General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBernie voted against Brady Bill and is very Pro-Israel
So, what do his supporters have to say about that? Or is that just inconvenient for liberals? I, personally, have concerns about both. However, I know there is no perfect candidate.
Should we bash on him day in and day out for these two issues? Seems HRC gets bashed because Bill passed NAFTA. Should we harp on this regarding Bernie like we harp on HRC about Bill's politics?
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)of insane fucks on the other side.
Criticize and question, yes.
But we can deal with the cons in our party when we get rid of the insane assholes trying to destroy all life on the planet
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I hope people here who ostensibly support the Democratic Party stop making obnoxious claims about HRC that bear no relation to reality. But of course they won't.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)but I've known for quite some time that he's as bad on Israel as basically every other Democrat and Republican out there.
Feel free to 'bash' him on whatever you want.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)He's against the people that rob you with an ink pen, and they have done far more harm than the gun toting variety!
I'm with Bernie all the way, my friend!
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)...I love writing with a good fountain pen.
I have a collection, some Parkers and the like.
Wonderful things!
Aerows
(39,961 posts)But I love doing the Sudoku puzzle in the paper with my fountain pen before I start the full day .
I gave up coffee two years ago, and now I've given up cigarettes. I am not in anyway going to give up on my Sudoku puzzles. They ground me in their simplicity and their complexity of logic.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I quit cigs in 2010, but still drink coffee.
I suck at sudoku but respect the form and the fact that it's not about math, it's about arrangements.
My friend was working a book of them with different levels of dificulty: easy, moderate, hard, and diabolical!
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)May 1, 1984 was the first smoke-free day of my adult life.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Has he expressed his reasoning somewhere? I am not surprised he supports Israel but to be honest that could mean anything. Does he support the Idea of Israel but not their hard right actions? I will have to learn more before I have an opinion.
Bernie has very good positions and I'd like to hear his side of things.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Not in any great depth, but gave the sort of standard 'Vermont is a state of hunters, of sportsmen, and we have low gun violence. I realize that things are different in the large cities in other states.' Which sounds more like he sounds like it should be a state's rights sort of deal.
As to Israel, others have posted links to show he's disagreed with various actions Netanyahu and the IDF have taken, and isn't happy with settlements. I guess as far as support for Israel goes, he's not a hardcore 'let them do whatever they want' type, but still is willing to keep sending money over like the rest of Congress.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Your post is appreciated. I'd like to temper our support for Israel and find ways to regulate the guns...I'm not going to give him a black mark, I think he's sane and rational and can be talked to, possibly persuaded. I'm still for Bernie all the way.
cali
(114,904 posts)I think you know what I say as I penned an OP about the gun control issue.
No shit there's no perfect candidate, Mags.
And bash away, Mags. That's what you've been doing since he announced.
I love the smell of hypocrisy on a May Eve.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)cyberswede
(26,117 posts)Autumn
(45,049 posts)any flavor except vanilla.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)But I like that you refer to me as Mags. That's what my friends call me.
Where is your post about the gun control issue? Thx..
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Sen. Sanders (I-VT) saw right through Netanyahus language of seeking a better deal. Netanyahu was trying to push for a better deal. Netanyahu compared Iran to ISIS and North Korea. That is not a comparison that gets made if a leader believes in diplomacy.
Besides boosting his reelection chances back home, Netanyahu was trying to provoke military action against Iran. The Democrats who skipped the speech did not miss anything. Netanyahus remarks could have been delivered by Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, or any number of a variety of Republican neocons. There was nothing in his speech that the American people didnt hear thousands of times during the Bush administration.
Netanyahu tried to argue for war, and Bernie Sanders called him out on it.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)yuiyoshida
(41,831 posts)glad to read this
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Sen. Bernie Sanders has joined the growing list of members of Congress who will be boycotting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahus speech before a joint session of Congress.
Snip of Bernie's statement on Not Attending Here: Quick Watch!
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/09/bernie-sanders-senator-boycott-netanyahus-speech-congress.html
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Doesn't that make him the "lesser of two evils" in the primary?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Oh, you wanted serious discussion?
You'll have to do better than that.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Same as some people think about HRC.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)and completed a day without being wrong about something.
Not that I'm proud of it, I just know that fallibility is part of the human condition.
He's not perfect, and I can forgive him for that because of all of the things he strives to do and succeeds at getting right.
Go Bernie!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)All but a very, very few have to pucker up and kiss the ass of a foreign power halfway around the world, no matter how racist or belligerent it is.
