Go Bernie!

Written By: - Date published: 9:55 am, January 14th, 2016 - 91 comments
Categories: us politics - Tags:

91 comments on “Go Bernie! ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Wayne 1
    14 January 2016 at 10:13 am

    Be careful what you wish for.

    If Sanders is the Democratic nominee and Trump the Republican nominee then Trump would likely be the next President of the US.

    Is that what you want?

    • Pat 1.1
      14 January 2016 at 10:19 am

      and you base that assertion on what?

    • Andre 1.2
      14 January 2016 at 10:33 am

      It would certainly make an interesting race, given the way the Republicans eat their own at the moment
      http://www.salon.com/2016/01/13/right_wing_backlash_to_nikki_haleys_gop_state_of_the_union_response_grows_to_reveal_ugly_racial_undertones/

    • happynz 1.3
      14 January 2016 at 11:11 am

      Trump the next president? Get real, Wayne.

      The next president of the US needs 270 electoral votes. Look at the electoral map from the 2012. Which blue states would a Trump candidacy flip?

      • Ad 1.3.1
        14 January 2016 at 12:56 pm

        Ask the same of a Bernie campaign.

        The question is never “who would make the ideal President”, but “who can win”.

        • crashcart 1.3.1.1
          14 January 2016 at 3:02 pm

          Funnily enough there is data on this. Polling shows that Bernie would beat trump and Cruz in both New Hampshire and Iowa in a presidential race. Not by a little either. I believe it is a 19 point lead he has in both states over both of the top republican candidates. Both important purple swing states. More importantly to show the ignorance of Wayne’s comments Hilary would only beat trump and Cruz by a slim margin in one and would actually lose to Cruz in the other.

          The common misconception that Hilary is more electable than Sanders is actually showing in polling to be the complete opposite.

    • Paul 1.4
      14 January 2016 at 11:45 am

      Looks like your prejudiced opinion does not sit with the US populace.

      http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-sanders

      • alwyn 1.4.1
        14 January 2016 at 1:02 pm

        I wonder how their methodology differs from the results shown by RealClearPolitics which, although still showing Sanders ahead seems to show the gap closing.
        http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html

        A Sanders vs Trump campaign would be rather funny except for the terrifying fact that one of them would win. It was best described by Oscar Wilde more than a century ago. Their campaign would be a case of the unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible.

        Personally I would prefer a campaign of John Kasich vs Hillary Clinton. They seem to be the best qualified of the various options.

        • Paul 1.4.1.1
          14 January 2016 at 1:23 pm

          Why is Sanders scary?
          His policies seems pretty much common sense.

          https://berniesanders.com/issues/

          • alwyn 1.4.1.1.1
            14 January 2016 at 2:43 pm

            He is certainly not like either Trump or, in Britain, Corbyn.
            They are both, quite simply, totally nuts.
            He is not however, in my view, competent to be President. The job is vastly too important, particularly at this time to have an unqualified person in the role.
            If I was an American and had to choose between Trump and Sanders I would choose Sanders. However I wouldn’t be at all happy about it. It would merely be that in a choice between the bad and the mad I would have to pick the bad.
            (That is bad as in not competent, not as in evil by the way).
            We need better and, like it or not, Sanders is not the one. He would turn out rather like Jimmy Carter I suspect. A man in a job that is far to big for him.

            • Paul 1.4.1.1.1.1
              14 January 2016 at 2:56 pm

              ‘He is not however, in my view, competent to be President.’
              Why?

              ‘He would turn out rather like Jimmy Carter I suspect.’

              Here are his presidency’s achievements…
              Looks pretty impressive to me.

              1. Created the Department of Energy. The DOE provided the administration with the bureaucratic chops to formulate and implement what could have been a comprehensive, long-term national energy strategy. Had Carter’s aggressive gas mileage standards continued to be pursued by subsequent administrations, we would today — 30-odd years later — be dramatically less dependent on Saudi oil.

              2. Created the Department of Education. Despite howls from anti-government groups who opposed yet another federal agency, the decision to carve out Education from the already over-burdened Department. of Health, Education and Welfare (now the Department of Health and Human Services) was a bold and necessary one.

