Seriously folks, can't we just schedule as few debates as possible, at annoying times when viewership will be down, and limit the number of people allowed up on the stage, so that the presumptive nominee has as little risk as possible of being usurped? That's a much smarter long term plan than having people tune in to watch politicians actually speak, or having our agenda dominate the talking heads news cycle!

I'm going to guess that debates are like playoffs...more debates more money.

If debates have descended into a discussion of penis size leading to applause, then yes I'd agree we should schedule few debates at low viewership times.

The new hobby for my Sanders Facebook fanatics is to find old out of context Hillary Clinton quotes to make her seem racist, then chastise black people for voting for her.

Oh and they're still posting pictures of MLK and making up quotes for him where he's outraged that black people are voting for Hillary (who campaigned for Goldwater) over Bernie (who marched with him). I guess the idea that white liberals making up fake MLK quotes to attack black people for their voting choices might be incredibly offensive is completely lost on them.

Any publicity is good publicity, and people are talking about the Republican candidates and ideas, however illogical or bad some of them are. Presumably Bernie Sanders got into this race to make progressive ideas a part of the national discussion, and instead all most know about him is that he wants to abolish the military and turn us isolationist, give free college tuition to all/wipe away all student debt, and he's supported primarily by the unemployed because people never actually see him talk about lowering Medicare prescription drug costs, or helping rural areas transition to the 21st century economy, or the impending ecological disaster that we're already seeing with aquifers and the water table in this country. Of course Hillary's ideas are more in line with my own, but to channel JiMGA for a second, why the hell should I support a candidate who's so unwilling to take principled stands and prefers to maximize her personal chances at the Presidency over getting her/the party's ideas out there and trying to drive that debate. Let's not leave out LGBT people! Hillary Clinton on Gay Marriage 2004 - YouTube

Or the "working" class - Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton (2004) - YouTube

Seriously, this is the type of stuff I want to see her defend in a debate. I probably won't believe her (and that's more of a slur against politicians in general than her specifically), but I'm an adult and a bit of a policy wonk. I could handle some real talk about why you compromised in certain areas, or how/why your view on certain things has changed, before we get to the general debates and it turns into ad hominem attacks and a glossing over of her faults because she's going up against an R.

Gotta watch out for those real MLK quotes too! U of Oregon Debates Removing MLK Quote For Not Being Inclusive Enough | Mediaite

Ah, as NYTimes columnist, Charles Blow, put it "Berniesplaining" (I love that term).

Which, btw, really doesn't help with the stereotype of the condescending liberal dictating to the hoi polloi.

I love the term hoi polloi. ISiddiqui wins the rest of the page.

Any article that includes "student leaders" in the first sentence automatically loses me (in terms of relevance or even grenade-throwing distance of reality).

I've worked at a university for too long, I think.

America needs to spend some serious time watching Revenge of the Nerds or Animal House for awhile so that we remember how seriously to take the brilliant ideas of undergrads on just about anything.

I feel the Bern, but in Hillary v. Donald, I shall jump for Trump.

The past few election cycles have convinced me that one of the few things that might help save what's left of the country is raising the voting age by about a decade.

I meant to thank you for your reference to isidewith.com (forget which thread it was in). I'd never heard of it and spent about an hour answering all of the quiz questions...which was really enlightening for me in terms of understanding and thinking through the consequences of my fairly naive political gut feelings. It's an incredibly useful exercise to come up against the accepted belief that "I support concept x" and then have to put it into a context where you start wondering if you really support x...or if that's just something you inherited from your parents without ever really thinking about it.

So, anyway, thanks for that.

You are definitely more than welcome. I've consistently hyped it as being a great tool for anyone to explore no matter where they are on the political spectrum, not matter if they're my 180 degree opposite.

Information is a good thing, understanding your own position(s) is always a good thing.

And I've yet to see anything that felt partisian in either direction on that site.
They support the positions they assign with attributions & links, anybody can judge for themselves how accurate they feel it is.

Glad it was of some use for you.

I don't think this is as over as everyone thinks.
Ignoring the super delegates it stands 595 - 405*

Yeah that is still a big lead, but things are shifting back north.
Hillery's fire wall stands at 200 delegates...


*I am ignoring the super delegates because I can not see them deciding this.
If Bernie goes into the convention with a majority of elected votes...
Having spent the last year telling everyone how the Wall St./Washington establishment is screwing them over...
Only to have the Wall St./Washington establishment is screwing them over by choosing Hillery...

I do not see Hillery picking up many Bernie supporters.
On top of that, the Democrats risk losing an entire generation of voters, they will never trust the Democratic party again.

No mater how loyal they are to the Clintons, at some point self preservation will kick in.


AS always YMMV.

There is not a single supporter of Bernie Sanders that will, in the general election, vote for Trump/Rubio/Cruz or choose not to vote and by proxy help those guys and hurt the democratic nominee.

If they do, then they are complete frauds who have no clue whatsoever why Bernie Sanders is running or what Bernie Sanders stands for.

Please enlighten me...

In all honesty, if you think this is D vs. R.
I do not think you have a clue whatsoever why Bernie Sanders is running or what Bernie Sanders stands for.

Every four year people say they will never vote for one of the other primary candidates, and every four years almost all of them do. Trump may be an exception to that, but even then I expect most people that identify as GOP will vote for him. For the Dems, I'd be very surprised if significant numbers of Bernie supporters didn't vote for Hillary.

I know and agree normally.
Everyone I knew was pissed at Obama and still ended up voting for him.

But this is by far, not a normal election.
Everyone I know says they will vote for Bernie, if he does not make it, they will vote for Trump. They are tired of getting screwed by Wall Street and are willing to burn the house down if that is what it takes.

The whole "lesser evil" is not playing well here.

