9,000 delegates were elected on caucus day in late February, but only 3,825 showed up to Saturday’s convention. An additional 915 elected alternates and 604 unelected alternates also turned out to support their favored candidate.

The final delegate count was 2,964 for Sanders and 2,386 for Clinton. That means the Sanders campaign will send 1,613 delegates to the state convention, while the Clinton campaign will send 1,298.

“We pretty much won Nevada,” said Sanders’ state director, Joan Kato, smiling as the results were announced.

What that means is the delegates from Clark County — along with the delegates selected by Nevada's other counties Saturday — will attend the state convention in May, where they will help select delegates to go to July’s Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

But, because of the way delegate-selection rules work in Nevada, they will only get to decide the proportion of 12 delegates — five pledged party leaders and elected official delegates and seven at-large delegates — that go to each candidate.

The apportionment of 23 delegates, known as “district-level” delegates, is already decided, as they are based proportionally on the Feb. 20 caucus results in each district. In the February caucuses, Clinton had won 55 percent of delegates to the county convention — 4,889 to Sanders’ 4,026.

There are an additional eight unpledged party leaders and elected official delegates who will attend the national convention.

Sanders supporters were surprised and pleased Saturday.

“I’m friends with a lot of people that support Bernie, and they were bringing people here,” said Zamir Anderson, a 20-year-old College of Southern Nevada student. “Especially with how we did in Utah, Alaska, I feel like he’s gaining a lot of traction.”

The convention wasn’t without its hiccups. Convention-goers complained of expectedly long lines and having to wait outside without shade for hours.

“I thought it was going to be more organized and faster,” said Elda Armenta, a 43-year-old Sanders supporter from Las Vegas. “It doesn’t even look like the organizers know what they’re doing.”

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/apr/02/sanders-wins-most-delegates-at-clark-county-conven/

we'll see if Reid's dirty tricks with the LV hotel unions will carry the state.

[FkLA]

https://i.imgur.com/SHX2ZAt.jpg

[z0sa]

https://i.imgur.com/SHX2ZAt.jpg

Lol Shillary supporters. Every liberal bastion by far prefers Bernie

[Reck]

Nice try but they're not at same venue..

"That does not make Trump and Cruz sound strong," said Clinton to the crowd of 1,400. "

https://www.yahoo.com/news/clinton-sanders-audition-role-anti-trump-candidate-031155343.html

[spurraider21]

lol semen shielding for shillary

[Reck]

lol semen shielding for shillary

You cant stop sucking the old man's dick. Somebody has to bring common sense to the discussion.

And since when does stating truth becomes "shielding"? :lmao

I am just calling it like it is.

[spurraider21]

not really, i've pointed out his flaws too, criticized him for using government/taxpayer money to go on a honeymoon, etc. but you've been shielding for shillary for some time now

[Reck]

not really, i've pointed out his flaws too, criticized him for using government/taxpayer money to go on a honeymoon, etc. but you've been shielding for shillary for some time now

I would be doing the same if it was Bernie getting all this ridiculous, often misinformed shitty takes.

Hillary is short of having horns come out of her forehead according to most of you. Politicians are all shitty with their own baggage. That's a fact we can all agree on.

[FkLA]

Nice try but they're not at same venue..

"That does not make Trump and Cruz sound strong," said Clinton to the crowd of 1,400. "

https://www.yahoo.com/news/clinton-sanders-audition-role-anti-trump-candidate-031155343.html

Yeah, no shit they're not at the same venue. Each candidate knows what type of crowds to expect and they schedule the venues accordingly. Shillary's rallies would look even deader if she scheduled at yuge venues like Bernie does.


I would be doing the same if it was Bernie getting all this ridiculous, often misinformed shitty takes.

Hillary is short of having horns come out of her forehead according to most of you. Politicians are all shitty with their own baggage. That's a fact we can all agree on.

What baggage does the great Bernard Sanders have that makes him shitty?

[Reck]

What baggage does the great Bernard Sanders have that makes him shitty?

Socialism, communist ties, not a democrat at all.

In fact, Bernie lied his way into a position to run for president. Guy is a lifelong independent. He knew that as that, he wouldn't get very far running for president so he became a democrat for the sole purpose to get traction.

Again, personally I dont give a fuck about any of that. If people brought all that up I'd counter it with the positive.

Everyone has baggage from their past.

[spurraider21]

Socialism, communist ties, not a democrat at all.

In fact, Bernie lied his way into a position to run for president. Guy is a lifelong independent. He knew that as that, he wouldn't get very far running for president so he became a democrat for the sole purpose to get traction.

Again, personally I dont give a fuck about any of that. If people brought all that up I'd counter it with the positive.

Everyone has baggage from their past.
everybody knows he's not a democrat. he doesn't call himself a democrat either. he's just running under the democrat ticket, it's not really a secret. that's not "baggage." socialism isn't baggage either considering he wears it as a badge of honor.

whats the difference between socialism and communism, reck?

[rmt]

Yeah, no shit they're not at the same venue. Each candidate knows what type of crowds to expect and they schedule the venues accordingly. Shillary's rallies would look even deader if she scheduled at yuge venues like Bernie does.

What baggage does the great Bernard Sanders have that makes him shitty?

I think that it's not good that almost all of his assets are listed under his wife's name. That with $174,000 salary as senator, he has $25k-$65 in credit card debt. That he didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old.

So if Hillary can't draw big crowds, who is voting for her? Are there that many union people and blacks?

[Reck]

everybody knows he's not a democrat. he doesn't call himself a democrat either. he's just running under the democrat ticket, it's not really a secret. that's not "baggage." socialism isn't baggage either considering he wears it as a badge of honor.

whats the difference between socialism and communism, reck?

Is not really baggage but it is misleading as hell. No?

For someone who likes to throw the honest card every chance he gets, he sure does his fair share of shenanigans. That's all I'm saying.

And what does that question have to do with anything? Whether I point out the difference between the two, they always seem to go hand in hand. It also wouldn't change how people view the two.

[boutons_deux]

Occupy CNN: Protest Breaks out Against the Lack of Sanders Coverage


Bernie Sanders supporters called for an end to the "Bernie blackout" from the "Clinton News Network."

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/occupy-cnn-protest-breaks-out-against-lack-sanders-coverage

[FkLA]

Socialism, communist ties, not a democrat at all.