Clinton will pander hard on Israel as well.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That makes no sense.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)His money is going towards defeating Democrats.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Tom Steyer, for instance - a liberal who doesn't give a crap about Israel. $73 million in campaign donations from him in 2014 alone.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Take all of the money donated to politicians or spent on lobbying by pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel interests and subtract from that figure all money donated to politicians or spent on lobbying by pro-Israel interests.
Positive or negative number? No playing dumb.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Definitely more money donated on the pro-Israel side than the anti-Israel side no question.
However, take any candidate - look at the total amount donated to their campaign and you will find those numbers dominated by Law Firms, Retired, Real Estate, Security & Investment, Defense, major universities, and on and on. The amount that is related to pro-Israel groups is minuscule in the big picture (and sometimes zero).
Check out the data at Open Secrets for the candidate of your choice and I think you will find that this is the case.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Israel is not an issue that is relevant to him. He contributed more than the next five people combined.
Another major contributor to Democrats was George Soros and I think it is fair to say that he is more on the pro-Palestinian than the pro-Israel side of that debate.
Edit to add: Soros gave just under $4 million which was around the same amount as Adelson (whose money all went to Republicans).
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Take, as but one example, Haim Saban:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haim_Saban#Political_views_and_fundraising
For every billionaire, there are hundreds if not thousands of millionaires.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)If you pander to their pet causes, it is likely they will give you money. Some of those rich people have "pro-Israel" as their pet cause. Many more do not. I am arguing that you can get a ton of money from a lot of people who have nothing to do with that cause. More than enough to get yourself elected as many have. Personally, I think this whole giving unlimited amounts of money thing is ridiculous and that we need some real campaign finance reform but that's another topic, I guess. (Maybe one we can both agree on, though?)
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)There is this paragraph for instance:
Although some Jewish PACs actively support candidates friendly to Israel and oppose those who are not, there are few credible examples of Jewish money sinking anti-Israel politicians. Some dissenters from the pro-Israel consensus, such as the late Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois or former Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, were alleged to be crushed by Jewish donations that went instead to their opponents. Such accounts, however, tend to ignore that the candidates were already deeply unpopular and likely to lose, no matter their views on Israel. Like the myth of the Israel Lobby itself, the notion of the undue influence of pro-Israel donations is a convenient explanatory tool for those who cannot accept that most Americans back the alliance. What critics of the Jewish state usually misunderstand is that politicians who make a point of bashing Israel are, in most instances, contradicting the opinions of their constituents, not just a few big Jewish donors.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Very few Democrats have been punished or lost under such circumstances because very, very few Congressional Democrats adopt a critical stance towards Israel.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I only cited it because you linked to it in your post.
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)went to PACS. His wife is a physician and she owns some drug rehab clinics. I think a $25 million dollar donation went through that clinic.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Here is the Top 10 for 2014 (Adelson is 9th, Koch is 10th)
1 Steyer, Thomas & F. & Kathryn Ann
Fahr LLC/Tom Steyer
San Francisco, CA $75,424,834 $75,422,334 $0 100% 0%
2 Bloomberg, Michael R.
City of New York, NY
New York, NY $28,549,392 $10,527,600 $515,200 95% 5%
3 Singer, Paul
Elliott Management
New York, NY $11,518,474 $0 $11,516,974 0% 100%
4 Mercer, Robert L. & Diana
Renaissance Technologies
East Setauket, NY $9,676,399 $0 $9,666,399 0% 100%
5 Eychaner, Fred
Newsweb Corp
Chicago, IL $9,669,400 $9,264,400 $250,000 97% 3%
6 Ricketts, John J. & Marlene M.
TD Ameritrade
Omaha, NE $8,987,721 $0 $8,987,721 0% 100%
7 Simons, James H. & Marilyn H.
Renaissance Technologies/Simons Fdtn
New York, NY $8,257,700 $8,224,700 $7,800 100% 0%
8 Uihlein, Richard & Elizabeth
Uline Inc
Lake Forest, IL $6,094,650 $0 $6,064,150 0% 100%
9 Adelson, Sheldon G. & Miriam O.
Las Vegas Sands/Adelson Drug Clinic
Las Vegas, NV $6,059,236 $0 $6,029,636 0% 100%
10 Koch, Charles G. & Elizabeth B.
Koch Industries
Wichita, KS
https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topindivs.php
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)While public records show billionaire casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam gave over $53 million to pro-GOP super PACs in the 2012 campaign, he gave about $100 million more to secretive 501(c)(4) groups that do not disclose donors, according to a Huffington Post report. And now, Adelson is reportedly attempting to leverage his massive pro-GOP investment to spur House Republicans to pass legislation that would help his company.