              3. Supported SALT II (Strategic Arms Limitations Talks). It sounds trivial today, but in the 1970s a nuclear non-proliferation pact, even a flawed one, was seen as an important step in forging a lasting peace with the USSR. A generation ago, people were genuinely frightened of a nuclear holocaust. Although Carter and Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev signed the agreement, the U.S. Congress, in the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, refused to ratify it.

              4. Brokered the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty. By initiating the Camp David Accords between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat (which led directly to the landmark treaty), Carter laid the groundwork for improved Israeli-Arab relations. That good relations in the region never materialized wasn’t Carter’s fault.

              5. Installed solar panels in the White House. This was not only a practical gesture, but a symbolic one as well, demonstrating to the world that America was serious about conserving energy, and that conservation does, indeed, begin at home. Alas, Ronald Reagan believed solar panels made the United States look pathetic and needy, and had them removed.

              6. Boycotted the 1980 Olympics. In response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Carter boycotted the Moscow games, a decision that earned him ridicule and scorn, even though Japan, West Germany, China, Canada, et al, supported his decision. Boycotts are unpredictable. Some work, most don’t. Still, who knows what would have happened if the world had boycotted the 2004 Olympics to protest of the U.S. invasion of Iraq? It might have made a difference.

              7. Granted amnesty to Vietnam draft-dodgers. Even though Carter issued these unconditional pardons on January 21, 1977 (his first day in office), the political fallout was severe enough to cost him votes in the 1980 election. Controversial as it was, this gutsy call helped move the country forward, providing closure to one of the most divisive issues in American history.

              8. Established diplomatic relations with China. Officially transferring U.S. diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to mainland China seems like a no-brainer today, but in the year 1979 it was a singularly progressive move.

              9. Pushed for comprehensive health care reform. Carter’s plan was bigger, better, cheaper and — right out of the blocks — had a greater chance of passing in its original form than either Clinton’s or Obama’s plan, but inertia, timidity, and old-fashioned politics (both Democratic and Republican) ultimately killed it.

              10. Returned the Panama Canal to Panama. Another gutsy move that surely cost him votes. By ceding the canal to tiny Panama, the mighty U.S. looked confident and magnanimous…. instead of paranoid and petty. Although Carter was able to secure bipartisan support, of the 20 senators who voted in favor of the treaty, and were up for re-election, only 7 were re-elected.

              http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-macaray/10-good-things-the-39th-p_b_945343.html

              • crashcart …
                14 January 2016 at 3:08 pm

                Stop bringing facts to this discussion. Honestly how could Bernie be qualified. I mean he has only one of the longest and most consistent voting histories around but he also has policies that are widely supported by the majority of Americans.

                • Paul …
                  14 January 2016 at 3:11 pm

                  And he scares alwyn

                • alwyn …
                  14 January 2016 at 3:42 pm

                  Did you actually read this item that you are replying to crashcart?

                  The “his presidency” was referring to Carter.
                  The facts you are so pleased with are not about Sanders at all. They are all about Jimmy Carter. Try reading it properly and you’ll see that.

                  And perhaps you can tell us how you can claim, about Sanders that “he also has policies that are widely supported by the majority of Americans.”
                  Do you have specific evidence of this?

                  • Paul …
                    14 January 2016 at 3:45 pm

                    Yes and you said Sanders ‘would turn out rather like Jimmy Carter I suspect.’
                    Which would suggest a massive improvement on Obama, Bush (x2), Reagan and Clinton.

                    • alwyn …
                      14 January 2016 at 4:02 pm

                      That is a matter of opinion.
                      Personally I think that Obama has been a fair President, as was Bush 1. Both Reagan and Clinton were fairly good. Bush 2 was a flop.

                      The best in my lifetime though was Eisenhower. He was miles ahead of any of the others.
                      I think you would approve of some of his comments.

                      “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.”

                      “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”

                      “Get it all on record now – get the films – get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.”

                      “As we peer into society’s future, we — you and I, and our government — must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”

                      I’ll bet you didn’t expect those from a Republican did you?

                  • crashcart …
                    14 January 2016 at 4:04 pm

                    His reponse was to your comment ion which you stated that he would be worse than Carter and that he would not be qualified.

                    Paul spoke to Carter and I decided to speak to the qualified comment.

                    As to his policies being supported.