In fact, Bernie lied his way into a position to run for president. Guy is a lifelong independent. He knew that as that, he wouldn't get very far running for president so he became a democrat for the sole purpose to get traction.

Again, personally I dont give a fuck about any of that. If people brought all that up I'd counter it with the positive.

Everyone has baggage from their past.

:lol You're just grasping at straws.

He has no ties to communism. His independent status is public record, not sure how he could lie or trick his way into the position he's in. He is a self-described democratic socialist and there's nothing wrong or baggage worthy about that.

[FkLA]

I think that it's not good that almost all of his assets are listed under his wife's name. That with $174,000 salary as senator, he has $25k-$65 in credit card debt. That he didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old.

So if Hillary can't draw big crowds, who is voting for her? Are there that many union people and blacks?

Oh are you saying he isn't the typical politician that uses his position to amass wealth? That's exactly why he's so beloved.

Yes, the blacks won the Southern states for her. She's also hitting the nursing homes hard to get all the alzheimers patients to cash early votes for her. Bill has broken several rules as well during these primary elections tbf.

[FkLA]

27000 in NYC:

http://i.imgur.com/MM11Clf.jpg?1

https://7468669c0013a7dae459-4d0fcf8d315d40f305ee2ebb6c32f79c.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.c om/10304127_1459727541.4027_updates.jpg

Brooklyn :cry

[Splits]

I think that it's not good that almost all of his assets are listed under his wife's name. That with $174,000 salary as senator, he has $25k-$65 in credit card debt. That he didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old.

So if Hillary can't draw big crowds, who is voting for her? Are there that many union people and blacks?

lolwut?

:cry why are they teaching climate change in science classes :cry

:cry dees ######s :cry

[DAF86]

No chance this guy wins in the most conservative country in the World, tbh.

[rmt]

Oh are you saying he isn't the typical politician that uses his position to amass wealth? That's exactly why he's so beloved.

Yes, the blacks won the Southern states for her. She's also hitting the nursing homes hard to get all the alzheimers patients to cash early votes for her. Bill has broken several rules as well during these primary elections tbf.

I'm saying that anyone who's been collecting $174,000 in salary for the time that he has should not be in credit card debt, that it is suspicious for ANYONE to have all their assets in their spouse's name only and that 40 is very old to be collecting anyone's first steady paycheck. As a result of all these flags, I would not want a person with such poor personal finances involved with the country's finances.

[DMX7]

https://7468669c0013a7dae459-4d0fcf8d315d40f305ee2ebb6c32f79c.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.c om/10304127_1459727541.4027_updates.jpg

Brooklyn :cry

Beautiful!

[FkLA]

I'm saying that anyone who's been collecting $174,000 in salary for the time that he has should not be in credit card debt, that it is suspicious for ANYONE to have all their assets in their spouse's name only and that 40 is very old to be collecting anyone's first steady paycheck. As a result of all these flags, I would not want a person with such poor personal finances involved with the country's finances.

Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs said the debt was related to weddings of a daughter and niece and that Sanders and his wife had since paid the balance on the two credit cards down to zero.

He also receives modest speaking fees and donates a lot of them to charity. Meanwhile the Clintons have made over $20 mill from those same fees since January 2014. They've also received billions into their 'foundation'. I'll put my trust in Bernie tbh.

[Mitch]

Pretty amazing how fast NY is starting to side with Bern, she went from 70%+ to 53% in less than a month.

[FkLA]

Hillary Clinton is taking credit for the Fight for $15. Here’s why this is a betrayal of workers.


Hillary Clinton will be joining New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on Monday for a rally in the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center at 11 a.m. to celebrate the historic $15/hour minimum wage legislation. Speaking as someone who worked for the Fight for $15 from the very first action in NYC (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/nyregion/fast-food-workers-in-new-york-city-rally-for-higher-wages.html?_r=0), let me explain why this is an appalling betrayal of workers.

Fast-food workers marched in the streets and shut down stores for years, while an army of online supporters shared viral photos, memes, and news. And we did it again and again. Despite all odds and hat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/06/22/a-15-minimum-wage-is-a-terrible-idea/)ers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/06/22/a-15-minimum-wage-is-a-terrible-idea/) telling us that a $15 minimum wage would never happen (http://time.com/money/4106428/national-minimum-wage-protest-fast-food-workers-fight-15/) — and still telling us that we should be “realistic (http://www.app.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/02/07/minimum-wage-new-jersey/79886624/)” — we started winning and never looked back.

Fight for $15 is arguably the greatest union victory in decades, perhaps even the greatest victory of the progressive movement in recent history (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/sunday-review/how-the-15-minimum-wage-went-from-laughable-to-viable.html). One of those victories came eight months ago, when the Democratic Party adopted a $15/hour minimum wage in the official party platform (http://usuncut.com/news/democratic-party-adopts-15hour-minimum-wage-national-platform-2/), weeks after Bernie Sanders introduced legislation (http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-introduces-bill-for-15-an-hour-minimum-wage) in Congress.

By contrast, Hillary Clinton is the only prominent Democrat who refused to endorse $15/hour (http://www.buzzfeed.com/kyleblaine/hillary-clinton-declines-to-support-a-national-15-minimum-wa). Bernie Sanders won’t remind people of this, so I will: He was in the streets with fast-food workers every time. There’s photos of him marching with workers in the pouring fucking rain, and he’s the one who pushed Democrats to adopt it. Yet, Hillary Clinton will be on the stage tomorrow for the victory moment.

http://usuncut.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/bernierain968-1-768x400.png
Bernie Sanders speaking to striking workers in Washington DC. (Photo: Daily Caller)


This article isn’t at all intended as a shout out to Bernie. I just wanted to share an insider’s view of how one of the most successful progressive campaigns sold out workers to ally themselves with the only person who refused to join them in solidarity. That’s what SEIU leadership (https://theintercept.com/2016/01/22/bernie-sanders-gets-group-endorsements-when-members-decide-hillary-clinton-when-leaders-decide/), the Democratic Party, and Hillary Clinton don’t understand.

This isn’t about their cynical bullshit games. This is about the power of solidarity. And this is about a candidate who got things done while Hillary Clinton collected fat checks from the oligarchs and then shows up on trophy day.

http://usuncut.com/politics/hillary-15-hour-minimum-wage/

[Will Hunting]

No chance this guy wins in the most conservative country in the World, tbh.

Not sure why you're talking about Israel, tbh.

