Bernie Sanders Favorability Rating = 61%

[Blackjack200]

I mean Sanders is on the record giving pretty effusive praise to Castro's takeover of Cuba and has never admitted being wrong about that. That would have been pretty easy to hang around his neck and that's just one thing that came out despite basically no oppo research being done on him.

Sanders never saw his popularity tank because no one ever took him seriously as a presidential candidate. As soon as they did, Republicans would have turned to hating him in no time.

MARTHA RADDATZ: Good morning, Senator Sanders.

You said back in 1985 that Castro transformed Cuban society and gave them health care and education. But this was a brutal dictatorship despite the romanticized version that some Americans have of Cuba -- he rationed food, impaired dissidents.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Well...

RADDATZ: You heard all today, Senator Cruz talk about that. So have you changed your view of Castro since 1985?

SANDERS: Look, what I said there -- I'm not quite sure...

RADDATZ: How would you now describe his leadership?

SANDERS: -- I'm not quite sure, Martha, this is the issue that is on the minds of the American people right now, who basically want to make sure that Donald Trump keeps the promises that he made when he said he was not going to cut Social Security and Medicare...

RADDATZ: I know. But I want to go back to your comments please. We'll get to Donald Trump in a moment.

SANDERS: No, of course, their economy is terrible. You're right, it is a dictatorship. They did have a good health -- do have a decent health care system and a decent educational system. A lot of people have left Cuba for better dreams, to fulfill their aspirations.

So, no, the Cuban economy is a disaster. No, I do not praise Fidel Castro.

RADDATZ: OK, let's move on to the Trump administration.

SANDERS: But it is interesting...

RADDATZ: You -- you've...

SANDERS: -- you know, it is interesting that we start a program off by talking about what happened -- what I said 30 years ago.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi..._terrible_but_they_have_good_health_care.html

 

[LPCTech]

You all realize the whole "destroy everything" is not a Trump thing only? Its a republican thing. Its their whole platform. Now they get to blame him, its their only reason to tolerate him.

The Republican(traitorparty) goal is to defund all aspects of government and privatize it. They want rich people in control and the government defunded and incapable of doing the job of a government, which is protecting its people from threats both foreign and domestic. Domestic threats include racism, sexism, discrimination of all kinds. Other domestic threats like bad untested medications, uninspected food, polution etc.
The point of a government is to protect its citizens from these things. The republicans want all protections removed from those that cannot protect themselves. So that they can prey upon them. They are the party of evil, stupidity, greed and malice.

Now they want to pretend Trump is extreme to them, but he is everything they always wanted. Once they are done with him they will toss him away and blame him for everything. As they do.

 

[ivwshane]

Why not say that Hillary love is a debilitating mental condition because it denies the reality that Hillary was hated and her lovers rammed her down our throats anyway. Now if you don't like that argument, I hope you can understand why I reject yours. The only debilitating mental condition on the left is the incapacity to understand and address moral outrage. Sanders was the moral outrage candidate who represented the kind of morality liberals are capable of feeling, outrage against unfairness and inequality, the kind of inner sense that even monkeys feel. Did you know, for example, that monkeys will not play games in which another monkey gets better rewards for the same effort that he does. He will see that and stop playing. We have a nation that is dying because the monkeys have stopped playing. We have allowed our commons, our cheese wheel to be overwhelmed my rats. Meanwhile democrats are out campaigning on how stupid Republicans are while they keep getting voted an open door to the cheese. What can be stupider than losing to the stupid?

There is a very simple rebuttal to all the Hillary fans here and that is Donald Trump. He won and she lost and not many of you understand why because of reasons. The real reason in my worthless opinion is that the country drifts right because the left has no message and no moral call, no real focus on class warfare. If you think it isn't going to require a revolution to put power back in the hands of people and give them a sense of control over their destiny you're nuts. They will just burn everything down and we can see it with Trump every day. It's the DNC that got the government it deserve. It's not Clinton's fault. She was the outer expression of that inner rot that has it's eyes on funding for campaigns, the 'grown ups of the party'. Pardon me while I spit.

Sure if you ignore reality, you can call it whatever you want and blame whatever your gut tells you. It still doesn't change the fact that you are invested in Hillary hate emotionally.

 

[ivwshane]

Bernie voted against an invasion of Iraq. Hillary voted for it. Bernie reasons were stated at the time:



Bernie was 100% correct. Hillary was 100% wrong. The consequences were hundreds of thousands of dead people, trillions of dollars that could have been used for better purposes and regional instability that appears to be getting worse rather than better.