SNIP
Adelson vowed in April to keep the bulk of his future political spending undisclosed, because he believed the medias use of the phrase casino mogul when reporting on his donations was not helpful to the person he was trying to elect. The voters proved him correct on that: nearly all of his favored candidates lost on election day.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/03/1270561/report-billionaire-casino-mogul-sheldon-adelson-spent-nearly-150-million-on-2012-campaign/
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)Opposed arming socalled Syrian moderates. That is an improvement over Hillary's position, and definitely a departure from aipac orthodoxy. He could be better probably but not in DC terms. I vote for the most progressive candidate that can win. He's it. Pro-Israel has a wide spectrum of opinions.
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)also many others in the news and entertainment business who can influence public opinion.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Not sure what you are referencing there.
My point is there are lots of wealthy donors with various causes of interest to them that a candidate is welcome to pander to in order to get their money if they so choose.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)from the Jewish community.
This is not a theory concocted by David Duke or Mondoweiss. It is an undisputed, universally accepted fact that anyone who knows anything about American politics acknowledges.
From that virulently anti-Semitic rag Commentary
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/jews-money-and-2012/
The Washington Post, years ago, put the figure at 60%.
"There are only a few key pillars left holding up the Democratic coalition, especially financial pillars, and if we can fracture one of them, they [Democrats] are going to go into 2004 in big trouble," a GOP strategist said.
In states such as Florida and New York, Jewish voters are a large enough percentage of voters to play a crucial role in election outcomes. In presidential elections, Democratic candidates depend on Jewish supporters to supply as much as 60 percent of the money raised from private sources. Any significant reduction in the financial support will weaken Democratic candidates and the Democratic Party organizations.
http://www.stat.unc.edu/visitors/temp/NYT/Jcontrib.html
Yes, anti-Semites spin and exaggerate this dynamic. There are a lot of other factors behind each Jewish donor's decisions to donate--Israel not being the most important for most. There is no conspiracy. There are cultural and other forces driving the exaggerated affinity for Israel amongst our elites.
But, if you think this has no bearing on our policy toward Israel . . .
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... The middle finger though. Aren't you? I will miss that when he's out of office.
Reter
(2,188 posts)n/t
840high
(17,196 posts)Koinos
(2,792 posts)Here is a link to Juan Cole's account of Bernie Sanders' positions on the Middle East:
http://www.juancole.com/2015/04/president-bernie-sanders.html
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)She's been more outspokenly supportive- and that includes of Netanyahu.
I love the smell of hypocrisy on a May Eve.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You really don't seem to know your stuff when it comes to HRC.
MADem
(135,425 posts)OMG, she KISSED Mrs. Arafat!! Oh, the HUGE manatee.....
I think she's been pretty nuanced. She knows that Israel is a major ally, our stationary aircraft carrier in the region if needs must, our buddy who will do Dirty Deeds Dirt Cheap when we can't touch some thing...but she also knows that killing kids wholesale in Palestine is wrong.
That said, Bernie is Jewish. He's going to have some empathy towards the "Jewish State." He is a member of a religious and cultural group that HItler tried to wipe from the face of the earth. He's in his seventies, and he's a lot closer to the horrors of Nazi Germany than people who only read about it in school books. It shouldn't surprise anyone that he is sympathetic, in fact, if he didn't have any empathy, people would wonder why not.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)McShame.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Like, perhaps, a quote or two to support your position? Your link seems to be decidedly pro-Israel.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)I think staunch ally wouldn't be out of turn to say about Clinton and I'll raise the ante and further will state she would forcefully concur.
Statements from your own linked article like "We are here to show solidarity and support for Israel. We will stand with Israel, because Israel is standing for American values as well as Israeli ones." and "Protecting Israels future is not simply a question of policy for me, its personal. Ive talked with some of you Ive know for a while about the first trip Bill and I took to Israel so many years ago, shortly after our daughter was born." or "And I have seen the great accomplishments," Clinton added; "the pride of the desert blooming and the start-ups springing up. Ive held hands with the victims of terrorism in their hospital rooms, visited a bombed-out pizzeria in Jerusalem, walked along the fence near Gilo. And I know with all my heart how important it is that our relationship go from strength to strength."
Or how about -
In an interview with the Atlantic published in 2014, Clinton offered strong support for Israel and for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, after Israel drew international condemnation for the deaths of Palestinian non-combatants in Gaza and the destruction of thousands of homes during its month of war with the Islamist movement Hamas.
