When one starts their argument out with an incorrect assumption..........

her candidacy.

It does not show a lack of comprehension as to why someone would be voting for Sanders. In any way at all.

Socialist'. The flaw in that kind of claim is it is speaking for millions of people and ignoring the millions who already ARE willing to vote for a DEMOCRATIC Socialist. Sometimes people leave out critical words from titles which either intentionally or unintentionally creates a very flawed portrayal of a candidate.

And since we do make flawed claims at times, it's rather ironic if we accuse others of doing so imo.

no matter who it is.

That is all I was doing.

come after me, not right away.

But then you also have the democratic corporate wing. Who are no friends to the people either.

Bernie is the new Messiah, and they can't figure out why you won't worship before the alter they've constructed.

middle class and the poor.

...start bottom feeding?

You really want to go that route?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/17/1402992/-Hillary-Clinton-made-more-than-Bernie-Sanders-net-worth-in-one-speech

Hillary Clinton made more than Bernie Sanders net worth in one speech

...............

How rich is Hillary Clinton? Well, in addition to earning (along with Bill) more than $30 million since 2014, Hillary earned more than Sander's entire net worth in one speech sponsored by telecom giant Qualcomm.

Sanders reported a net worth of $330,507 in 2013. In October of 2014, Hillary earned $335,000 to speak at a Qualcomm event in San Diego. The tech company, which has donated generously to the Clinton Foundation, has also lobbied the federal government to approve the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Sanders is firmly opposed to the agreement; so are labor unions and liberal heartthrob Elizabeth Warren. Hillary, meanwhile, has repeatedly failed to take a position, despite having praised the agreement on numerous occasion during her time as secretary of state.

Several months after the Qualcomm speech, Clinton was paid $150,000 to address the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, an institution that has been the subject of multiple U.S. investigations, and has been accused of helping Enron commit fraud by misleading investors. Clinton's total haul for those two speeches alone ($485,000) is greater than Marco Rubioâ's reported net worth ($443,509 in 2013).

...rather than a bunch of unanswered questions.

Politician are real.

That's scary.

…..how important it is to Bernie supporters that he is not owned by corporations and is not taking corporate money.

He is a walking Anti-Citizen's-United.

We have a social and economic analysis of him. No need for him to walk on water. It's enough that he is an ordinary, flawed, FDR Democrat.

He makes a false claim about Hillary supporters, and backs it up with nothing.

He's projecting pure and simple.

He can't comprehend why anyone would support some one other than Sanders. And he appears to be very upset about it.

The only argument Hillary supporters have is "you want the Democrats to win right?" and they can't comprehend anyone who won't suck it up and vote for the team. Have you heard a single other convincing argument?

their agenda. Even if the moon turned blue and Bernie somehow did get elected, he would be doing his usual shtick to an audience of the Robert's court and a Republican house and Senate. They are a lot harder to convince than a bunch of internet warriors.
Bernie hasn't a clue about how to wield power and isn't that what you all have been blaming Obama for???

What makes you think Hillary can do that?

Because her "agenda" is more of the same?
Because it's watered down and low on expectations?
Because there's nothing new or extraordinary about it.

Because it's status quo? An insider job?


It's certainly nothing to get excited about.

With the Republican congress? What is she going to get them to vote with her on?

earth shattering changes to the way government is run.

Bernie is promising that and his supporters are asserting he can deliver. And you need to show how.

get anything done." I've asked, repeatedly, what it is Hillary is going to get done, without an answer. If the complaint is that Bernie will get nothing done, then you have to show how Hillary would be any different, otherwise the criticism amounts to "he'll be just like her".

So what will she get Republicans to agree with her on that Bernie won't?

because the Repubs have not been getting ready to run against all things Hillary for the past 8 years. They will be soooo shocked and awed by her because....

It is much easier to pass giveaways for big business than campaign finance reform but that doesn't mean you turn around and just support whatever the billionaires want!

and what makes you think republicons will be anymore cooperative with her than they were with obama? logic FAIL.

No Clinton supporter can answer this simple question

... is those issues aren't big movers for some people.

it didn't work in 2008 and it's not going to work now. We don't want Hillary Goldman Sachs.

will you stay at home and pout like a 5 years old, as many on the left tend to do, or will you support the nominee?

What Obama asked was for people to push him and have his back and in both 2010 and 2014 the lazy left didn't vote.

I don't think "the lazy left" is a description of Sanders' supporters.

so your comment about "lazy left" is really uncalled for here. WTF?

Another low-post member making nasty accusations.

make your shit not stink?

How does that make you special other than being able to set
in front of a computer all day long when many others are out there
scraping to make a living?

WTF? More nastiness ... nobody said having many posts was any sort of virtue. But I do definitely notice when newcomers start slinging mud right out the door. And why would you defend that kind of behavior?