                    Money in politics
                    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/02/us/politics/money-in-politics-poll.html?_r=0

                    Universal Health care
                    http://www.gallup.com/poll/4708/healthcare-system.aspx

                    Free Education
                    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poll-most-support-making-college-free/article/2572333

                    • alwyn …
                      14 January 2016 at 4:20 pm

                      OK.
                      The problem is that when you reply to a comment that contains quite a lot of statements of fact and then refer to the author introducing facts into the argument I, quite reasonably I think, take it to be those facts you are referring to.
                      That was what made your comment look silly.

                  • North …
                    15 January 2016 at 10:29 pm

                    I think it’s you who misunderstands Crashcart Alwyn, if not yourself.

                    You did after all in anticipation pejoratively conflate Sanders with Carter and spoke some broken biscuits about the latter. Crashcart carried on your line. And assisted by Paul’s excellent contribution made you look silly.

                    Now you disown yourself. Right you are !

              • alwyn …
                14 January 2016 at 3:35 pm

                I don’t really want to get into a debate about the merits, or otherwise of Jimmy Carter but the list above is a bit forced.

                For example
                (1) claims “we would today — 30-odd years later — be dramatically less dependent on Saudi oil.”
                Would you believe, and it is true, that the US imports from the Kingdom come to about 3% of the US consumption? Would even dropping to zero be “dramatically less”?

                (3) Supported SALT II. Well yes, and he signed it but the process started under Richard Nixon and continued under Gerald Ford.

                (8)” Established diplomatic relations with China”. That was the last step in the process. That one really deserves to go to the credit of Nixon doesn’t it?

                (10)”Returned the Panama Canal to Panama”. That one he does deserve. However if you used the same method here as you did with 3 and 8 you would have to ignore Jimmy and give the credit to Bill Clinton. It was actually handed back in 1999.

                The Brookings Institute is a left leaning institution, at least in the way the US defines left. Here is an item they published on Jimmy Carter, and why they say he was a failure.
                http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2000/01/21politics-hess
                I would regard it as a fair review of the man.

                • Paul …
                  14 January 2016 at 3:48 pm

                  The author was ‘a veteran staffer of the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations.’
                  Both Republican Presidents.
                  So the actual author is not ‘left leaning.’

                  Brian Gould is left leaning and wrote a powerful article for the right wing rag the Herald today.

                  Not all authors represent the views of the organisation they are published in.

                  • alwyn …
                    14 January 2016 at 4:14 pm

                    You will also have noted that the editor described Mr Hess and what he has written in this way

                    “Editor’s Note: Following is a column Mr. Hess wrote in June 1978, when Jimmy Carter was just midway through his term. We think it’s worth reprinting. It shows how early Carter’s flaws became apparent to eagle-eyed pundits like Mr. Hess.”

                    It doesn’t sound as if the Brookings Institute were disapproving of the material does it? In fact they do seem to agree with the description of “failure” .
                    Incidentally Hess was an adviser to Carter. He didn’t just work for Republicans. He also worked at Brookings.
                    By the way I believe it is Bryan Gould, not Brian.

    • Ad 1.5
      14 January 2016 at 12:52 pm

      The United States with a strong Republican-aligned Executive, Senate, and Congress would be quite something to behold on the world stage.

      President Obama’s State of the Union was on point there yesterday.

    • Lanthanide 1.6
      14 January 2016 at 1:00 pm

      Any centrist candidate will defeat any extremist (and Bernie is extremist, in the US context) in the general election.

      Hard to say how two extremists head-to-head would go, though. I’m not sure Trump would win, because he’s crazy.

      But for that same reason, it suggest that neither Trump nor Bernie will win their nominations.

      • crashcart 1.6.1
        14 January 2016 at 3:11 pm

        Current polling disagrees with you. That doesn’t mean Bernie would win but it certainly shows there is an appetite for non establishment candidates. As shown by both primaries currently being led by very non establishment people.

        • You_Fool 1.6.1.1
          15 January 2016 at 7:38 am

          I do wonder how much the polling will actually reflect the final result. Yes there is appetite for non-establishment candidates, but is it Americans finally waking up to the power of polls to shift debate to issues they actually care about by showing support for extreme candidates before voting for which ever moderate adopts a more sensible policy based on those views.