[spurraider21]

Not sure why you're talking about Israel, tbh.
Thought he was talkin about Saudi Arabia

[Reck]

Pretty amazing how fast NY is starting to side with Bern, she went from 70%+ to 53% in less than a month.

She was never at 70. There was once a poll that had her up 48 but that was done 2 months prior to the April 19th.

It is highly unrealistic to expect that margin to stand unchanged for all that time. I think that poll numbers the way they are now are far more on point. 10-12 seems about right.

[Mitch]

She was never at 70. There was once a poll that had her up 48 but that was done 2 months prior to the April 19th.

It is highly unrealistic to expect that margin to stand unchanged for all that time. I think that poll numbers the way they are now are far more on point. 10-12 seems about right.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html



Emerson (http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_e6ef41f2113347feaedca7d88762c6f3.pdf)
3/14 - 3/16
298 LV
5.6
71
23
Clinton +48



She was at 71% when she was up 48, Reck. It was just a 298 sample size though, so whatever tbh - she's obviously slipping in NY

[Reck]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html



Emerson (http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_e6ef41f2113347feaedca7d88762c6f3.pdf)
3/14 - 3/16
298 LV
5.6
71
23
Clinton +48



She was at 71% when she was up 48, Reck. It was just a 298 sample size though, so whatever tbh - she's obviously slipping in NY

Oh. I always pay more attention to the spread.

My bad.

[z0sa]

If its even close in NY, Hillary failed massively. Her lead is shrinking daily.

[Mitch]

If its even close in NY, Hillary failed massively. Her lead is shrinking daily.

Might be too late, sadly. If this started in the first month of primaries he'd be ahead now.

[DMX7]

I really hope I'm wrong but I don't think Bernie is going to pull out NY even with the Wisconsin win.

[Reck]

If its even close in NY, Hillary failed massively. Her lead is shrinking daily.


Might be too late, sadly. If this started in the first month of primaries he'd be ahead now.

What Mitch said.

It doesn't matter if he even wins New York at this point because that's not going to be a landslide win.

Cant be winning states by splitting it anymore.


“If Clinton had lost Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, it would have been a devastating series of defeats that would have called into question her entire campaign,” said Tad Devine, one of several Sanders advisers who described the Feb. 21 conference call. “We had to shift our strategy. But no matter what, the nomination became tougher to win.”


Mr. Sanders is now campaigning more effectively than many expected, exposing Mrs. Clinton’s weaknesses as a candidate, and is positioning himself to win contests like the Wisconsin primary on Tuesday. But allies and advisers of Mr. Sanders say they missed opportunities to run an aggressive political operation in 2015 that would have presented more of a challenge to Mrs. Clinton. She has now firmly built a big lead in delegates needed to clinch the nomination — a margin that would be smaller if Mr. Sanders had run differently last year, according to interviews with more than 15 people who are on his team or close to him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?_r=2

Telling article. Good WHAT IF read.

[z0sa]

What Mitch said.

It doesn't matter if he even wins New York at this point because that's not going to be a landslide win.

Cant be winning states by splitting it anymore.



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?_r=2

Telling article. Good WHAT IF read.

:lol if Bernie wins NY, no big deal huh? Next level semen shielding, tbh.

Like I pointed out before, Bernie doesn't need to win the delegate race. All he needs to do is make it to the convention.

And make NO mistake, if its even CLOSE in NY, its a YUUUGE L for Shillary. If he wins, it could conceivably be the defining moment of yet another inconceivable lost nomination.

[Reck]

:lol if Bernie wins NY, no big deal huh? Next level semen shielding, tbh.

Like I pointed out before, Bernie doesn't need to win the delegate race. All he needs to do is make it to the convention.

And make NO mistake, if its even CLOSE in NY, its a YUUUGE L for Shillary. If he wins, it could conceivably be the defining moment of yet another inconceivable lost nomination.

Are you shitty at math or just plain stupid? :lmao

He has no chance if he's not winning states by 30+. Tomorrow for instance, he'll win Winsconsin but because he'll only win it by a few points he won't cut into her lead by any significant margin. They'll split it tomorrow so he's not going to gain enough delegates to matter.

What will he making it to the convention do for him exactly? He's not going to steal the elections away. This isn't the republican side. He either overtakes her in delegates or they will go to the convention and lose there.

Be a faggot all you want. I'll be more realistic and look at the actual numbers that matter.

[z0sa]

Oh, and that article is founded on a terrible concept. Bernie didn't have the money or supporters nine months ago to do what he is doing now. He has truly created a political revolution in a VERY short amount of time, and is outraising Shillary despite her owning a massive amount of rich establishment connections. He deserves MAD respect and props for founding this movement and keeping the momentum rolling just to this point, much less stealing a win in multiple states where he was down double digits in polling. Hillary fans should be embarrassed to even be connected with her remarkable underachievement in not just one, but TWO campaigns now.

[z0sa]

Are you shitty at math or just plain stupid? :lmao

He has no chance if he's not winning states by 30+. Tomorrow for instance, he'll win Winsconsin but because he'll only win it by a few points he won't cut into her lead by any significant margin. They'll split it tomorrow so he's not going to gain enough delegates to matter.

What will he making it to the convention do for him exactly? He's not going to steal the elections away. This isn't the republican side. He either overtakes her in delegates or they will go to the convention lose there.

Be a faggot all you want. I'll be more realistic and look at the actual numbers that matter.

:lol semen shielding
:lol NY doesn't matter anyway!!
:lol Shillary fans defending her pathetic underachieving against a candidate no one even knew about 10 months ago

[Reck]

Oh, and that article is founded on a terrible concept. Bernie didn't have the money or supporters nine months ago to do what he is doing now. He has truly created a political revolution in a VERY short amount of time, and is outraising Shillary despite her owning a massive amount of rich establishment connections. He deserves MAD respect and props for founding this movement and keeping the momentum rolling just to this point, much less stealing a win in multiple states where he was down double digits in polling. Hillary fans should be embarrassed to even be connected with her remarkable underachievement in not just one, but TWO campaigns now.

Those are Bernie's own advisers you retard.

[Reck]

:lol semen shielding
:lol NY doesn't matter anyway!!
:lol Shillary fans defending her pathetic underachieving against a candidate no one even knew about 10 months ago

:lmao Has no response, has to settle for shitty lol emojis. :lmao

[z0sa]

Those are Bernie's own advisers you retard.

