Jump to content
kfools

For spycar (Bill) I have some Bernie Questions.

Recommended Posts

Bill 

 

1. You want to eliminate the electoral college. If Bernie gets the popular vote during the primaries do you think it's right for the super delegates to refuse to nominate him?

 

2. You rage against other liberals who refused to vote for Clinton and blame them for Trump (Rightly so) if a Communist like Bernie is the Dem nominee will you vote for him?

 

3. Was the right wing correct this whole time that Democrats were really pushing for incremental socialism.

 

No judgements. Not trying to go after you here. I just want your honest opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kfools said:

Bill 

 

1. You want to eliminate the electoral college. If Bernie gets the popular vote during the primaries do you think it's right for the super delegates to refuse to nominate him?

 

2. You rage against other liberals who refused to vote for Clinton and blame them for Trump (Rightly so) if a Communist like Bernie is the Dem nominee will you vote for him?

 

3. Was the right wing correct this whole time that Democrats were really pushing for incremental socialism.

 

No judgements. Not trying to go after you here. I just want your honest opinion.

The left only likes the popular vote if it benefits them.

 

Years ago the popular vote in California won on traditional marriage.

 

A leftist judge struck that vote done and turned his back on the pop vote.

 

Not a word from the left about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, kfools said:

Bill 

 

1. You want to eliminate the electoral college. If Bernie gets the popular vote during the primaries do you think it's right for the super delegates to refuse to nominate him?

 

2. You rage against other liberals who refused to vote for Clinton and blame them for Trump (Rightly so) if a Communist like Bernie is the Dem nominee will you vote for him?

 

3. Was the right wing correct this whole time that Democrats were really pushing for incremental socialism.

 

No judgements. Not trying to go after you here. I just want your honest opinion.

 

As a preface: I don't think the electoral college is going anywhere. I also understand the logic of the framers of having an EC (beyond the practical ones of a big country). I do think that that combined with a Senate that gives disproportionate power to small and under-populated states that the EC overly distorts the power of small states.

 

The EC has nothing what-so-ever to do with how political parties choose their nominees. Parties are NOT part of the government and are free to have their own selection processes. There is no link.

 

#1. I do not think there is a chance in hell that BS will get the nomination if he doesn't have the required majority of pledged delegates on the first ballot. He is not a Democrat (nor a liberal) and he's unacceptable to most of the party. If the vote goes to a second ballot, I think he's finished. I'd be appalled if party officials selected him. That would destroy our party, beyond handing Trump an easy win.

 

#2. The question involves gaslighting. No "liberals" failed to vote for HRC (unless they were ill or otherwise incapacitated). It was the kooky populist-communist cult of BS that stayed home. If BS managed to get the nomination  (god forbid) I expect a huge portion of the party to stay home. We are not a communist party. The loss would be catastrophic.

 

#3. No. Socialism is the government/collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Socialism/communism is not the aim of liberals. Most liberals (to varying degrees) do want to use the wealth that an advanced capitalist economy is capable of creating to take care of people's social welfare needs, medical care, education, infrastructure, along with the country's defense needs. We favor a social safety net. Nothing "radical" about that.

 

Most liberals also think that for a capitalist economy to thrive we need to root out financial crime, manipulations of markets, monopolistic practices and other such anti-competitive distortions that undermine a free economy. Too many on the far-right and the far-left conflate capitalism with kleptocracy. The irony of the situation is that one of the nation's biggest cheaters is now POTUS. Trump is not a "corporate socialist" as BS claims for propaganda purposes, but he has taken advantage of tax-breaks and engaged in shady business practices that only advantage the very wealthy and very corrupt.

 

Bill

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

 

As a preface: I don't think the electoral college is going anywhere. I also understand the logic of the framers of having an EC (beyond the practical ones of a big country). I do think that that combined with a Senate that gives disproportionate power to small and under-populated states that the EC overly distorts the power of small states.

 

The EC has nothing what-so-ever to do with how political parties choose their nominees. Parties are NOT part of the government and are free to have their own selection processes. There is no link.

Mmmmm. I understand what you are saying but it seems to be contradict itself. 

 

Essentially the DNC can use superdelegates to thwart the will of the voters. That being the case why have primaries at all?