          I.e. want a more leftist Hillary, tell pollsters you support Sanders and then watch as Hillary tries to more like Sanders then vote Hillary. Republicans ditto (but Trump, Rubico or Cruz as the crazies and which ever of the other 9000 candidates you want)

          From what I have seen, Hillary has picked this up better than the Republicans

          • crashcart 1.6.1.1.1
            15 January 2016 at 7:59 am

            Don’t disagree with you at all. As I said the polls don’t mean Bernie will win but the indicate people are not happy with the status quo. I still don’t think Trump will win the Republican primary. The DNC has a lot of tools to try and push things towards Hilary as well so there is still a strong chance that we end up with a Clinton V Cruz election.

            • You_Fool 1.6.1.1.1.1
              15 January 2016 at 9:59 am

              I doubt that the republician voters will nominate Trump or Cruz or even Carson (as Lanth pointed out my confusion on the bizare right wingers) but that their support is more to do with trying to promote the ideas behind their extremism.

              • crashcart …
                15 January 2016 at 10:08 am

                With how close the first primaries are and the current polling in those states both Cruz and Trump have massive leads over any other contenders. Yes there is probably a bit of error in the polls due to people trying to push more centre candidates out but when we are talking 20 points or more then that is a level of co-ordination that I doubt would happen in polls. Heavy defeats in those first two states will essentially drop most of the also ran’s. This could result in a consolidation in support behind a Rubio type candidate but by that stage he will all ready be trying to catch up.

                Of course anything is possible.

                • You_Fool …
                  15 January 2016 at 12:21 pm

                  It comes down to how much people are willing to back up their frustration at the actual vote as opposed to when a polling company rings and asks. Nothing says you need to answer the pollster the same way as you will actually vote; and if saying Trump helps to make a more centrist candidate sit up and notice then maybe enough people are doing that this time.

                  The republican primaries will be a good sign of how crazy the US right has a actually gone, or how smart/trollish they can show themselves to be

          • Lanthanide 1.6.1.1.2
            15 January 2016 at 9:21 am

            Rubio isn’t crazy and is likely to be the republican nominee. Did you mean Carson?

            • You_Fool 1.6.1.1.2.1
              15 January 2016 at 9:56 am

              Maybe I have confused my crazy republicans, It is hard to separate them sometimes. Although Rubio denies Climate Change so he is a little crazy, though yeah not as crazy as Carson/Trump//Cruz – so sorry wrong crazy

        • Lanthanide 1.6.1.2
          15 January 2016 at 9:19 am

          A more sophisticated modelling of the primaries gives Hillary a 82% chance to win Iowa and 57% chance for New Hampshire:

          http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-democratic/
          http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-hampshire-democratic/

    • Sabine 1.7
      14 January 2016 at 1:10 pm

      bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

      Vote For Trump – cause Bernie is a red commie hippie purple tie die t-shirt wearing socialist.

      Cause he is gonna keep the ladies in their place

      Cause he is gonna get rid of the Mulims, and the rapist drug dealing latinos – or at least he will registrate them or pull an Eisenhower on them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

      Cause he is gonna make US great again, after the lefty liberals took all the guns n gods and the country has now gone to shit

      And he is gonna hold on to power just like the geezer in North Corea http://www.thejournal.ie/donald-trump-kim-jong-un-executed-uncle-2543190-Jan2016/

      Do you really think that they would not vote for Trump if Hilary is gonna get the nomination?
      Frankly its about time that the ‘right’ needs to understand that Trump is their baby, they made them, they enable him, and they are gonna go vote for them.
      And then there was the TPPA under Presnit Trump. Don’t ya love how life is gonna be in the future.

      And you know what, there is a segment of the population in NZ that would vote for him – or NZ answer for him (Pullsher Bennefit comes to mind) for the same reasons, just replace Latino with any ethnicity the right in NZ would like to get rid off, of course the Muslim will not be let in, and of course the Ladies need to be put back to their barefoot n breeding days in the kitchen. And let no one even take one look at guns.

      Question: Do you have enough money to survive a Preznit Trump and the TPPA?

      Sadly Wayne i fear you must face the reality, Trump is the ghost the right called for and now they can not rid themselves of it.

      • Anne 1.7.1
        14 January 2016 at 4:06 pm

        Trump is the ghost the right called for and now they can not rid themselves of it.