No shit. Just because you are too biased to realize they wrote an article founded on a fucking terrible concept meant to make your pussy wet about Shillary's delegate lead doesn't mean it isn't exactly that.

[z0sa]

:lmao Has no response, has to settle for shitty lol emojis. :lmao

I specifically addressed your "NY doesn't matter!! :cry :cry" post. Wow you are fucking stupid :lol

About what I'd expect from a Shillary semen shielder, though. You and the insane feminazis bent on electing a female president and the 65 and older crowder are running scared from Bernie :lol

[Reck]

No shit. Just because you are too biased to realize they wrote an article founded on a fucking terrible concept meant to make your pussy wet about Shillary's delegate lead doesn't mean it isn't exactly that.

http://i67.tinypic.com/10p2aa8.jpg

So back to the convention thing. Tell me how that matters.

Bernie doesn't even have the popular vote? She has over 2 million more votes than he does.

LOL you're pathetic man. This ain't about taking sides. I'm just calling it like it is.

If this was Bernie, I'd be posting the same.

You Bernie supporters are anti facts. Let that shit sink in.

[z0sa]

http://i67.tinypic.com/10p2aa8.jpg

So back to the convention thing. Tell me how that matters.

Bernie doesn't even have the popular vote? She has over 2 million more votes than he does.

LOL you're pathetic man. This ain't about taking sides. I'm just calling it like it is.

If this was Bernie, I'd be posting the same.

You Bernie supporters are anti facts. Let that shit sink in.

I bet you're just so mad about all those heinous lies Bernie's campaign spreads about your candidate aren't you? :rollin you can't make this shit up.

Oh and I explained why Bernie has a solid argument (that's becoming ever more solid every passing state) that he's better vs Trump than Hillary. Just because you don't care about the actual FACTS like Bernie beating Trump and Cruz well outside of the margin of error in every available head to head poll doesn't mean I'm anti-fact.

[Reck]

I specifically addressed your "NY doesn't matter!! :cry :cry" post. Wow you are fucking stupid :lol

About what I'd expect from a Shillary semen shielder, though. You and the insane feminazis bent on electing a female president and the 65 and older crowder are running scared from Bernie :lol

When did I say New York didn't matter?

You are now making shit up.

I said that if he won NY it wouldn't matter because it would be by a small margin. But that's irrelevant because he's not going to win here.

[z0sa]

When did I say New York didn't matter?



I said that if he won NY it wouldn't matter

Holy. Shit.

[Reck]

I bet you're just so mad about all those heinous lies Bernie's campaign spreads about your candidate aren't you? :rollin you can't make this shit up.

Oh and I explained why Bernie has a solid argument (that's becoming ever more solid every passing state) that he's better vs Trump than Hillary. Just because you don't care about the actual FACTS like Bernie beating Trump and Cruz well outside of the margin of error in every available head to head poll doesn't mean I'm anti-fact.

My candidate? :lmao

I'm not voting in the New York Primaries. I have zero stakes in this fight. Muahahaha

So keep your head spinning.

And as far as Bernie beating Trump well outside the error of margin, that's true..but so is Hillary.

As a Bernie supporter, dont you get embarrassed you have to bring poll numbers up? That's exactly what a Trump dumbass would do.

Does it matter how big iether one beats Trump as long as they beat him? Both Bernie and Hillary beat Trump and Cruz rather handily and outside the margin of error so I dont know what your beef is.

[Reck]

Holy. Shit.

In the context of delegate numbers. Keep up.

[z0sa]

In the context of delegate numbers. Keep up.

You continue to abrasively suggest that is the only facet worth looking at. It's not. Just because you want to contain the argument and beat a strawman when I'm not even arguing about his delegate lead means nothing in terms of his actual momentum going forward.

And yes, your candidate. it's very, very obvious youre in the Hillary camp. Comparing me to a Donald Trump fan because I brought up facts thoroughly confirms that.

[Reck]

You continue to abrasively suggest that is the only facet worth looking at. It's not. Just because you want to contain the argument and beat a strawman when I'm not even arguing about his delegate lead means nothing in terms of his actual momentum going forward.

And yes, your candidate. it's very, very obvious youre in the Hillary camp.

That's a conclusion you came to by yourself. If that's what you want to believe, then you are free to believe it.

But you're wrong, I asure you.

Delegate math is not the only thing I have pointed out so you're also wrong in that. What about the vote count? You cant overlook the fact people like you and I have casted over 2 million more votes for her than Bernie.

That's just fact, I ain't making that up.

I'm just here to discuss shit. I have no sides nor do I plan on voting for either one in these primaries.

[z0sa]

That's a conclusion you came to by yourself. If that's what you want to believe, then you are free to believe it.

But you're wrong, I asure you.

Delegate math is not the only thing I have pointed out so you're also wrong in that. What about the vote count? You cant overlook the fact people like you and I have casted over 2 million more votes for her than Bernie.

That's just fact, I ain't making that up.

I'm just here to discuss shit. I have no sides nor do I plan on voting for either one in these primaries.

You get more delegates by getting more votes. The two are intrinsically linked. Like I said, no one is disputing either. And instead of being so defensive, maybe you should look back to my NUMEROUS posts in this thread where I definitively call Bernie winning a long shot.

I understand Hillary's probably going to win.

Doesn't mean Bernie winning NY "wouldn't matter." It absolutely would be a major deal, if only for propaganda purposes. See the big picture instead of just saying "Hillary's delegate lead is way too big." In case you haven't realized it yet, that is EXACTLY why superdelegates exist, and why pushing a vote on the floor can and possibly will happen. The DNC wants the candidate who beats the other guy better, not the populist pick. Bernie has an argument that's increasing in resonance every day that HE is the better pick for the general. Hillary may beat Trump, but her unfavorability rating is HUGE. She will not drive out voters like Bernie will, and she CERTAINLY does NOT have any kind of lead when it comes to independents, who tend to turn elections one way or the other. BERNIE wins outright in that regard, which in my opinion, makes him a better candidate for the general.

[FkLA]

You Bernie supporters are anti facts. Let that shit sink in.

Your assertion that the only wins that would matter for Bernie are 30+ point ones isn't a fact. He needs slightly under 57% of the remaining delegates. There's plenty of ways to accomplish that besides just huge 30+ point wins.

