ACLU rating 93%, The Feminist Majority Endorsement "Preferred", NAACP rating 97%,

[mmonk]

HRC rating 100%.


Bernie Sanders. Does that cover most of the concerns here? Hope so. Have a great evening DU. I had a tiring day and I'm not as spry as I used to be. Hasta mañana.

[Snotcicles]

1. Covers it for me, completely. nt

[jberryhill]

2. And a Volvo 100% bumper to bumper warranty!

[panader0]

6. I think I'm beginning to understand your humor, maybe

[jberryhill]

21. Well, that puts you a step ahead of me

Most of the time, I just write it off to demon possession

[RufusTFirefly]

3. Great! Thanks! And just for clarity's sake

(In case there's any doubt)

HRC = Human Rights Campaign not Hillary Rodham Clinton

[DJ13]

5. I'm glad you clarified that

Thank you!

[SoapBox]

10. DOH!

Good grief I was confused.

Thanks for that clarification.

And...GO Bernie!

[Jack Rabbit]

12. Thank you, Your Excellency. Now it makes sense

[RufusTFirefly]

18. Why, it's so simple, a four-year-old child could understand it

Run out and find me a four-year-old child, I can't make head or tail of it.

[totodeinhere]

4. It certainty covers me. But lets face it. Bernie could walk on water and it would not satisfy some

people. I guess this is par for the course in any campaign, but there are those who are going around looking for any obscure reason or excuse to oppose Bernie simply because they are for another candidate not named Bernie.

[retrowire]

7. walked on water?

this just in! Bernie can't swim!!!

[RufusTFirefly]

8. But I thought all Jewish, socialist, former carpenters walked on water.

[azmom]

11. Nice.

[fredamae]

26. Lol n/t

[sabrina 1]

28. Lol!

[Live and Learn]

9. +1 nt

[bobbobbins01]

13. But what has he done for me lately?

[ismnotwasm]

14. Yawn

[TheBlackAdder]

42. My teenage kids and their peers stopped using 'Yawn,' 'Meh,' and 'LOL' comments years ago.

.


I find it rather humorous that people come to threads to just post those things because they really just object to the topic, not even relying on the content.


One day, these old cliches will be abandoned by non-tweens, just like the overuse of the term "jump the shark."


.

[moobu2]

15. Leadership qualities 0%, Charisma 0%

Advanced any of the issues important to those groups 0%.

[cali]

20. fail. why do people think it's ok to just make things up out of whole cloth?

The first two are opinion, so fine. I think they're opinion that is easily countered, but still.... However, the claim that he's never advanced issues important to the groups in the op is simply a flat out.....

What's the opposite of respect? That's what I have for your opinion.

[George II]

23. Major accomplishments in the last 40 years: 0

[cali]

27. That's just nuts. Bernie piloted programs

as mayor that have been replicated across the country.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/how-bernie-sanderss-radical-ideas-entered-the-municipal-mainstream-118447.html

Ascongressman he mastered the art of using the Amendment process. As Senator, in exchange for his vote on the ACA, he got hunters of millions for community healthcare centers, and that is a very big deal. CHCs provide primary care I including dentistry and psychological services on a sliding scale basis. If you can't afford anything, you don't pay.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/07/1399644/-Senantor-Sanders-Has-worked-with-The-Intractable-Congress


He's accomplished far more than that, but why bother. You have no interest in being intellectually honest. I will say this; your claim is no truer or better.than those who claim Clinton didn't accomplish anything and only got where she is by grabbing onto Bill's coattails.

[George II]

33. Yes, he did a nice job as Mayor of Burlington (first link), a burg of less than 40,000 people..

...without any of the problems of big cities or the United States.

But on the other hand Burlington Vermont is not prototypical of the average American city. It's a sleepy small town on the banks of Lake Champlain about 30 miles from the Canadian border and roughly 200 miles from any major city.

Unfortunately the second link is a highly subjective opinion piece with very few specifics, including that ACA example.

So tell me, if he's been so effective in Congress, why is it that about 120 current members of Congress have endorsed Clinton and ZERO have endorsed Sanders - not one!