        Talking of ghosts, a Trump presidency reminds me of a modern-day U.S. equivalent
        of the 1930s/40s Hitler/Nazism in Germany. It wouldn’t be too far fetched to envisage a U.S. wide witch-hunt against Muslims and Mexicans and huge “holding pens” (concentration camps) erected for the ultimate purpose of eliminating them.

    • Naturesong 1.8
      14 January 2016 at 1:33 pm

      It won’t be that close, but not a landslide.

      Huffington Post’s poll of polls is tracking 20 polls from 8 pollsters have Sanders at 49.2% v Trumps 42.5%.

      My pick is Sanders would win over Trump due to large capital interests backing the social democrat, then moving to destroy him and everything he stands for during the first term.

      If Clinton becomes the democrat pick, she takes the presidency.
      If it’s Sanders, Jeb’s the only one who would beat him (poll of polls has him narrowly losing to Sanders).
      However Jeb is 5% v Trumps 37% for the republican primary. So much for that.

      The real meat for the election is not Sanders v Trump, it’s the Senate.
      Republicans currently have a razor thin majority. 34 seats are to be contested, 24 of them with republican incumbents. Guestimate is a dozen seats in play …?

      It is also a bumper year for state governorships with 11 states up for grabs so how local and federal issues intersect are more likely to be present in people’s minds as they vote.

      The only thing I am absolutely certain of though, is that more money will be poured into the US political system than anyone previously imagined possible.

    • Richard@Down South 1.9
      14 January 2016 at 4:19 pm

      I have several friends in the USA… Trump’s rallys are often quite empty of people, and they use tight in shots to make it look like there are a lot of people there… Bernie has pretty good pulling power, he recently filled a hall on campus for 1200 students… (and it was when they were on holiday break)

    • Colonial Viper 1.10
      14 January 2016 at 8:41 pm

      Wayne, Trump/Sanders are doing so well now because people are sick of the US corporate oligarchy/dynastic establishment.

  2. Julia Schiller 2
    14 January 2016 at 10:22 am

    Wayne, I am following this closely, because I still have US citizenship and will be voting in the California primary and the general election. Many polls have shown that Bernie has the better chance of beating Trump and other potential Republican nominees.

    In fact, Bernie can appeal to Trump supporters because he understands their anxieties, but addresses them in a way that brings people together, well, the 99% anyway.

    Although I can’t argue that there are a few points that would make a Clinton presidency preferable to a Republican one, she would represent no real progress for the millions of Americans who are underpaid and who lack health care and access to education. Over the years, she, Bill and now Chelsea have raised millions speaking to banking, health provider, and other corporate interests and her policy views have been accordingly warped. Bernie is beholden to no one and has been reliably guided by his compassion and steadfast principles throughout his many years in public office, which, by the way, outnumber hers, even if you grant her the 8 years spent as first lady.

    Bernie is proposing raising minimum wage to $15/hour (HRC supports a rise to only $12 over some years), repairing sagging infrastructure to create jobs, free tuition to public colleges & universities, and universal Medicare. He has done the numbers and demonstrates how to pay for all of this. His desire to address climate change and his reluctance to deploy the military will mean a better world for all.

    Everyone should #FeeltheBern and hope that his example will provide an inspiration for politics here in NZ too.

  3. Manuka AOR 3
    14 January 2016 at 11:13 am

    Hillary’s lead is shrinking nationwide, according to an NYT poll:
    http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/13/clintons-lead-over-sanders-shrinking-nationwide-poll

  4. sweetd 4
    14 January 2016 at 11:24 am

    Talk on the US news channels the other night was that Hillary is in deep trouble over the FBI email investigation, they say there are at least 16 instances she could be prosecuted on, the latest being that NSA signals intelligence being passed to private sources.

    They further more speculated that FBI could look at inditing in 60 days or less and they (FBI) have over 100 agents working on this case at present.

    More speculation was that the DMC would alter their rules to make Biden the Dem candidate.

    Not my opinion, just the talk on the US news channels.

    • happynz 4.1
      14 January 2016 at 11:42 am

      …err…DNC…though I’m down with RunDMC. Wak This Way, indeed! 🙂

      The current chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, doesn’t appear to be too popular with the Democrat activist wing.

      Biden already announced that he is not seeking the office of president.

    • weizguy 4.2
      14 January 2016 at 12:30 pm

      Let’s be honest – that’s the talk on Fox…

    • Lanthanide 4.3
      14 January 2016 at 1:04 pm

      They don’t need to ‘alter’ any rules to make Biden the candidate – yet. They’d only need to do that if Bernie stacks up a majority in delegates.