 

The Democrats as a platform have railed against the electoral college. This is inarguable. You can see where it would look like hypocrisy for the party to reject Sanders if he wins the most votes right?

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

#1. I do not think there is a chance in hell that BS will get the nomination if he doesn't have the required majority of pledged delegates on the first ballot. He is not a Democrat (nor a liberal) and he's unacceptable to most of the party. If the vote goes to a second ballot, I think he's finished. I'd be appalled if party officials selected him. That would destroy our party, beyond handing Trump an easy win.

I also do not think Sanders will be the nominee. A brokered convention will not look good on the party though. You do need Sanders voters. You may think they are retards but there's a lot of them.

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

#2. The question involves gaslighting. No "liberals" failed to vote for HRC (unless they were ill or otherwise incapacitated).

Actually I think this response is gaslighting. You can say they weren't Democrats but not liberals? 

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

It was the kooky populist-communist cult of BS that stayed home. If BS managed to get the nomination  (god forbid) I expect a huge portion of the party to stay home. We are not a communist party. The loss would be catastrophic.

Wouldn't that effectively insure Trump's victory the very same scenario which you rage about for those that didn't vote Clinton?

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

#3. No. Socialism is the government/collective ownership of the means of production and distribution.

Ya.

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

Socialism/communism is not the aim of liberals.

Dont most healthcare overhauls proposed by many mainstream Democrats pretty much for your above description of socialism?

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

Most liberals (to varying degrees) do want to use the wealth that an advanced capitalist economy is capable of creating to take care of people's social welfare needs, medical care, education, infrastructure, along with the country's defense needs. We favor a social safety net. Nothing "radical" about that.

No. There isn't.

2 hours ago, SpyCar said:

Most liberals also think that for a capitalist economy to thrive we need to root out financial crime, manipulations of markets, monopolistic practices and other such anti-competitive distortions that undermine a free economy. Too many on the far-right and the far-left conflate capitalism with kleptocracy. The irony of the situation is that one of the nation's biggest cheaters is now POTUS. Trump is not a "corporate socialist" as BS claims for propaganda purposes, but he has taken advantage of tax-breaks and engaged in shady business practices that only advantage the very wealthy and very corrupt.

 

Bill

 

 

Isn't a socialist just a left wing version of running a Nazi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, kfools said:

Mmmmm. I understand what you are saying but it seems to be contradict itself. 

 

Essentially the DNC can use superdelegates to thwart the will of the voters. That being the case why have primaries at all?

 

The Democrats as a platform have railed against the electoral college. This is inarguable. You can see where it would look like hypocrisy for the party to reject Sanders if he wins the most votes right?

I also do not think Sanders will be the nominee. A brokered convention will not look good on the party though. You do need Sanders voters. You may think they are retards but there's a lot of them.

Actually I think this response is gaslighting. You can say they weren't Democrats but not liberals? 

Wouldn't that effectively insure Trump's victory the very same scenario which you rage about for those that didn't vote Clinton?

Ya.

Dont most healthcare overhauls proposed by many mainstream Democrats pretty much for your above description of socialism?

No. There isn't.

Isn't a socialist just a left wing version of running a Nazi?

 

No contradiction. Parties make their rules for who is the nominee. It is fully proper that the Democratic leadership has a role in determining the nominee IMO. We have people who are not even Democrats--take TrollingRock for example--who attempt to influence elections of a party they don't belong to, so having superdelegates is a good counter balance.

 

A party's primary rules has zero to do with the electoral college. Apples and oranges. Parties are not even required to have primaries and did not have them in the past. 

 

Is Sanders does not have a majority then we will have a brokered convention, not ideal, but that's how it will go. The party will never rally to Sanders as he is not a Democrat, does not reflect the values of the majority of the party, and he's deeply disliked. The cult may abandon the party (again) as they did in 2016. Did I expect the scorpion would change its nature? No.

 

The far-left populist-socialists in the cult of BS are not liberals and most are not Democrats either. Liberals did not boycott the election in 2016, far-leftists did that. 

 

If Sanders were (god forbid) the nominee, Trump would win in a landslide. I do not want that to happen. 