Hillary was war-mongering to topple Assad thus demonstrating that she was not capable of learning from past mistakes. There is a reason that America is the most loathed country in the world. America engages in loathsome activities in other countries for no other reason other than it has the military power to do so. Perpetual wars of discretion that have no connection to American interests MUST end.

Your ignorance of history doesn't it make your gut feelings any more truthful.

 

[Moonbeam]

Sure if you ignore reality, you can call it whatever you want and blame whatever your gut tells you. It still doesn't change the fact that you are invested in Hillary hate emotionally.

Gosh, do you have that all wrong. I don't hate Hillary, I was simply sure her lack of message might very well lead to her defeat and I did everything I could here on this forum to warn liberals about this. I also tried to show them how absurd their attacks on Trumps apparent stupidity were, so stupid in fact that he won. He wasn't very worried about what you reasonable gut empty people think because he's not inhibited about what he feels. What you ridicule in others is what gave Trump his strength. His weakness is that he's emotionally primitive. So you are in your opinion, I'm quite sure, very very realistic. The problem. of course, like conservatives, is that your reality is all wrong. I don't hate Hillary, but you can't face the flaw in your brain that prevented you from seeing she could lose for a lack of, here it comes,,,,,,emotional appeal and empathy. And as you should know, liberals fall all over themselves out of arrogance. You're just so much smarter than people who feel, like poor dumb me who knew in his gut the moment he trump announced his candidacy that he would win. My finger on the pulse of the American people is just that good. It has a name. It's called emotional intelligence, the greatest thing since sliced bread. PS: Your whole inability to take in criticism is because, while you don't see it, you blame yourself for Trump since it was folk like you who caused him to win. We always create what we fear. You'd know that if you were more self aware.

By the way, you can't be blamed at all because you don't know what you feel. It's not something you can consciously choose to do. What you can do is maybe try to listen more openly. But that's up to you. I give you what I can. What you do with it is up to you.

 

[Moonbeam]

Your ignorance of history doesn't it make your gut feelings any more truthful.

Your job as a superior rational thinker who doesn't make off the wall emotional claims was to state clearly how he misconstrued history and why his post was the product of gut feelings. Otherwise, what I hear in your post is a frankly pretty useless gut feeling based on a titanic sense of self confident arrogance that has no substance to excuse it's existence.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol. Your "criticism" of her was already voiced by me at least since October. You seem to think that because I disagree with your message that I'm disagreeing with your criticism of her, I am not. I'm pointing out to you one of mans flaws, a flaw you have but seem intent on denying it despite exemplifying it in every post.

Gosh, do you have that all wrong. I don't hate Hillary, I was simply sure her lack of message might very well lead to her defeat and I did everything I could here on this forum to warn liberals about this. I also tried to show them how absurd their attacks on Trumps apparent stupidity were, so stupid in fact that he won. He wasn't very worried about what you reasonable gut empty people think because he's not inhibited about what he feels. What you ridicule in others is what gave Trump his strength. His weakness is that he's emotionally primitive. So you are in your opinion, I'm quite sure, very very realistic. The problem. of course, like conservatives, is that your reality is all wrong. I don't hate Hillary, but you can't face the flaw in your brain that prevented you from seeing she could lose for a lack of, here it comes,,,,,,emotional appeal and empathy. And as you should know, liberals fall all over themselves out of arrogance. You're just so much smarter than people who feel, like poor dumb me who knew in his gut the moment he trump announced his candidacy that he would win. My finger on the pulse of the American people is just that good. It has a name. It's called emotional intelligence, the greatest thing since sliced bread. PS: Your whole inability to take in criticism is because, while you don't see it, you blame yourself for Trump since it was folk like you who caused him to win. We always create what we fear. You'd know that if you were more self aware.

By the way, you can't be blamed at all because you don't know what you feel. It's not something you can consciously choose to do. What you can do is maybe try to listen more openly. But that's up to you. I give you what I can. What you do with it is up to you.

Btw, I've already acknowledged my LBD a long time ago.

 

[LPCTech]

Not one democrat I know in real life wanted Hillary Clinton to ever be president. They just voted for her due to the threat of Trump. But I imagine "the democrat candidate" would easily have beaten Trump if it were not Hillary.

She is literally the most disliked of democrats. Everyone I encountered in real life wanted Bernie to win.

This is just my personal experience talking to other democrats.

I can only hope for the sake of democracy she never engages in another national election. She is a 100% loss.

Bernie should be president right now, but due to the DNC colluding with Hillary over Bernie and half of America being stone cold stupid, we have Trump.

 

[innociv]

Sanders praised that at least in those socialistic dictatorships, people were fed and had health care compared to some other ones.

But everyone knows there's a difference between Social Democracy or Democratic Socialism compared to Authoritarian Socialism - there's just those that like to conveniently ignore the difference to be manipulative.