If he was so effective in Burlington and the state of Vermont, why is it that the current mayor of Burlington has endorsed Clinton and the current Governor of Vermont (AND his fellow Senator from Vermont, Patrick Leahy) have endorsed Clinton. All of those are a lot closer to the two candidates than anyone writing a blog post on Daily Kos or posting on DU. I'm sure they know more about the ability of him to get things done in his home city, home state, and Congress.

That's why they've endorsed Clinton.

[ibegurpard]

34. they've endorsed her

Because like many others they've calculated she will be the nominee and don't want to suffer political payback should they step out of line.

[George II]

37. Really?

[ibegurpard]

39. Yeah really

I'm not sure what's worse...whether you think everyone on here is an idiot who doesn't understand politics or that you actually believe Hillary is a saint who has everyone falling all over themselves to support her.

[George II]

46. I really don't think anyone on this site is an "idiot", but I know that lots of people.....

....like to make stuff up and present it as "fact".

[sibelian]

58. I don't believe the first thing you said there

and I think the second thing you said is ironic.

[George II]

67. Well, we're certainly not going to sit down and have a beer and discuss it...generally I refrain....

....from calling anyone or implying that anyone is an idiot.

On the second one, ironic or not (I presume you're hinting that I "make things up&quot , the ACLU has not issued ratings for the 2016 Presidential candidates yet, so if Sanders is rated at "93%", the rating is either very old and not applicable to him as a Presidential candidate, or it's false and made up, like the statement that "he's the most popular Senator in his state".

Good day.

[cali]

36. burg or not, programs he piloted have been replicated in our largest cities.

And the fact that Bernie got that money to hugely expand chps is not subjective.

Hilly is the choice of Congress critters for a number of reasons; I'm sure some think her the best candidate. Others think she's the most electable. No one wants to be on her elaborate and tiered enemies list.

Personally, I think she's dishonest, had ghastly judgment and is corrupt.

[George II]

43. Which "largest cities" are you talking about?

[sabrina 1]

29. He is the most popular Senator in his state because he works for the PEOPLE who elected him. 71%

approval rating. That will be the case nationally as more and more people learn who he is and when he wins the WH.

[George II]

35. "The most popular Senator in his state"?? 71%? Where does that number come from?

I think you're using Sanders % of the vote last time he was elected. But his fellow Senator, Patrick Leahy (THE most popular Senator in his state) was elected with EIGHTY NINE PERCENT of the vote.

[cali]

40. um no. do you live here? Bernie is definitely more popular than pat

Yes, Pat is popular but not as popular as he once was. There's rising sentiment that he's been in office long enough. Bernie is also much more.accessible than Pat. People are more familiar with him, and his constituent services are legendary.

[George II]

44. I'm sure you can quantify their relative popularity?

[cali]

47. I've already explained it to you. no I can't prove it

But I live here and follow state politics avidly. I certainly know far more than you do.

[George II]

50. I'm sure you do (even though I live about an hour from Vermont)....but what you've provided...

...is anecdotal, certainly not verifiable.

The only information we have is their relative success in their last elections, Leahy winning with 89% of the vote, Sanders with only 71% of the vote.

And to the person who mentioned it, 71% is NOT Sanders' "favorability" or "popularity" rating, just as the OP claim that his "ACLU rating" is 93%.

This has been educational everyone, thanks!

[MoveIt]

31. lies

that's all your side has now. enjoy!

[George II]

48. Notice that there are no links or sources for the "ratings" in the OP. I started to look them up...

....myself, and when I discovered that the ACLU hasn't done any ratings for Presidential candidates since the 2012 election (probably in 2011) I saw through the OP and gave up.

Lacking that, the OP is probably all fiction. But it makes for interesting discussions.

I notice too that mmonk posted that garbage and ran the other way. I guess it stunk so much even HE couldn't stand the smell.

[Maedhros]

54. Your first two points are personal opinion,

the last is an outright lie that you KNOW is a lie.

Pathetic.

I now have read everything I need to read from you.

/ignore.

[kenfrequed]

57. Wow

Yeah, I always join ten thousand people at a gathering of people to listen to someone with 0% charisma speak.

And I don't know what you mean by "leadership qualities." I see a leader as someone who is willing to stand up for what is right even if it is politically inconvenient.

