You guys need to keep it together. With all this infighting Trump is going to walk in like Fortinbras ready for a fight just to find everyone but Horatio dead.
Reimagined public domain superheroes in a 1945 that never was!
Read the superhero webcomic THE POWER OF STARDUST!
Something which she grew out of through facts as she went to university and devoted her life to protecting the little guy from corporations and Sanders himself didn't think it was that bad given that he wanted her to run in '16. Being a capitalist is bipartisan in America, not a trait exclude to the GOP. No politician gets far by not doing bills like that, including Sanders - who backed a $1.5 trillion military project in Vermont for Lockheed Martin.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/12/why-...oondoggle.html
Sanders is the front runner, of course she's going to attack him more. The truce is over. She's not there to be his cheerleader, she's in it to win.Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II is a radar-evading stealth fighter jet whose cost overruns and development delays have generated many headlines. This program, which has yet to be deployed in a combat capacity, was commissioned by the Pentagon in 1995 and has a projected cost of $1.5 trillion over the next 55 years, making it the most expensive weapons program in U.S. history. What hasn’t been the subject of as much ink, however, is the antiwar Democratic socialist senator who supports keeping the program in his state of Vermont: Bernie Sanders.
Edit: This attack on her comes off as wrong considering in the debates she was the one taking down Bloomberg, not Sanders. His credibility about "fighting" is overblown.
Last edited by Steel Inquisitor; 03-03-2020 at 06:19 AM.
A bat! That's it! It's an omen.. I'll shall become a bat!
Pre-CBR Reboot Join Date: 10-17-2010
Pre-CBR Reboot Posts: 4,362
THE CBR COMMUNITY STANDARDS & RULES ~ So... what's your excuse now?
If anything, he has a similar offer to Obama -- since he claims he will continue what they started together -- while having far less historical baggage than Hillary and also being a male in a contest where evevy other winner has been male as well.
There's no way of knowing who really has the better chance of beating Trump until the actual election happens but it's clear even from reading posts on this forum that a Sanders win will motivate both Republicans and independents who oppose his policies either not to vote or to vote against his progressive agenda.
The counter argument is that progressives -- and others -- will show up to propel Sanders to an historical victory, but there's no real evidence that this is true.
To the contrary, most people who aren't Sanders supporters feel it hurts chances at winning the Senate, and could result in Democrats losing control of the House of Representatives due to the lack of support for progressive candidates in congressional elections, along with potentially losing even more Supreme Court picks and and judicial seats if their progressive experiement doesn't connect with the general public.
Even if Sanders wins, there's plenty of evidence that he won't be able to pass any progressive legislation so long as Republicans control the Senate.
Regardless, the most recent elections reaffirmed that moderates are the key to taking back Congress and the White House, not progressive candidates.
It makes more sense to go with a winning formula than to bet it all on a poltical movement that crashed and burned in the last election cycle.
Last edited by aja_christopher; 03-03-2020 at 06:41 AM.
The reality is that both candidates are likely to lose given historical precedent, especially if the party remains divided.
-----
"President Trump has beaten his biggest political threat to date after being recently acquitted in the Senate’s impeachment trial. The latest Gallup Poll shows Trump reached a job approval rating of 49%, a record.
Presiding over an economy that continues to expand during an election year will likely get Trump re-elected, according to Brad Neuman, director of market strategy at Alger, an investment management company.
“We’ve looked into this and done quite a bit of research on it,” Neuman told Yahoo Finance’s “On the Move.” “If you look back at the past century and you look at all the incumbent races where there was an incumbent president seeking re-election, if there was a recession within the two years leading up to the election, that incumbent has not been re-elected and there’s been a new president.”
In recent history, Presidents Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush lost their reelection bids, while Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama won. The most recent 2008 recession hit at the end of George W. Bush’s second term.
“If there was no recession, then the incumbent actually won re-election. It has virtually a flawless track record back to 1932,” Neuman said."
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-e...144031765.html
Last edited by aja_christopher; 03-03-2020 at 07:41 AM.
Well that wasnt a direct quote from Huffington Post. You could tell from their headlines, particularly just after one declared their support for Sanders, they thought it was dirty pool from the established Democrats.
I'm a registered independent, and I think it's kind of stupid and I might change soon. Did you guys know, I can not vote in primaries? Thoughts?
When I was seventeen,
I drank some very good beer,
I drank some very good beer
I purchased with a fake ID.
My name was Brian McGee,
I stayed up listenin' to Queen
When I was seventeen.
Thank you for this. It needs to be said a lot.
Thing is AOC and several others were from areas that already skewed blue, so the jump over was far easier. From what I understand this young lady is running in a district where there is a conservative bend. So you need someone who skews a bit more right in regard to money or other things.
Also has she endorsed anyone recently at all? I dont think anyone outside of Bernie has been directly doing that, because most politicians don't until the summer or fall. At least around here.
Most people in her age bracket grew up in a US where being conservative was on a local level not national. And a lot of conservatives used to skew more left in social obligations in regard to Social security, vaccines, and regulations. So it was not like the arch conservatives we see today.
A lot of young people change their views in college, and its true today too. Again calling yourself Republican was not a bad thing for a very long time. It's only been since the 70s that its become this mess and a lot of local former Republicans are now calling themselves independents 9r some other group name.
Yup. This is something that the Republicans have in lock step.
I know some Jewish people who do not consider him Jewish as much. Even with a family that has ties to the Holocaust.
And yes, she is not. But a lot 9f people have this kind of thing in their family because, unfortunately there were things going down that lead to people thinking that they may have a Native American blood tie in their family.
What's your point here? I can argue that AOC isn't a true progressive either, but that would get me no where.
Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!