But yes. He should be president now. The problem is that the DNC and their donors prefered "any Republican" over Bernie Sanders, and they didn't care what Americans wanted as usual.

 

[Brainonska511]

But yes. He should be president now. The problem is that the DNC and their donors prefered "any Republican" over Bernie Sanders, and they didn't care what Americans wanted as usual.

Yes, it was the DNC that made him lose by millions of votes in primaries. It had nothing to do with the fact that Democrats actually preferred Clinton over Sanders...

Not one democrat I know in real life wanted Hillary Clinton to ever be president. They just voted for her due to the threat of Trump. But I imagine "the democrat candidate" would easily have beaten Trump if it were not Hillary.

She is literally the most disliked of democrats. Everyone I encountered in real life wanted Bernie to win.

This is just my personal experience talking to other democrats.

I can only hope for the sake of democracy she never engages in another national election. She is a 100% loss.

Bernie should be president right now, but due to the DNC colluding with Hillary over Bernie and half of America being stone cold stupid, we have Trump.

And plenty of Democrats I talked to in real life couldn't stand Sanders and his not based in reality economic policies and talking points and would have been perfectly content with Hillary Clinton as president.

 

[agent00f]

Well it certainly seems that the Democrats had two options for President and picked the one with the least chance of winning for reasons and still can't come to grips with that fact. But to me this was entirely predictable and in perfect keeping with the liberal brain defect. They are unable to understand which way the wind is blowing because they use logic and reason and politics is all about touch and feeling. They can't craft a message that appeals to what people are feeling because they are out of touch with what they feel. Feeling are so irrational and messy. So they pick the logical candidate and lose and they do it fucking consistently.

And when you look at the brain defects on the other side, you can pretty much see how hopeless it is to tell them anything.

Centrism worked for the clintons (and obama) for quite a while, and if not for a quirk of the us election process would've kept working.

Centrism works because people overall are slow on the uptake for progress, and nothing as of late suggests that's changed.

 

[Jhhnn]

Your first link only mentions Sanders in the context of his supporters being pissed off in light of the DNC hack. Your second link concerns right-wing echo chambers that parrot fake news, nothing exclusive to Sanders concern trolling, nor anything likely to significantly reach the left's eyes. I won't bother clicking the third link since it amounts to the total amount of effort (along with a couple copy and paste motions) you've put into your argument.

Which underscores my willful blindness remark entirely.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yes, it was the DNC that made him lose by millions of votes in primaries. It had nothing to do with the fact that Democrats actually preferred Clinton over Sanders...


And plenty of Democrats I talked to in real life couldn't stand Sanders and his not based in reality economic policies and talking points and would have been perfectly content with Hillary Clinton as president.

That's the point, isn't it, that concern over the elements of impracticality in his talking points and economic policies, ideological differences in the democratic party took such president that that they had to run a candidate they were too blind to see would lose. And what was the result, of course, but to elect a fool whose economic policies and talking points are thousands of times worse than anything Sanders could have done. Here you are with all your brain power making a logical sounding argument out of pure idiocy.

Oh dear, I can't vote for Sanders because he's a socialist and says impractical things. I think I'll vote for the centrist, the one who does not emphasize and point out the fact we've lost our democracy and our power to control our destiny to the rich who will manage our fate to their own advantage. The logic of those sound asleep, who can't hear the cries of agony of our people. Yup, another vote for Trump.

What is it about the fact that you are lost without a revolution that you don't understand. Why can't you see that those crowded at the trough are not interested in changing things. I know, change might be for the worst. Let's play it safe and run somebody with no stress on the message addressing the only issue that matters, that democracy is dead. At least we can comfort ourselves that we at least have a DNC smart enough to generate enough corporate dollars to field a nonviable candidate. WEEEEEEEE look at us.

 

[ivwshane]

That's the point, isn't it, that concern over the elements of impracticality in his talking points and economic policies, ideological differences in the democratic party took such president that that they had to run a candidate they were too blind to see would lose. And what was the result, of course, but to elect a fool whose economic policies and talking points are thousands of times worse than anything Sanders could have done. Here you are with all your brain power making a logical sounding argument out of pure idiocy.

Oh dear, I can't vote for Sanders because he's a socialist and says impractical things. I think I'll vote for the centrist, the one who does not emphasize and point out the fact we've lost our democracy and our power to control our destiny to the rich who will manage our fate to their own advantage. The logic of those sound asleep, who can't hear the cries of agony of our people. Yup, another vote for Trump.