 

No, none of the Democratic plans involve the government owning the means of production.

 

Socialists are not Nazis. That doesn't mean I want to run a socialist. Your party make the mistake of going to the lunatic fringe, I don't want my party to make a similar mistake.

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, SpyCar said:

 

No contradiction. Parties make their rules for who is the nominee. It is fully proper that the Democratic leadership has a role in determining the nominee IMO. We have people who are not even Democrats--take TrollingRock for example--who attempt to influence elections of a party they don't belong to, so having superdelegates is a good counter balance.

Isn't that kinda like a shadow crew actually in charge of picking the nominee? Seems like it's thwarting the Will of the people. Do a couple of men in a smoky room determine the platform and agenda of the DNC or do the people? You seem to think a couple of men can set the agenda. I dunno man. Seems like a contradiction to me. I see your point of view though.

Quote

A party's primary rules has zero to do with the electoral college. Apples and oranges. Parties are not even required to have primaries and did not have them in the past. 

Ya , U know they are different processes. Lol. We established that. Seemingly the point is the same. The will of the people.

Quote

Is Sanders does not have a majority then we will have a brokered convention, not ideal, but that's how it will go.

That will be very bad news for the DNC I think. Many many people will see it as the people's choice being replaced. The RNC will ruthlessly drive it home.

Quote

The party will never rally to Sanders as he is not a Democrat, does not reflect the values of the majority of the party, and he's deeply disliked. The cult may abandon the party (again) as they did in 2016. Did I expect the scorpion would change its nature? No.

I did not either. Surely you must be surprised by the amount of support though.

Quote

The far-left populist-socialists in the cult of BS are not liberals and most are not Democrats either. Liberals did not boycott the election in 2016, far-leftists did that. 

True. Far leftists are still liberals though. Just as it is argued the far right is conservative.

Quote

If Sanders were (god forbid) the nominee, Trump would win in a landslide. I do not want that to happen. 

Obviously I do. Which is why I wanted your perspective.

Quote

No, none of the Democratic plans involve the government owning the means of production.

I mean, to varying degrees they  kinda do man.  You could maybe argue not totally but it's there.

Quote

Socialists are not Nazis. That doesn't mean I want to run a socialist. Your party make the mistake of going to the lunatic fringe, I don't want my party to make a similar mistake.

 

Bill

 

We shall see.

Quote

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kfools said:

Essentially the DNC can use superdelegates to thwart the will of the voters. That being the case why have primaries at all?

Has never came to that in two hundred years so I doubt that will happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie is pulling 30% of the vote last I checked. And I doubt the democrats want Bernie to represent them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kfools said:

That will be very bad news for the DNC I think. Many many people will see it as the people's choice being replaced. The RNC will ruthlessly drive it home.

Like I said it's never happened and doubt it will ever happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kfools said:

did not either. Surely you must be surprised by the amount of support though.

I'm not surprised by the Bernie vote at all. The socialist have a champion and this is his second time around. Most socialists love Bernie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kfools said:

Obviously I do. Which is why I wanted your perspective.

I doubt Bernie will win the nomination just because I think he is unelectable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kfools said:

Socialists are not Nazis. That doesn't mean I want to run a socialist. Your party make the mistake of going to the lunatic fringe, I don't want my party to make a similar mistake.

So true. We need a common sense moderate like Bloomberg and buttyjudge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, kfools said:

You want to eliminate the electoral college.

 

Why do ultraliberals think they are smarter that the Founding Fathers ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Old Mack said:

 

Why do ultraliberals think they are smarter that the Founding Fathers ?

 

 

 

Everyone is smarter than you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leftwinger said:

Everyone is smarter than you.

 

Drunk again...huh bunyip lover !

 

Image result for bernie sanders balloon meme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

Here is the question for spycar: Why do you attack every liberal on the forum? 

He said he does not consider them to be true liberals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kfools said:

He said he does not consider them to be true liberals.

 

Yes, spycar attacks every liberal. And you fell for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

Yes, spycar attacks every liberal. And you fell for it.

Fell for what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

 

Yes, spycar attacks every liberal. And you fell for it.

Not all liberals are socialist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

He's a right wing troll.

You say that about every right winger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...