[Reck]

It absolutely would be a major deal, if only for propaganda purposes. See the big picture instead of just saying "Hillary's delegate lead is way too big." In case you haven't realized it yet, that is EXACTLY why superdelegates exist, and why pushing a vote on the floor can and possibly will happen. The DNC wants the candidate who beats the other guy better, not the populist pick. Bernie has an argument that's increasing in resonance every day that HE is the better pick for the general. Hillary may beat Trump, but her unfavorability rating is HUGE. She will not drive out voters like Bernie will, and she CERTAINLY does NOT have any kind of lead when it comes to independents, who tend to turn elections one way or the other. BERNIE wins outright in that regard, which in my opinion, makes him a better candidate for the general.

In that we agree.

It would be a psychological blow to her if she lost New York even if by a few points. Specially since he has won 5 out of the last 6 contests. And I'm fairly certain he will win Wisconsin and Wyoming.

So her losing New York also would be pretty devasting mentally.

[Reck]

Your assertion that the only wins that would matter for Bernie are 30+ point ones isn't a fact. He needs slightly under 57% of the remaining delegates. There's plenty of ways to accomplish that besides just huge 30+ point wins.

Not plenty, but there is one other way I would say. Superdelegates.

If he continues to win states after states, he can make the case to them to switch and balance the scale.

[FkLA]

Not plenty, but there is one other way I would say. Superdelegates.

If he continues to win states after states, he can make the case to them to switch and balance the scale.

I'm not sure if you fully understand what 57% of remaining delegates entails. He can win some by huge margins, others by small margins, and even lose a few and he'd still catch her if he hits that 57%.

[Reck]

I'm not sure if you fully understand what 57% of remaining delegates entails. He can win some by huge margins, others by small margins, and even lose a few and he'd still catch her if he hits that 57%.

But I'm sure Hillary's target is somewhere in the 30 percentile. She's more likely to hit that every time than he is 57% which is why superdelegates are sort of his only way out.

[FkLA]

But I'm sure Hillary's target is somewhere in the 30 percentile. She's more likely to hit that every time than he is 57% which is why superdelegates are sort of his only way out.

No, I'm pretty sure her target would be slightly over 43%. And yeah her target is more likely but I wasn't responding to that. I was responding to the assertion that he needs 30+ point wins for his victories to matter.

[DMX7]

Almost all Clinton supporters would be ok with Bernie winning but not the other way around. The democratic party needs to understand this.

[spurraider21]

Almost all Clinton supporters would be ok with Bernie winning but not the other way around. The democratic party needs to understand this.
eh, they say that. but they're all going to vote clinton over trump when push comes to shove

[spurraider21]

good on him for winning wisconsin (though not really a big delegate push)... but apparently he had a really rough interview the other day with the new york daily news

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/05/9-things-bernie-sanders-shouldve-known-about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

[Nbadan]

Almost all Clinton supporters would be ok with Bernie winning but not the other way around. The democratic party needs to understand this.

Progressives, ...IMO young liberal voters would more likely show up to vote against Trump than Cruz....although young females might show for Clinton...

[z0sa]

good on him for winning wisconsin (though not really a big delegate push)... but apparently he had a really rough interview the other day with the new york daily news

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/05/9-things-bernie-sanders-shouldve-known-about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

I was a bit disappointed, I will admit.

Bernie seems like he's going to over rely on the executive order with this type of response, something I personally have a lot of issues with.

But it's hilarious that he's being compared to Cruz on CNN etc when Bernie has won 6 more states IIRC and by higher margins. The race between him and Clinton is MUCH closer than Cruz and Trump; the difference is, the establishment Repubs HATE Trump.

[boutons_deux]

"over rely on the executive order with this type of response"

Any Dem president faced with Repug strict obstructionist Congress has to advance America with Exec Orders.

Which of these would be voted up by Repug Congress?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Bernie had real balls to even talk to an extreme right wing rag.

[hater]

Another day. Another poster wrecking reck :lol

[z0sa]

"over rely on the executive order with this type of response"

Any Dem president faced with Repug strict obstructionist Congress has to advance America with Exec Orders.

Which of these would be voted up by Repug Congress?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Bernie had real balls to even talk to an extreme right wing rag.

No one is denying that.

The real problem isn't congress, it is the SCOTUS striking down these orders. If people greatly benefit from the EOs then it is a low chance Congress will have the unity to pass laws contrary to them, especially with such deadlock as has been for years and years now.

But the SCOTUS would have no problem dealing a major blow in the name of the law - even a more liberal one.

[boutons_deux]

"it is the SCOTUS striking down these orders"

do you have list of EOs that SCOTUS has killed since 2000? I really can't remember any since 2009.

[Reck]

Another day. Another poster wrecking reck :lol

Funny, I don't remember you showing your face last night. You got fucked with a 12 inch strapon raw. :lmao

[Reck]

good on him for winning wisconsin (though not really a big delegate push)... but apparently he had a really rough interview the other day with the new york daily news

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/05/9-things-bernie-sanders-shouldve-known-about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

He botched that interview pretty hardcore. I listened to the 50+ minute interview. He seemed rattled and caught off guard on almost every question.

He's so weak on foreign policy.

[z0sa]

He botched that interview pretty hardcore. I listened to the 50+ minute interview. He seemed rattled and caught off guard on almost every question.

He's so weak on foreign policy.

The only foreign policy question that actually mattered in a Bernie presidency was concerning captured ISIS. The rest of the questions are stupid, for the stupid, by the stupid. We're 20 trillion in debt, we dont need more wars, we dont need to police the world. Thats why Bernie doesnt know, and frankly, doesnt care. Domestic issues are what the 99% are worried about. Bullshit about israel or riding the subway is just that, bullshit.

[DMX7]

Bernie now saying that Hillary is not qualified. That seems to throw the unity ticket hopes out the window.

[Reck]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-qualified/

This guy is on an all out attack it seems. Desperation?

Not quite sure why he's going the route of Trump when he's winning states after states. Perhaps he knows he's coming up on a huge wall he's bound to crash in? New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut are all going to Clinton.

[Reck]

Bernie now saying that Hillary is not qualified. That seems to throw the unity ticket hopes out the window.

I was hoping for a Hillary/Bernie tickect but this guy just wants the cake and eat it too. For fuck's sake Bernie, you're spoiling it.

With this, he's also saying screw you Democratic party. If I dont win the nom, I will make sure Hillary loses by keeping my supporters.