  5. Anno1701 5
    14 January 2016 at 12:10 pm

    Trudeau first, Sanders next, Corbyn in a few years time

    is this a global swing ?

  6. Rich 6
    14 January 2016 at 12:36 pm

    A Trump presidency wouldn’t be so bad. It would probably lead to economic collapse, mass starvation and rioting, a nuclear war with North Korea and the collapse of the USA as a nation.

    The survivors might wind up creating quite sensible small countries out of some of the states, like Oregon. Others, like Texas, would wind up like a cross between Mexico and Somalia, but they’d be too small and poor to be a global problem.

  7. Michael 7
    14 January 2016 at 1:06 pm

    Yes!

    If Bernie wins in Iowa or New Hampshire, he will have the momentum to become the Democratic nominee, and the next President.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/bernie-sanders-destroys-donald-trump-by-13-points-6-more-than-clinton-_b_8936840.html
    In a general election, Sanders would destroy Trump with a 13-point lead. Hillary would eke by with a 7-point lead, when you consider the poll’s margin of error.

    72% of Independents and 59% of all Americans do not trust Hillary Clinton. Independent voters – who make up 40% of the electorate – are essential to winning an election in the US. Independent voters like Bernie Sanders.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/us/politics/hillary-clintons-lead-over-bernie-sanders-slipping-in-new-poll.html Among voters under 35, Sanders has a 2-1 lead over Clinton.

  8. Anno1701 8
    14 January 2016 at 4:00 pm

    For any body who hasnt seen it

    GREAT interview with Bernie Sander & Killer Mike ( from Run the Jewels )

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCnrQZbqIQU

    well worth a watch !

  9. katipo 9
    14 January 2016 at 4:20 pm

    This has been doing the rounds on the interweb…

    The Hillary campaign has been recently started attacking Sanders over his healthcare policy when Hillary aide aka daughter Chealsa said Sanders would dismantle Medicare and Medicaid — and “strip millions and millions and millions of people of their health insurance.”

    Sanders FB page then posted the following photo of Hillary & Bernie
    http://imgur.com/nmsKrTG
    with the inscription….
    “To Bernie Sanders with thanks for your commitment to real health care access for all Americans…” – Hillary Rodham Clinton, 1993

    classic

  10. Bob (Northland) 10
    14 January 2016 at 6:17 pm

    In the latest NBC polls Bernie Sanders has gone from 2% support at the beginning of the Iowa Democratic Candidate selection process to trail Hillary by 4% and now leads her in New Hampshire by 6% (both figures within the margin of error)
    In Nationwide Presidential polls he leads all Republican candidates by a far greater margin than Hillary.
    He leads Donald Trump by 13% and Hillary leads Trump by 7%.
    His main support base are younger voters (under 45) but he is now attracting older voters as he “finally” gains “minimal” mainstream exposure.
    He even has crossover support from disenchanted Republican supporters, and if he can garner African American and Latino support the momentum will give him overwhelming support which the DNC will not be able to ignore, or certainly ignore at their peril.
    This has all been achieved despite a total shutdown on exposure by ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and all mainstream media outlets. Even Fox (Faux) News has given him more exposure!
    Only the Democratic National Convention aided by Corporate funding will attempt to stop Sanders – and there will be public outrage and protests if the DNC attempts to override the People and impose their will.
    Sanders is a Light on a Hill, and may yet be the salvation of true Democracy in the U.S. and throughout the World.
    This is not idealistic wishful thinking, this is People Power.
    “Feel the Bern!”

    • alwyn 10.1
      14 January 2016 at 7:32 pm

      My goodness.
      Your impassioned eloquence reminds me of this old tune
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSiVjlknuSw
      “Sanders is a light on a Hill and may yet be the salvation” etc etc.
      Reminds me of Ronald Reagan in full flight.

    • Wayne 10.2
      14 January 2016 at 10:50 pm

      I would not read too much into the poll results of the various match ups at this stage. The voters simply have not thought about the options enough for the results to be predictive.

      My gut feeling is that Sanders is too far left for most American voters, hence the reason why I think in a Sanders Trump contest, Trump wins. Trump seems to be more the epitome of the American ethos, at least of a particular sort. As I said my view is not based on polls but on my perceptions.