"I think Israel did what it had to do to respond to Hamas rockets. Israel has a right to defend itself. The steps Hamas has taken to embed rockets and command and control facilities and tunnel entrances in civilian areas, this makes a response by Israel difficult," Clinton said.
Maybe stop spiking the football on the two yard line to show of your new touchdown celebration dance and read what you link to without comment.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)When BiBi turned full wingnut in 2009.
Here is what you avoided reading:
Nonetheless, Clinton made it clear in 2009 that a halt on settlement construction in the West Bank was not a pre-condition for the resumption of talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
"There has never been a pre-condition. It's always been an issue within the negotiations," Clinton said about the settlements.
"I want to see both sides as soon as possible begin in negotiations," said Clinton. "Both president Obama and I are committed to a comprehensive peace agreement."
In 2011, Clinton made comments showing a shift on her stance on Israel's capital when she was senator, warning against American action towards recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, saying that it would jeopardize the peace process.
Also in 2011, Clinton said that the path to a two-state solution creating a Palestinian state beside Israel runs through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not through New York - a refrence to the Palestinian's attempt to attain statehood through the UN.
Speaking at a news conference at the time, Clinton repeated the US view that the Palestinians should not seek full membership in the United Nations and instead should resume direct talks with the Israelis.
"We need an environment that is conducive to direct negotiations," she said. "We all know that no matter what happens or doesn't happen at the UN the next day is not going to result the kind of changes the United States wishes to see that will move us toward the two state solution that we strongly support.
In 2012, the then Secretary of State reiterated her stance that the Palestinian Authority "took a step in wrong direction" with its UN bid, but also called on Israel to make efforts to advance peace talks.
"America supports the goal of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel but this week's vote at the UN won't bring the Palestinians any closer to that goal," she said. "President Abbas took a step in the wrong direction this week . We opposed his resolution. But we also need to see that the PA in the west bank still offers the most compelling alternative to rockets and resistance.
"Israel needs to help those committed to peace," she added, referring to Abbas and then-Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad, whom she lauded for their achievements in overhauling institutions in the PA and cooperating with Israel over security."
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Autumn
(45,049 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)I never expect to agree with ANY candidate on EveryThing. But then, I don't do personality cults.
cali
(114,904 posts)http://mondoweiss.net/2015/04/everything-clinton-republicans
Israels new lawyer: Hillary Clinton
She sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through Bibis eyes, which could be the reason she gets so much wrong.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.610007
There's only a million articles out there about how Hllary is uber pro Israel. Did she offer one word of criticism about Gaza? NOPE. Bernie did.
whistler162
(11,155 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)I think he would be a great president.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Trajan
(19,089 posts)I get to see who the hard core democratic haters are ...
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I plan to vote for him in the primary.
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)I'd wager. I don't think that's true of all those running for the Dem nomination.
cali
(114,904 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)She has been a strong supporter of a Palestinian state for a very long time.
cali
(114,904 posts)stuff to the contrary isn't persuasive.
Guess what? Bernie has been supportive of a Palestinian state for longer than Hillary. And he didn't support like she did, moving the capital to Jerusalem. She supported that for years.
Making stuff up wildly. Again.
MH1
(17,595 posts)So far Bernie is winning this round on DU, for me.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)additionally fight for public funded elections. That is the fight that must be undertaken
until we win in order to have a thriving democracy.
We have had money in politics for so long it may be difficult for some Americans
to imagine it eventually wiped out.
sendero
(28,552 posts)..... I'd prefer Bernie over HRC about 20 to 1.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)But Bernie is not for military intervention around the globe and voted against the Iraq war.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)That's just a fact.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)I have no problem with his record on gun control. Like myself, he comes from a state that supports the NRA, gun ownership, hunting, etc. I expect him to be supportive of those he represents. He has been supportive of modest gun control, and he has voted against extreme measures like PLCAA.
Now, on Israel, there is a not a politician in DC that I think would ever go against Israel, or at least very few. That is a problem that all share including Clinton. I do know that he has been reasonable in his support for Israel as he is anti-war. Clinton will not be so if elected.
HRC gets criticized because of NAFTA because she supports it as well and is an instrumental architect of the current TPP. I will criticize her forever on that whether she wins or loses.
Criticize him all you want on issues that are important to you, but maybe next time, put a bit more meat in your OP. Produce some stats, argue your position, and offer how Clinton will actually be in different in a substantive way.
I really bet you can't, hence, this little whine about bashing and a lack of 'fairness'.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Darn them and their democracies!
