Bernie Sanders' rising star from the view of the Progressive Left

1. 79

   Credence2posted 8 years ago

   Candiate Hillary Clinton has disappointed me twice;
   
   1. Being slow to take on Wall Street and  the finance industry, and not take on the more egregious behavior of the banks in reference to the 2008 meltdown.
   
   2. Most recently, no stating in clear terms her position on the Keystone XL program for the oil sands.
   
   
   Candidate Sanders is using this evasiveness on her part against her.
   
   I would prefer Liz Warren as I tend to think that Bernie Sanders may be too far left in his views even for me. I don't want to see another McGovern type washout at election time, we need a viable candidate and being more toward the center politically is important.
   
   But, Bernie is the prefered choice of the populist left that do not want a candidate who is seen as 'sleeping with the enemy', while saying all the 'right things' on the campaign trail.
   
   Bernie Sanders attracts the Left's true believers, just as Donald Trump does that for the Right. Most interesting
   
   Your thoughts

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I like that Sanders is taking on Clinton's dodges of the tough subjects when it comes to her attacks on Wall Street. He also takes on the big money in politics that continues to plague our system. My only problem is that he is a little vague on how he wants to finance all the free things he is promising. Free college and healthcare also is tough to understand. Can he be effective with the slime on the hill he will have to overcome just as Obama has had. Will he become just as Obama in making decisions that hurt so many in an effort to just get something done? I don't know. I will wait until we have the Democratic debates to see if he is cool and reasonable under fire.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

         RH, check out this article from the Atlantic
         
         http://www.theatlantic.com/national/arc … lia/72454/
         
         Can you believe that we spend more money on some damn plane than the total GDP of Australia? The money is there, alright, to do much better than we have been doing.
         
         The need to invest in our people, but of course you are going to have those that take philosophical issue with that.  if you want a society of working drones that are marginally paid to do only what they are told with no future with the rising costs of education to be dealt with successfully only by the wealthy, where does this take us?
         
         Bernie has his heart in the right place, but oftentimes that is not enough. Unfortunately, the plutocrats that run this country can only allow a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to go only so far.......

         replyreport
         1. 93

            wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Now that's a nifty bit of spin!  More than the GDP of Australia for a plane, that is.
            
            A little truth (from your own link): 2/3 of Australia's GDP for one year to build a fleet of 2,443 planes, as well as maintain and operate them for a 10 year period.  Sounds a trifle different than "some damn plane", doesn't it? 
            
            If you've got to put the liberal spin on it, at least be honest and compare apples to apples: 6% of Australia's GPD (or 20% of Swedens or even the most "honest"; 0.5% of our own) per year to build, maintain and operate the worlds largest and most advanced fleet of warplanes.  And then go on to say that there are better things to do with that money than provide for the strongest military in the world.  Or that it is about what Obama's "stimulus" program was for just one year...
            
            (Australia hasn't seen a GDP as low as that quoted in the article since 2008, which was about the height of the world wide recession.  You might want to choose a little better source for your information.  http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp )

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

               So, Wilderness a little liberal spin is it? Looking at the stats of the link you provided the chart for 2010 Australian GDP was at 926B, seems accurate to me as the article was penned in 2011. So who is trying to pull the wool over your eyes.?
               
               The Atlantic Monthly is both a mainstream and renown publication, not exactly a liberal rag. We are talking about a lot of money as Australia is not exactly a 'banana republic'.
               
               
               
               So using 2014 data would not be relevant, would it? So where do you get the 6 percent. of Aussie GDP? Your data source is unclear and confusing.
               
               The amount of money for any one weapons system is still staggering, when I think that the money can be better spent. The problem with the  Right is that military spending is always a given and they seem never to want a limit on how much is enough or too much. THAT FOR ME IS THE PRIME EXAMPLE  OF WASTE IN ACTION, not the fiction of welfare queens getting free cell phones.
               
               Yes, I meant one damn plane, I did not qualify what the expenses associated with the plane were as part of my argument. Who are we fighting that justifies these kinds of expenditures on this and most probably several other weapons systems in the pipeline? I was involved with military procurement for a short time, so I know something about it.   
               
               Strongest military, does not mean layer upon layer of overkill, to the detriment of domestic programs. When is enough enough?
               
               But again, that what makes me Left and the conservative as being both Right and wrong at the same time. So after reading this information, you could not pick up on the theme that there may be more than a few dollars excess going into this direction?

               replyreport
               1. 93

                  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  And the article quotes 924 billion.  I stand by my comment, particularly in that one year's GDP from an irrelevant country was used to compare to 10 years construction and operation of a fleet of planes.  Heck, you could probably use world GDP if you go back far enough and use the entire operating budget of the US military over 200 years! 
                  
                  Just spin, using emotional but irrelevant facts to denigrate something by making it sound much worse (and different) than it is.

                  replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   A lot of younger liberal idealists  are  what make up Bernie's favorite crowd .   He loves to spout  anti- -anything slogans ,   the lefty college  kids love him , here in Vermont where he lives and "serves "  he is better known for never actually listening  !    Bernie is also rather a Hot Head  who  goes off occasionally on a rant , remember the fourteen hour filibuster speech he made in Senate  a couple years ago ?
   
   He loves to hate the federal  government , constantly berating  business as usual . And yet his political  service suffers  from a  very much rhetorical speechmaking , and smaller doses of actual accomplishment .   Beware that which sounds good - and pay attention  more to what  amounts to progress , positive change and political  productivity, things that are generally not Bernie .

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Vermont resident? Nice place....
      
      You get to see him in action, close up.
      It is interesting to hear your point of view. Maybe he pushes the envelope just a bit?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ahorsebackposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         Bernie  is vocal , I'll give him that, ..... and he does  care about veterans ,.....  yet when I seek out leadership for the positions of top dog , I look for a well rounded  leader . Bernie sanders likes to control the conversation topic , his plan ,his dialog , his  rendering and if he can't have his overall conversations ,uninterrupted , unchallenged , he's apt to exit the town meeting completely . I have seen this more than once ,  That's not leadership , that's  an incredible ego .

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Reminds me of Trump, what a coincidence..

            replyreport
3. 77

   Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago

   "Sanders’s record, especially his time as mayor of Burlington in the 1980s, essentially comes down to higher taxes on the wealthy and strong investment in programs and projects that have broad public support—things like building parks and schools and providing free or low-cost child care."
   
   Right?
   oops,  I mean...
   Left?
   Yes.
   
   http://inthesetimes.com/article/18154/b … -socialism

   replyreport
4. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   We need MORE  $400.00  toilet seats  please !

   replyreport