      But for the record, my actual preference for the next US President is Clinton, and in second place Rubio. But I think his time is four years away.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 10.2.1
        15 January 2016 at 4:24 pm

        😆

        Always listen to your gut, Dr. Mapp. The gut has far more nerve endings than the brain.

      • gnomic 10.2.2
        15 January 2016 at 11:26 pm

        Hillary Clinton for US president? Nah. Perhaps get a dementia check? Backing Hillary is not a good sign.

        You must have heard her comments on the murder of Gadaffi? ‘We came, we saw, he died.’ Finger on the trigger, not good.

        And what about the hair? Someone who has a new hairstyle every few days is a fit and proper person to govern the greatest nation in the world? What is that about?

    • Colonial Viper 10.3
      15 January 2016 at 11:30 pm

      Uh, the United States was never set up as a democracy, but as a republic. The Founding Fathers structured the electoral system of the country to prevent popular democracy from the get-go.

  11. Bob (Northland) 11
    14 January 2016 at 8:22 pm

    Impassioned eloquence? Well, thank you1
    Do you see any other competent, honest contenders? Contenders who want to remove the influence of money on the electoral process, who want to make policy the centre point of Voters decision making? Who want to restore and protect the democratic process? Anywhere in the U.S. or any country for that matter?
    Jf so name them and I will hold them up also as a “Light on a Hill” and a protector of democracy.

    • alwyn 11.1
      14 January 2016 at 8:30 pm

      For the Republicans my pick would have been John Kasich actually.
      He isn’t going anywhere though is he?
      I really can’t comment on any of the people who never put their heads over the barricades though.

  12. Bob (Northland) 12
    14 January 2016 at 9:25 pm

    John Kasich, the Managing Director of Lehman Brothers when it went into bankruptcy and former political and business commentator with Fox (Feaux) News?
    A strong advocate for Government bailouts of private banks, and dismantling the Social Security system,private prisons, charter schools, U.S. invasion of Iraq.
    Competent?
    Perhaps.
    Honest?
    His views, actions and decisions don’t indicate that is a strong trait of his.
    Ethical?
    highly debatable.
    Keep looking,

    Regardless of your political leanings I think you will find Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who fits this bill.
    I do however have considerable respect for Jill Stein (Green Party) but a vote for the Green Party in the U.S. will never happen.

    • alwyn 12.1
      15 January 2016 at 12:53 pm

      You describe Kasich as being “the Managing Director of Lehman Brothers”.
      That tends to imply that he was running the whole business. He wasn’t. He was as his Wiki biography says “managing director of Lehman Brothers’ Columbus, Ohio office”.
      He was “a managing director”.
      These firms have hundreds of people with that sort of title. The clients much prefer to be talking to someone who is a “Managing Director” than to someone who is a “Branch Office Manager”. Wouldn’t you?

      However that isn’t that important. Of all the Republican candidates I think he is the one who would be best equipped to be President. I don’t think that Bernie has the ability on the Democratic side.

      Of course if you want to see what I think of all the announced candidates, of both parties, I would refer you to the funniest final line ever to appear in a movie.
      Have a look on YouTube for the last line of the movie “Some Like It Hot” when Jack Lemmon finishes explaining why he cannot marry his suitor, played by Joe E Brown.
      It is the very last line Joe says.

      • crashcart 12.1.1
        15 January 2016 at 1:16 pm

        I think you are right about Kasich being the most reasonable candidate on the Republican side. I obviously disagree on the Democratic side about who would be the best candidate but I do think it is more likely that Hilary will win the nomination at this stage.

  13. UncookedSelachimorpha 13
    15 January 2016 at 1:09 am

    My God I hope Bernie wins – in time the belief that there is an alternative to neoliberal garbage could spread to NZ. Just wish he was ten years younger though.

    Hopefully Trump’s support has ‘a high floor and a low ceiling’, as some have suggested.

  14. Nck 14
    15 January 2016 at 4:01 pm

    I have been following Bernie and I believe he is going to be the next US President. Clinton is just Republican lite (totally owned) and I won’t mention those other nutters.

  15. Anno1701 15
    16 January 2016 at 6:55 pm

    Jose Mujica for president 2016 !

    Go Pepe !!!

Links to post