Jesus almighty.

[spurraider21]

nobody that makes it this far ever becomes VP :lol... at least not in recent memory

[DMX7]

I'm kind of disappointed he said it. I think it would have been better if maybe he said in a debate something to the effect of "voting for the Iraq war disqualifies you from running as a progressive in the democratic primary" which would have more sharply countered her criticism that he's not a democrat. Instead, he will now have to defend the fact that made up her saying he's "not qualified" because she never explicitly said that.

[Nbadan]

I was hoping for a Hillary/Bernie tickect but this guy just wants the cake and eat it too. For fuck's sake Bernie, you're spoiling it.

With this, he's also saying screw you Democratic party. If I dont win the nom, I will make sure Hillary loses by keeping my supporters.

Jesus almighty.


Bernie would have no chance on a Clinton ticket, he knows that....Clinton will pick a centrist like Caine...Bernie is staying true to Bernie...Hillary is a special interest candidate...it will be business as usual for the rich oligarchs and screw the minions with a flare of neo-con....yippee...

[boutons_deux]

Hillary's attacking Bernie now for his numbers not adding up, and proposing stuff that's no feasible.

subtext: I Hillary will sign all kinds of nasty Repug bills into law, will not touch BigCarbon, BigFinance, and not do anything to protect Human-Americans against BigCorp predations. iow, Hillary am center right Repug.

[boutons_deux]

"He's so weak on foreign policy" :lol

yep, he can't hold a candle to the Repugs for stopping 9/11, to invading Iraq for oil, and for winning the Afghanistan war.

And he can't dare to equal Hillary who pushed for regime in changes in Libya and Syria, both of which are huge American successes.

[DMX7]

Hillary doesn't understand the difference between being experienced at foreign policy and being good at it. She is clearly not the latter.

[spurraider21]

shillary is billed as 4 more years of obama, so i dont get why all the people who were slurping obama are so anti-shillary

probably a lot of sexism imo

[z0sa]

Bernies comments suddenly front page news on CNN :lol

The bias and establishment politics reeks.

[Reck]

Bernies comments suddenly front page news on CNN :lol

The bias and establishment politics reeks.

It's pretty much on every media, plus internet sites to be fair.

I wish he didn't say those comments even if true. This is going to look bad on him because he's not just attacking her. He's throwing the party under the bus and alienating a shit ton of people on both sides. (His and hers)

http://abcnews.go.com/US
http://www.nbcnews.com/
http://www.cbsnews.com/politics/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

The huffintonpost is pretty liberal and pro Bernie and they have it as front news so this bias notion is pretty ridiculous.

[z0sa]

abc, cbs, nbc . . . no those aren't establishment at all.

[Reck]

abc, cbs, nbc . . . no those aren't establishment at all.

http://rightwingnews.com/top-news/the-50-most-popular-liberal-websites/

Most of them have it as front page news.

Most liberal popular sites. Nothing to do with media driven channels. Let's be fair

[z0sa]

Im not talking about the fact that it;s not news. It's just hilarious that Bernie makes a straight up attack and everyone raises their eyebrows suddenly. Meanwhile Hillary can call him a one issue candidate and lie about his campaign constantly and it's not even worth batting an eye.

[spurraider21]

"issue oriented campaign" :lol

odd to see bernie go the way of rubio

[z0sa]

"issue oriented campaign" :lol

odd to see bernie go the way of rubio

Desperation time. He's going all-in hoping he can force a bad reaction from Shillary.

Feelin the Bern or not, it's pretty clear that this next stretch of his campaign will be brutal for him. He may not even make it to the convention if these NY numbers hold out.

[Reck]

Desperation time. He's going all-in hoping he can force a bad reaction from Shillary.

Feelin the Bern or not, it's pretty clear that this next stretch of his campaign will be brutal for him. He may not even make it to the convention if these NY numbers hold out.

Polls from today favored him. Up 2 in the overall elections and cut her Pennsylvania lead from 23 points to 6.

it will be interesting to see if these comments set him back or propel him.

I just don't understand why he's taking the Trump approach lately. Between talking poll numbers in his rallies to calling for Hillary to apologize to now calling her un qualified is really odd. That's so far out of his elements and something he didn't use to do.

I also think that if he wants Hillary's superdelegates he's going to need to be less of an asshole. This isn't how you win over people already pledging Hillary support.

[Reck]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/bernie-sanders-israel-michael-oren-blood-libel-221671

Bernie is having a Trump like week. He's saying all the wrong things. He's now being asked to apologize for 3 different comments he made.

[z0sa]

Being asked to apologize for the sandy hook shit is straight up stupid. That's definitely a Hillary backfire.

As for Israel . . . who cares again? From a strictly secular POV, obviously. No one in their right mind with access to the facts thinks Israel hasn't killed thousands and thousands in the name of "national security."

[Reck]

Being asked to apologize for the sandy hook shit is straight up stupid. That's definitely a Hillary backfire.

As for Israel . . . who cares again? From a strictly secular POV, obviously. No one in their right mind with access to the facts thinks Israel hasn't killed thousands and thousands in the name of "national security."

Given that it was the victim's family who asked for the apology I'd say you're wrong on that.

Agree that the Israel thing is irrelevant. Just posted to show how people are upset at Bernie.

[z0sa]

Given that it was the victim's family who asked for the apology I'd say you're wrong on that.

Apparently you're not aware Hillary thinks he should be apologize, too, AKA a Hillary backfire. The family asking for an apology are likewise, stupid. experiencing a tragedy doesn't mean you earn a get out of stupid free card.

[Reck]

Apparently you're not aware Hillary thinks he should be apologize, too, AKA a Hillary backfire. The family asking for an apology are likewise, stupid. experiencing a tragedy doesn't mean you earn a get out of stupid free card.

Jumping in and taking the opportunity is not a backfire. It's just taking advantage of the situation.

I think Bernie's deflection are even more of a fail. Here he's asked to apologize by the family and he says Hillary should apologize for taking money from people? Like how does that even relate? Lol

[Shastafarian]

Given that it was the victim's family who asked for the apology I'd say you're wrong on that.



Yeah but they want him to apologize for what? Not being able to sue someone right? I don't agree with his stance on this but this controversy is silly. They're misplacing their anger. Unless they can explain exactly how a change in that law would have prevented the massacre.