So... yeah. Try again.

[sibelian]

59. Gosh, they must be really gullible.

Maybe you should tell them who to vote for.

[Fearless]

75. Umm... suggesting charisma is a needed quality isn't flattering to Hillary

I could post some uncomfortable links if you'd like.

[Comrade Grumpy]

17. You said in 14 words what people have spent 14,000 posts trying to ignore.

[djean111]

19. No, they are trying to get everybody ELSE to ignore those things. n/t

[George II]

49. At least it was only 14 words. Even the great fiction writer Ernest Hemingway couldn't have...

...presented so much fiction in so few words.

[Comrade Grumpy]

63. Please point out the fictions in the OP.

[George II]

68. I have a couple of times already, but the first one is that "ACLU rating 93%"...

....the ACLU hasn't released any ratings yet for any Presidential candidates, and from what I've seen they don't issue those ratings in percentages. I've asked the OP to clarify but mmonk seems to have disappeared.

[druidity33]

69. If that's his most recent rating by them

then why is this an issue for you? Why would anyone need to wait for the"Presidential candidate" ratings if the ACLU has rated him before? Do you think his rating would change or be different somehow?

[George II]

70. We don't know if that is "his most recent rating by them", we don't know ANYTHING about...

....the ACLU or any of the ratings that were presented in the OP. They were just flung out there in, what has been summarized as "14 words", without any idea where they came from. And quite honestly, they are highly questionable.

[Wilms]

22. ^

[brooklynite]

24. Not the concern about electability...

...Clinton will have the resources to run against the Republicans. I fear Sanders won't.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

38. When Clinton loses the nomination, she can make her own pro-Bernie superpac. nt

[cali]

41. I think that's a reasonable concern, but if he beats Clinton, than it's reasonable to

assume he can compete

[frylock]

51. The only resources that Sanders needs are the voters..

let the GOP throw their money away running ads that people will never see as they fast forward through commercials on their DVRs.

[brooklynite]

53. How much money will Sanders have for staff?

New Hampshire is nice and compact. How will he campaign in ten States simultaneously on Super Tuesday?

[frylock]

55. I don't have access to his books..

but I suspect he will continue to use volunteers who all seem eager to help.

[brooklynite]

61. Volunteers need to be coordinated and managed...

...covering a State as big as Texas, where your target is 1 M votes? You'll need full-time staff in a lot of places.

[Stellar]

25. NAACP is under fire...

for giving an award to Donald Sterling (Basketball owner that didn't want Black people on his properties/facilities). They also gave an award to Chris Brown (beat up Rhianna) and to R. Kelly (having sex with under aged girls).

http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/04/29/308054638/the-naacps-less-than-sterling-intentions

[virtualobserver]

30. Hey NAACP....what are you doing under this bus?

Next, you'll be trashing Jesse Jackson for tweeting a picture of himself warmly greeting Bernie back in the olden timey days.

[Stellar]

62. Why would I do that?

No, I'll let you have Jesse Jackson.

[virtualobserver]

64. my mistake, I thought that you were trying to systematically undermine.....

everyone who thought well of Bernie.

as for letting me "have" Jesse Jackson....

I'll take him....when he ran for President
he made more sense than any of the other candidates running.

[Stellar]

65. LOL, be my guest. nt.

[virtualobserver]

66. what amuses you so?

[Stellar]

73. Never a fan of JJ. nt

[virtualobserver]

74. I went to see him speak during the 1988 campaign

I liked what he had to say.

[ibegurpard]

32. really?

You're really going to attack the NAACP? You're really going there?

[Stellar]

52. Don't shoot the messenger. nt

[George II]

45. From what I can see, the ACLU hasn't rated the 2016 Presidential candidates yet. The last ratings..

....were released in for the 2012 election.

Can you tell us from where you got that 93%?

[SonderWoman]

56. Here's Hillary's ratings:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11074452

[sibelian]

60. Ah, the Calvin strategy.

[George II]

71. But the ratings presented by SonderWoman are real and documented, not simply...

...a bunch of words and numbers thrown out there without any credibility or background.

[sibelian]

72. Posting someone's ratings isn't really an argument for anyone, George, or against.

If people SAY things about them, that's different.