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)smmiillllling. OMG. Your proof is overwhelming, I'll alert SCOTUS.
Rex
(65,616 posts)That's not at ALL how a 'career politician' behaves!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... For decades he should have more than $300-500k saved up. Don't you think? That concerns me too. I guess he figures he is 73 and will get s big pension, so he doesn't need to save? I wonder where he spends it all though.
Rex
(65,616 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)If you don't, I don't think you're using critical thinking skills. No offense.
I mean I know folks like that. They make good money but they don't save much of anything. Makes me shake my head. I don't know - maybe he donates a lot of money. But I wonder.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)No. He maintains two residences. DC is not an inexpensive city.
At that salary you should be able have 2 houses paid off at age 73.
ileus
(15,396 posts)(not kitten meat of course)
Throd
(7,208 posts)I got better.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)My girlfriend and I are very excited about a Bernie Sanders presidency!
DCBob
(24,689 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Should we bash on him day in and day out for these two issues? YES
Should we harp on this regarding Bernie like we harp on HRC about Bill's politics? YES
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I ask because I really don't know where you stand and I am not sure what you hope to accomplish with this post.
Most Clinton supporters on DU probably won't be generally appreciative of this, and I am fairly sure Sanders supporters aren't going to like it either unless you clarify.
and if you do, that would be really nice.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)it's too easy.
ileus
(15,396 posts)As a progressives we're supposed to hate both.
^I that what you're getting at???
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)There is no such think has the perfect candidate.
I will say, one of the things I like about Obama the best is his frequent middle finger to Israel.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Keep in mind relations are usually indicated by last name rather than first name.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I'd just say that's because he knew he was going to run and is pandering to the extreme left. Maybe he remembers this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/wp/2014/08/20/answering-question-on-israel-bernie-sanders-tells-townhall-hecklers-to-shut-up/
karynnj
(59,501 posts)To do.
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)I"ve read that people don't expect his new coalition to last, so maybe a more moderate coaltion will take its place.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Though honestly I can't see how they got an F out of his voting record:
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm
Yes on banning high-capacity magazines (personally not an issue I care about; mass shootings are not my worry when I think about gun control)
Yes on allowing firearms to be checked on Amtrak trains (lot of hunters in vermont who travel by train, I would imagine)
Yes on prohibiting lawsuits against gunmakers (this vote bugs me since I think lawsuits over intentional design and marketing decisions are not a bad idea)
No on decreasing the handgun waiting period to 1 day
So from a gun rights/gun safety standpoint it seems like a mixed bag at best.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Vote against The Iraq war when you represent the people attacked on 9/11 and the rethugs have been convincing the country with their lies about the connection between 9/11 and Iraq?
No perfect candidate.
cali
(114,904 posts)supported it? Do post links proving that, Maggie.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Though his opposition to Gun Control may be Bernie serving the people of his state, it does not serve the entire nation.
I will compare his history of votes to other politicians applying for the job.
The candidate with the best history will have the advantage.
I am not a single policy voter. This is one policy.
As to Israel, I support Israel and oppose their choice in government.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Be scared everyone! The lights and backdrop are old and full of holes...so BE SCARED!
hedda_foil
(16,372 posts)Get thee behind me Bernie, and let me walk in the dazzling light that is Hilary.
Omaha Steve
(99,580 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I don't care who the fuck they are, if before the primary even begins there's an "inevitability" thing about them, I will fight them to the core.
She did this in 2008 and I sent money to Obama.
Lot's of it.
And this year it's exponentially worse.
Not just "no" to Hillary, fucking HELL NO!
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)I'm still a Sanders supporter.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Saying there are no perfect candidates is bashing Bernie? Oh my goodness, Sanders supporters have VERY delicate fee fees, don't they? LMAO.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)You asked if bashing and harping should happen because poor, poor Hillary blah, blah.
You seem to have very delicate feelings also.
As I said in my post, bash away. You won't change my mind in the least.
Vinca
(50,261 posts)His job has also been representing his constituents - which he has done very well - and includes thousands of Vermont hunters. I don't agree with him re guns, but on just about everything else. Like the POTUS. I don't agree with him on trade, but I do agree with him on the majority of other things. I also agree with Hillary on the majority of things. What nudges me in Bernie's direction is his passion. He really, really cares about the masses. It's not an act.
madville
(7,408 posts)Vermont is an interesting pro-gun state. I recognize Israel's right to exist and defend itself from multiple countries who outright call for wiping their Jewish population out of existence.