[z0sa]

Jumping in and taking the opportunity is not a backfire. It's just taking advantage of the situation.

Asking that he apologize to sandy hook victims for saying the gun manufacturers shouldn't be held accountable is absolutely a backfire and absolutely a mistake on her part. She's not a victim. It's not logical, it's not going to appeal to independents (where she REALLY needs to make some ground up) and it's not necessary considering her lead.

Just a backfire, plain and simple. It's going to hurt her more than help her among the groups she needs to make up ground in. Edit: make up ground in for the general election.


I think Bernie's deflection are even more of a fail. Here he's asked to apologize by the family and he says Hillary should apologize for taking money from people? Like how does that even relate? Lol

He's "deflecting" because she is trying to make an issue out of something that quite frankly, does not fucking matter. Everyones raising eyebrows for Bernies attack and saying that's not policy related, how the fuck is this policy related, Hillary? God only knows you are in the back pocket of wall street a 1000x more than Bernies in the pocket of the NRA and gun manufacturers. Again, just rabblerousing to try and confuse dumb people.

[Pelicans78]

Why should Bernie apologize? He has no reason to.

[Reck]

This is the quote. He didn't said anything about money, my bad.

I would say that I think we all are aware of what happened, and Sandy Hook is a tragedy beyond comprehension. But maybe Secretary Clinton might want to apologize to the families who lost their loved ones in Iraq or Secretary Clinton might want to apologize to the millions of workers in this country who lost their jobs because of the disastrous trade agreements that she supported.

Just as bad.

[Reck]

Yeah but they want him to apologize for what? Not being able to sue someone right? I don't agree with his stance on this but this controversy is silly. They're misplacing their anger. Unless they can explain exactly how a change in that law would have prevented the massacre.

They're suing regardless. I think it has more to do with how he said it.

He undermine the significant of the tragedy by scoffing the question with a simple, emotionless answer.

[Shastafarian]

They're suing regardless. I think it has more to do with how he said it.

He undermine the significant of the tragedy by scoffing the question with a simple, emotionless answer.

Yeah so we agree. It's a silly controversy.

[z0sa]

FWIW, I agree with Bernie 100%.

[Shastafarian]

FWIW, I agree with Bernie 100%.

It's a slippery slope with the special case of guns. I understand where Bernie comes from but I thought the reason he is getting asked about this is because there can be no liability found against manufacturers in civil cases. I think it should be allowable to determine that in court, not strictly ban it.

[z0sa]

It's a slippery slope with the special case of guns. I understand where Bernie comes from but I thought the reason he is getting asked about this is because there can be no liability found against manufacturers in civil cases. I think it should be allowable to determine that in court, not strictly ban it.

I can't say I agree. That said, it's really too bad there wasn't a manufacturer's defect.

[Shastafarian]

I can't say I agree. That said, it's really too bad there wasn't a manufacturer's defect.

I'm as anti-gun as can be. But as long as all types are legal, the issue of suing a manufacturer that breaks no laws is complicated to say the least. This controversy is yet another phony attempt to discredit him among ACTUAL liberals. "Sanders is responsible for Sandy Hook!" GMAFB

[z0sa]

I'm as anti-gun as can be. But as long as all types are legal, the issue of suing a manufacturer that breaks no laws is complicated to say the least. This controversy is yet another phony attempt to discredit him among ACTUAL liberals. "Sanders is responsible for Sandy Hook!" GMAFB

Sanders "soft on guns" stance was about his only centrist/right wing viewpoint. Surprised Hillary hasn't attacked him on it much more, tbh.

[boutons_deux]

From Robert Reich on Facebook?

"One of you just sent me these numbers for the Democratic primary at this point in time -- which I've checked out and appear accurate.
Total pledged delegates - 4051

Pledged delegates needed to win - 2026

Pledged delegates yet to be decided - 1662

Pledged delegate for Sanders - 1088

Pledged delegates for Clinton - 1302

To win sanders needs - 938

To win Clinton needs - 724

What sanders needs to win (938) divided by what's left (1662), 938 ÷ 1662 = 56.438. We'll round that up to 56.5%

So it's not 60 or 70, it's 56.5% of the remaining pledged delegates Sanders need to win."

[boutons_deux]

Bernie's rally in PA

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/t31.0-8/12973387_1023876417667362_97902169331412414_o.jpg

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/t31.0-8/12977123_1023875381000799_1531326132545200681_o.jp g

[CosmicCowboy]

If Bernie has more popular votes and pledged delegates will the super delegates switch to Bernie? Didn't that happen with Obama?

[baseline bum]

If Bernie has more popular votes and pledged delegates will the super delegates switch to Bernie? Didn't that happen with Obama?

Obama is a Democrat, Sanders isn't.

[DMX7]

Obama is a Democrat, Sanders isn't.

LOL, get that weak shit out of here.

[baseline bum]

LOL, get that weak shit out of here.

Are you retarded, Democrat superdelegates are going to flock to socialist Sanders like they did a Democrat Obama?

[spurraider21]

Are you retarded, Democrat superdelegates are going to flock to socialist Sanders like they did a Democrat Obama?
To be fair Republicans were calling Obama a socialist the while time :lol

[baseline bum]

To be fair Republicans were calling Obama a socialist the while time :lol

The Republican definition of socialist is anyone to the left of Cruz.

[DarrinS]

The Republican definition of socialist is anyone to the left of Cruz.

Lol

[DMX7]

Are you retarded, Democrat superdelegates are going to flock to socialist Sanders like they did a Democrat Obama?

That's not why they flocked to him. Candidates usually flock to who they think will win so they will be in their good graces and can associate themselves with a winner. Hillary has been the inevitable candidate with money, a name brand, and so many political connections/relationships. That's the real reason she is dominating with the super-delegates, not because Bernie has been an independent.

[spurraider21]

The Republican definition of socialist is anyone to the left of Cruz.
:lol qft

[boutons_deux]

If Bernie has more popular votes and pledged delegates will the super delegates switch to Bernie? Didn't that happen with Obama?

yes, that's has happened. The superdelegates pledged to the candidate who loses the primaries will "normally" switch to the primaries winner.

That's why giving Hillary all the superdelegates now as a final condition is misleading (that's why the Dem establishment counts the supers ALREADY for Hillary, to discourage the Bernie voters)

If Bernie wins more delegates, he'll pick up the supers, too.