Please feel free to supply proof.

Please provide some links or cites that support you conclusions,
or admit that you simply made up all that bullshit.

Hasn't changed.

The facts are all out there, yet the disconnect remains. It's almost like they completely underestimate people who use critical thinking and facts and jam up discussion in various ways when they know they've been had.

Who says we can't learning anything from tea baggers?

I have seen a lot of it on DU in the last few months.

the policies that have been killing Americans in the 99% to feed the wealth of the 1%. Those that support Clinton won't even discuss her stands on issues. It's not important when one worships someone. It apparently doesn't matter if she won't do a thing about the 22% of American children living in poverty nor stop the destruction of our environment via fracking, Arctic Drilling, and XL type Pipelines.

Sanders will have a hard time fighting Clinton and her billionaire backers that want to continue the status quo. But the movement will not stop until we have thrown out of our government, the puppets of Goldman-Sachs, Koch Bro., and Wall Street.

This is a class war. Which side have you chosen?

I am not the only one who is making this observation

False right out of the gate.

Like

Sanders' supporter throw everyone under the bus?

or

Sanders' supporters are haters?


That kind of thing?


This seems pretty civil and mild.

My point stands and it appears from your distinction of severity you agree that it is an incorrect assumption.

"Sanders' supporter throw everyone under the bus?"

That is not an assumption in any way. It is hyperbole.

"Sanders' supporters are haters? "

That is not an assumption, it is a broad brush smear.

The ops whole premise flows off of a completely flawed assumption.

I think the word "some" would be a welcomed addition to the statement, yes.

But it's hardly a matter to duel over. None of this is.


Still, I find Sanders' supporters less choleric. Mainly, I'm sure, due to that "It's her turn" thing.... that should be abhorrent to all democratic thinkers.


It's obvious to anyone thinking clearly that one must vote for the sane party.... even if it's O'Malley!

Agree. Not sure why the op wanted to have this conversation or why they started it with a clearly flawed assumption. But I don't control what is posted here and don't try to. I was simply pointing out the glaring flaw that the op started with, specially considering the rest requires that comment to be accurate. Thanks.

You support O'Malley (or at least you did last time I checked).

I like all the leading candidates, I can understand supporting any of them, but I think Hillary has the best chance to beat the GOP.

It's mostly the Bernie supporters who can't comprehend why anyone would support anyone else.

as a Progressive, Leftist Socialist, I cannot believe that anyone would vote for anyone other than Sanders. But I get it, you prefer the moderate coporatist.

I've been clear that my sole concern is that I can't see Sanders winning a General Election.

even one that asked about his policy positions. How about the recent thread about Hillary genitilia as the reason she hasn't had the nomination gift wrapped to her yet.

The burden of proof is on you. And I say this as a Bernie supporter.

HRC supporters have either a lack of knowledge of how many of her decisions have harmed hundreds of thousands of people across the planet or a flaw of character such as a mental block the keeps them from realizing just how awful HRC actually is, they want to continue corporate control of our political system, and/or they lack empathy for regular Americans.

If she wins the primary, we'll probably lose the general, and even if she wins the general, we will lose in the long run because her corporate masters will still be the ones pulling the strings.

as usual

Please explain how you stack a randomly selected jury.



To quote NCTraveler: "When one starts their argument out with an incorrect assumption.........."

As Carter has said- we are living in an oligarchy and Clinton is status quo

I feel sorry for you.

nt

A lot of people seem to think that too.

But I believe that, IF BERNIE GETS THE NOMINATION, he will wind by a real landslide. I don't think the machine crooks will be able to tilt it enough to defeat him.

But he will have a lot of trouble winning the nomination. HRC is a good candidate and with the help of DWS et al. her chances are even better than they would be normally and that's pretty good.

On top of everything else is the complicity of the voting machine programmers (i.e. the Far Right crooks who work at ES&S etc.) and what they'll do is unpredictable. If they think Bernie will be an easier candidate to beat, they might see fit to tilt the results Bernie's way. If they think the opposite, they might tilt it the other way.

Who knows? I'm just giving an opinion like anybody else and opinions are a dime a dozen.

We'll see.

Most of what is said about Hillary is made up shit. Hell I could invent a Hillary to hate if I wanted to.
I think there is something deeper behind it but can't be spoken. Yes I can understand why you don't like Hillary and it isn't what you posted. You invented that Hillary.

Hillary was a Senator and Secretary of State she was not President Bill Clinton

I don't understand why you don't support someone else because of who they are. What you are telling me is you support Bernie because he isn't Hillary. You would support anyone but Hillary I guess. No honor there.
I don't support Hillary because she isn't Bernie. I support her because she is the person running who would make the best President.

Have you been living in a hole. Do you know what DLC is?

At least the last time I checked.