What is it about the fact that you are lost without a revolution that you don't understand. Why can't you see that those crowded at the trough are not interested in changing things. I know, change might be for the worst. Let's play it safe and run somebody with no stress on the message addressing the only issue that matters, that democracy is dead. At least we can comfort ourselves that we at least have a DNC smart enough to generate enough corporate dollars to field a nonviable candidate. WEEEEEEEE look at us.

You are stuck on stupid.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Which underscores my willful blindness remark entirely.

Preferable to dementia.

 

[brandonbull]

Your point, which I agree with and which haybausa missed, was that the liberal brain thinks one way (logically, rationally) and the conservative brain thinks with their emotions.

What hayabusa and the other poster illustrated was exactly what you just got done describing. Their comments are based on feelings and not facts.

We get the government we deserve because a majority of Americans (more specifically, more Americans where it counted) voted based on their feelings and not facts. Clinton lost not because she was corrupt or a lying liar but because she was unable to appeal to those who make decisions based on their feelings.

The left gets blame for being unable to effectively communicate with a person who has the CBD and for not doing what is necessary to ensure logic and rationality win.

Liberals are all about emotions and feelings and that lost has lost them a lot of elections. They operate in a zone of entitlement and trying to base their vote on the next big feel good story about a candidate. First woman, black, muslim, hispanic, gay, lesbian, etc. Take your pick and they want to promote the next "first". Clinton's platform basically was "I'm good and anyone that likes Trump is bad." Sanders seemed like the crazy old guy that goes around saying anything because he is old and wanted life to be like an episode of Oprah where everyone gets a new car.

 

[Moonbeam]

You are stuck on stupid.

No, I was showing you what real stupid looks like in your own language, the stupidity of using the other side is stupid so elect me. I told you that even monkeys know when they are being dealt dirt and there you are claiming your intellectual superiority over people who feel with their guts as if a war against real injustice and inequality and a cry that I hear your pain reduces you to some emotionally irrational shit bag.

 

[brandonbull]

It does work well indeed. Bernie, however doesn't poses that quality or at least he has yet to use it to get anything accomplished.

Sanders and Clinton always struck me as the types of people that you come across in corporate America that throw out generalized ideas. Such as "we should do some cool stuff with technology or I think we should make more money this year." Zero clue of what's going on, what it takes to implement, but first in line to get credit for the success or criticize the failure. They kick their "great idea over" the fence and let others do the work.

 

[ivwshane]

No, I was showing you what real stupid looks like in your own language, the stupidity of using the other side is stupid so elect me. I told you that even monkeys know when they are being dealt dirt and there you are claiming your intellectual superiority over people who feel with their guts as if a war against real injustice and inequality and a cry that I hear your pain reduces you to some emotionally irrational shit bag.

Now you are projecting.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I'm curious, how long has democracy existed in America? Certainly not before 1920. Is there an exact moment where democracy was officially lost? Citizens United isn't the cutoff, is it? Because 90 years is a pretty good run, most people would be happy to live that long. Both my paternal great-grandfathers died exactly at 90. It's a nice, clean number.

 

[Moonbeam]

Liberals are all about emotions and feelings and that lost has lost them a lot of elections. They operate in a zone of entitlement and trying to base their vote on the next big feel good story about a candidate. First woman, black, muslim, hispanic, gay, lesbian, etc. Take your pick and they want to promote the next "first". Clinton's platform basically was "I'm good and anyone that likes Trump is bad." Sanders seemed like the crazy old guy that goes around saying anything because he is old and wanted life to be like an episode of Oprah where everyone gets a new car.

Your political astuteness is genuinely staggering.

 

[ivwshane]

Sanders and Clinton always struck me as the types of people that you come across in corporate America that throw out generalized ideas. Such as "we should do some cool stuff with technology or I think we should make more money this year." Zero clue of what's going on, what it takes to implement, but first in line to get credit for the success or criticize the failure. They kick their "great idea over" the fence and let others do the work.

That has more to do with your sources for information than reality.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

That has more to do with your sources for information than reality.

I'd say Sanders was more the stoned hippie dude that would provide ideas, albeit incoherent ones. Clinton needed a support team just to send out a single Tweet.

 

[Moonbeam]

Now you are projecting.

So you claim like you claimed I was stuck on stupid and that bshole was off on his history. I claim you're a toad that croaks and with a couple of bucks I can get a coffee. Where's the beef?

 

[ivwshane]

I'd say Sanders was more the stoned hippie dude that would provide ideas, albeit incoherent ones. Clinton needed a support team just to send out a single Tweet.

I know right! What we need is a leader who can tweet whatever they want without having to think of the consequences. I mean, fuck the candidate who thinks things they say and do has consequences and who would bother to have a staff keep her on the straight and narrow.

Lol