But I'm sure some female supers will not switch but stick with Hillary because they think Hillary as a woman is entitled, it's a woman's turn, and for women to "avoid that special place in hell".

[boutons_deux]

Are you retarded, Democrat superdelegates are going to flock to socialist Sanders like they did a Democrat Obama?

yes, that's supposedly the convention, but the some of sexist element of supers will stick with Hillary even if she loses the primaries because she's woman (ignoring her screw-the-99% neoliberalism and neoconnism.

[spurraider21]

yes, that's has happened. The superdelegates pledged to the candidate who loses the primaries will "normally" switch to the primaries winner.

That's why giving Hillary all the superdelegates now as a final condition is misleading (that's why the Dem establishment counts the supers ALREADY for Hillary, to discourage the Bernie voters)

If Bernie wins more delegates, he'll pick up the supers, too.

But I'm sure some female supers will not switch but stick with Hillary because they think Hillary as a woman is entitled, it's a woman's turn, and for women to "avoid that special place in hell".
wouldn't surprise me, coming from that party

[boutons_deux]

“The Clinton campaign has refrained from going nuclear on Sanders, aides say, in large part to keep at least some goodwill alive in hopes of unifying the party at the end of the primary fight,” according to CNN. “No more, a top adviser [said]. The fight is on. Extending an olive branch to Sanders’ supporters ‘will come later.'”

However, the Clinton campaign and media outlets like CNN promote a false narrative that the campaign has not been in attack mode. Since September, she has used a network (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/hillary-clinton-2016-proxies-attack-bernie-sanders-213359) of surrogates and rapid response super PACs to push anti-Sanders talking points into the media.
Shadowproof has documented a pattern (https://shadowproof.com/2016/03/19/clinton-campaign-relies-on-more-rumors-and-dishonest-attacks-against-sanders/) of dishonest attacks (https://shadowproof.com/2016/02/23/clinton-campaign-relies-rumors-dishonesty-attack-sanders/) and rumors, particularly since January. The attacks include:

Sanders supports Minutemen vigilantes and similar anti-immigrant hate groups,

Sanders opposed bailing out auto workers,

Sanders supports the NRA,

Sanders wants to dismantle the Affordable Health Care Act,

Sanders supported the indefinite detention of immigrants, and

Sanders sees President Barack Obama as “weak” and will not support Obama’s legacy.

Voters have yet to see the full scope of what the Clinton campaign will sling at Sanders, but today’s interviews indicate she will return to her effort to paint Sanders as a gun-lover.

She will focus on the fact that he is an independent senator, and, therefore, he is not a Democrat who will help the Democratic Party win in down-ballot elections in November.

She also will attack him on regulating “too big to fail” banks and re-up her artful smear that Sanders has no respect for President Obama.

Clinton Falsely Claims Sanders Doesn’t Recognize Financial Reform Legislation Was Passed

“A Relatively New Democrat:” Clinton Attacks Sanders’ Political Identity

The once-inevitable Democratic nominee (as her campaign claimed) recognizes there is a battle to be won. Commentator Van Jones, appearing (http://www.democracynow.org/2016/4/6/van_jones_new_york_primary_is) on “Democracy Now!” said New York is a “war to settle the score.” Jones said, “You’re going to see a vetting of Bernie Sanders like you’ve never seen.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/04/07/disqualify-and-defeat-clinton-campaign-attacks-intensify-halt-sanders-win-streak

[boutons_deux]

Sanders Takes 30-Point Bite out of Clinton Lead in NY

New poll shows Clinton with 18-point lead over Sanders, compared to 48-point lead in mid-March

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/08/sanders-takes-30-point-bite-out-clinton-lead-ny

... and that's with BigMedia ignoring if not trashing Bernie.

BigMo is with Bernie

[Reck]

Sanders Takes 30-Point Bite out of Clinton Lead in NY

New poll shows Clinton with 18-point lead over Sanders, compared to 48-point lead in mid-March

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/08/sanders-takes-30-point-bite-out-clinton-lead-ny

... and that's with BigMedia ignoring if not trashing Bernie.

BigMo is with Bernie








She increased it. She had a 10 point and a 12 point lead as of last week.

Any polls done a month ago is irrelevant.

[boutons_deux]

Sanders Over the Edge

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/11/12/opinion/krugman-circular/krugman-circular-thumbLarge-v7.jpg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html) Paul Krugman (http://www.nytimes.com/column/paul-krugman)APRIL 8, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/opinion/sanders-over-the-edge.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/opinion/sanders-over-the-edge.html)

Reich's FB takedown of Krugman:

Ordinarily I wouldn’t pick on a particular columnist but I respect Paul Krugman. Also, his perch at the New York Times gives him broad influence – especially just two and a half weeks before the important New York State primary. But his piece today (which I’ve attached) is shot through with errors.

1. The biggest Wall Street banks did indeed precipitate the crisis on Wall Street in 2008 because of their gambling in newfangled financial instruments and fancy derivatives even they didn't understand.

2. Their size did make a difference because they were so interconnected with other financial entities both in the U.S. and around the world that they were "too big to fail." Today's biggest Wall Street banks are much bigger than they were in 2008.

3. Size also has a bearing on their political influence. The reason the Glass-Steagall Act was scotched by Bill Clinton's administration, and the Clinton administration wouldn't agree with the CFTC to regulate derivatives, had a lot to do with the influence of Wall Street over the Clinton administration and over Congress.

The political power of the biggest players on the Street is even larger today – as evidenced by their capacity to whittle back significant parts of Dodd-Frank in the regulatory process.

4. Breaking up the biggest banks isn’t a radical idea. In fact, many experts – including the current president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (who’s a Republican and a former executive of Goldman Sachs), and the former head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas -- have called for exactly this.

5. Bernie's other ideas -- for a single-payer plan, and for free tuition at public institutions of higher education – are sensible, and also backed by many experts.

It’s well-established that a single-payer plan would be far less costly and deliver far better care than our own system, which is based on private for-profit insurers.

As to free tuition in public universities, we were well on the way to this goal in the 1950s and 1960s. It was and is a logical extension of free K-12 education.

6. Finally, the current brouhaha over who's "qualified to be president" was arguably started by Hillary Clinton. Personally, I think neither she nor Bernie should be calling the other unqualified, but to blame Bernie for this exchange is simply incorrect.

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1193897777289483?comment_id=550814701758212&notif_t=like&notif_id=1460146383808096