Then they are idiots because they're sabotaging chance to have a 5-4 anti-Citizens United majority on the SCOTUS. Getting rid of Citizens United is the only way someone like Bernie has a chance in the future.

Obama weighs Republican for Supreme Court
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN0VX1LL

Yeah. I need to vote Demarcate to ensure a permanent right wing supreme court.

And? That was clearly a trial balloon designed to embarrass Republicans for refusing to hold hearings. Sandoval is not currently under consideration. Do you have a problem with Kagan or Sotomayor?

Last 4 Dem appointments: Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan. None of them right wing. None of them pro-Citizens United. But sure a news article about Obama considering a Republican erases all of that.

Bernie has run his entire campaign on small donors.
Millions at $20 a pop, at the risk of stating the obvious, Citizens United is not hurting him.

Yes it does.
How can Obama even consider a republican?...

For the last 40 years, the fall back argument has always been...
We need a demarcate in the White House in case of a Supreme Court nomination.
Now Obama is considering selling us out???

Except he's not. Sandoval isn't under consideration. The latest name being bandied about is Jane Louise Kelly, who is hardly a Republican.

Sandoval was under consideration.

"Was" and almost certainly just a political move to embarrass Republicans for refusing to hold hearings. Either way, everyone under consideration now is a liberal. And that same shortlist will be Hillary's.

Even if you don't care about Citizens United (which Bernie disagrees with you about), you can say goodbye to decisions like same sex marriage, Obamacare, any chance to reverse the birth control exception or Heller (2nd amendment).

I'm not sure you understand Citizens United. Bernie has raised $96 million to Hillary's $130 million. However, SuperPACs put Hillary up to $180 million and almost a 2:1 advantage over Bernie. If he somehow got the nomination, he'd probably get outspend 3:1. Without Citizens United, the PACs are limited and someone like Bernie with his small donors would have a much better chance.

I think technically we are on the same side.
I just see Hillery as the enemy(slave to Wall St).

And once Trump and Hillary are the only voices the differences between the two will be made clear. Are Bernie supporters really going to vote for the pro-torture, defund Planned Parenthood, 10 trillion tax cut for the wealthy, anti-immigration, etc. etc. etc. candidate?

I doubt it.

My point is/was Bernie is/was able to mount a viable campine without big doners.

Again being told to shut up and sit down does not work well.
Or do you think Hillery will listen to them?

Or maybe you are going to a special hell?

A viable campaign where he's going to lose by a fairly wide margin.

He has already won.
Look at how far left Hillery has shifted.*

*of course it is just an act, but still.

* Income and Wealth Inequality
It's Time to Make College Tuition Free and Debt Free
* Getting Big Money Out of Politics and Restoring Democracy (aka Citizens United)
* Creating Decent Paying Jobs
* A Living Wage
* Combating Climate Change to Save the Planet
* A Fair and Humane Immigration Policy
* Racial Justice
* Fighting for Women's Rights
* Fighting for LGBT Equality
* Caring for Our Veterans
* Medicare For All
* Fighting for Disability Rights
* Strengthen and Expand Social Security
* Fighting to Lower Prescription Drug Prices
* Improving the Rural Economy
Reforming Wall Street
* War Should Be the Last Option: Why I Support the Iran Deal
* Making the Wealthy, Wall Street, and Large Corporations Pay their Fair Share

That is what Bernie Sanders is running for (I got rid of the nebulous ones like "Family Values") - I put an asterisk in front of each of those that Hillary Clinton also supports to a great deal, quite a few even more so that Sanders. Keep in mind, while senator, Clinton's voting record was more liberal than Sanders.

How many of those so you think Trump supports? Cruz? Rubio?

So, yeah, if you support Sanders now and then plan on flipping when he loses the nomination - which he will lose - then you're a total fraud and a hypocrite.

I'm totally confused why you attempt to separate Trump and Sanders (but then, not really) here.

Also, Bernie will certainly be endorsing Hillary. So it'd be hilarious to see Bernie supporters who have been saying we need to listen to Bernie, but then reject his advice in the general election.

They all sound soooooo nice and happy. What are the pros and cons of each and how much will it cost and who pays?

So you are throwing a bunch of shit against the wall. Big deal.
* School lunch programs
* Ranger Rick
* Foo Fighters.

See how easy is...

I am a hypocrite.
I don't think anyone who is honest can claim not to be.
Not sure why I am a fraud though...

I am planing on writing in Sanders.

Well this thread got a whole lot more interesting.

Trying to figure out what the cons and costs for these are other than being hard or some people just not liking them.

* Getting Big Money Out of Politics and Restoring Democracy (aka Citizens United)
* Creating Decent Paying Jobs
* A Living Wage
* Racial Justice
* Fighting for Women's Rights
* Fighting for LGBT Equality

Are you really that obtuse?

It's the Bernie supporters saying they won't vote for Hillary and in the GOP it's the supporters of the non-Trump candidates saying they won't vote for Trump. Nobody is stamping their feet and saying they'll never vote for Rubio or Cruz or Kasich.

Once apon a time we, Americans, used to just do stuff.

How the fuck can you even throw that list out???
Fuck you.


* Medicare For All
Hillery "just say no" Clinton is for medicare for all?
Fuck you.

They agree on universal health care, but she'd prefer to do it incrementally, by adding on to the ACA, rather than starting from scratch.

Uh.. are you drunk (edit: Surtt)? I mean I realize its only like 12:30 in Eastern Standard Time, but still... WTF dude?

So someone who's take home is around $34,000
stick them, with $4000.00 a year premiums and $6000.00 deductible is ok?

Obama couldn't even get a public option to the ACA passed, with 59 Democrats in the Senate. What in the world makes you think you can get Medicare for All passed with far fewer than that?

He did not try.