Sanders just CRUCIFIED Clinton in Alaska and Washington

[Muhammed]

To Sanders it's all about the money. I doubt that he thinks he has any chance of winning the nomination. He's stupid, but not that fucking stupid. He is just greedy for monetary donations from people who are even stupider than himself.

Speaking of stupider --- you think he gets to keep that money?

Are you ignorant enough to think he has to give it back to the contributors?

THINK!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Sanders can't win, the fix is in, it has been in from the start. Look at the delegates column.

What is truly sad is there are only about 20,000 Democrats in Washington voting. I know for a fact that that state is overrun with liberals. Maybe they are all too stoned to go to the caucus.

 

[sonic]

File this under "pointless". Sanders has no path to the nomination.

 

[HenryBHough]

There IS an excellent chance Sanders could get more votes in the general election than could Her Thighness.....consider, though, that they'll both have to be running as independents 'cause Georgie Boy ain't gonna let HIS Democrat Party nominate either of them.

 

[Pogo]

There IS an excellent chance Sanders could get more votes in the general election than could Her Thighness.....consider, though, that they'll both have to be running as independents 'cause Georgie Boy ain't gonna let HIS Democrat Party nominate either of them.

You're really frickin' married to this Hungarian Tinfoil Fantasy Impromtu No. 1 in fall-flat major huh?
Everybody knows you're obsessed. They're just not responding to be polite.

Speaking of towers of babel, what is this "Democrat Party"? Is there also a "Republic Party"?

English is a lost art.

 

[Preacher]

He has no chance. American people aren't dumb enough to elect a socialist.

You do realize Americans elected a womanizer,an idiot who thought god talked to him and a Kenyan halfbreed TWICE right?

 

[gallantwarrior]

The Hildebeest lost it in Alaska and I am PROUD to have been part of that. For the first time in my life, I am a Democrat. I was PROUD how many of my fellow constituents supported Bernie!

 

[Pogo]

He has no chance. American people aren't dumb enough to elect a socialist.

You do realize Americans elected a womanizer,an idiot who thought god talked to him and a Kenyan halfbreed TWICE right?

You do realize that none of those are political positions, right?

 

[Pogo]

The Hildebeest lost it in Alaska and I am PROUD to have been part of that. For the first time in my life, I am a Democrat. I was PROUD how many of my fellow constituents supported Bernie!

I was proud that my county and all the counties around here did too, although we lost the state.
The only NC county that went for Sanders out of this area was out east around Raleigh --- I think it was Pillars.

 

[Stephanie]

All Kabuki theater performed to make it seem like you dems. actually have a choice. When everyone knows the commie sympathizer Bernie was thrown in there knowing he didn't stand a chance in hell of winning. your party played you all and not a peep from the sheep

 

[Freewill]

All Kabuki theater performed to make it seem like you dems. actually have a choice. When everyone knows the commie sympathizer Bernie was thrown in there knowing he didn't stand a chance in hell of winning. your party played you all and not a peep from the sheep

Right on, they are performing the theater better than I thought it would play out. Apparently they forgot to tell Bernie he was to take the dive in the second round. He could have saved himself a beating by realizing that if the bout goes the whole way he will lose by a decision. It will take an FBI indictment to knock out Mrs Tuzla and that might not be enough.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Too bad that the "powers that be" have chosen to back a pathological liar and enabler. I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation. Holy shit! Charles Manson would be a better face man for Americans than that murdering, lying, sexual-predator-enabling she-beast. For anyone who would support the candidacy of the lying cankle-**** from hell, you deserve what you get...I, and every other decent human in this country, we do not.

 

[Pogo]

I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation.

Looks like you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.... how exactly do you get "both for the same reason"? If they were the same reason there would be no point in choosing one over the other.

 

[Pogo]

All Kabuki theater performed to make it seem like you dems. actually have a choice. When everyone knows the commie sympathizer Bernie was thrown in there knowing he didn't stand a chance in hell of winning. your party played you all and not a peep from the sheep

Bernie has never been "thrown in" to anywhere. He's been an Independent all his life, taking on both Democrats and Republicans and even a joint candidate at least once. He won his first election in fact against an entrenched Democrat. The idea that he's beholden to any political party's plans is tinfoil psychosis, and is contradicted by everything in his history up to this point.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation.

Looks like you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.... how exactly do you get "both for the same reason"? If they were the same reason there would be no point in choosing one over the other.

First: the same reason is that each represents a departure from the mainstream of either party. Sanders is running on the Dem ticket, but is an avowed Socialist. His appeal as an alternative to the typical, run-of-the-mill, DC demoncrat for liberals/progressives is similar to the appeal Trump has for conservatives who would otherwise find any GOP candidate preferable to a liberal candidate. Both Trump and Sanders fail to fit into the mold of either party. I suspect the electorate of both parties is searching for some relief from the business-as-usual, bullshit dished by the establishment-approved shills.
No contradiction. Just a difference in ideology.

 

[gallantwarrior]

All Kabuki theater performed to make it seem like you dems. actually have a choice. When everyone knows the commie sympathizer Bernie was thrown in there knowing he didn't stand a chance in hell of winning. your party played you all and not a peep from the sheep

Bernie has never been "thrown in" to anywhere. He's been an Independent all his life, taking on both Democrats and Republicans and even a joint candidate at least once. He won his first election in fact against an entrenched Democrat. The idea that he's beholden to any political party's plans is tinfoil psychosis, and is contradicted by everything in his history up to this point.

I actually like Sanders. At least he's up front about what he is and how he will "change" things. He stands a snowball's chance in hell, but at least he's honest (compared to the lying, sack-o-shit, my-lips-are-moving Clinton).

 

[Pogo]

I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation.

Looks like you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.... how exactly do you get "both for the same reason"? If they were the same reason there would be no point in choosing one over the other.

First: the same reason is that each represents a departure from the mainstream of either party. Sanders is running on the Dem ticket, but is an avowed Socialist.

No, he's a Democratic Socialist, and he's never put it any other way. I don't get why some people need to keep changing it. It's somebody else's term; leave it alone.

His appeal as an alternative to the typical, run-of-the-mill, DC demoncrat for liberals/progressives is similar to the appeal Trump has for conservatives who would otherwise find any GOP candidate preferable to a liberal candidate. Both Trump and Sanders fail to fit into the mold of either party. I suspect the electorate of both parties is searching for some relief from the business-as-usual, bullshit dished by the establishment-approved shills.
No contradiction. Just a difference in ideology.

That I'll agree with. But being "not-something" doesn't make for common ground. You could say they're both "not-basket weavers" but that doesn't give them any kind of common ground.

We analyze a candidate based on what they are, not by what they lack. Sanders is an idealist who identifies with the common class and despises hierarchical class striations, while Rump is a narcissist who identifies with himself, manipulates everyone around him to that end, and believes with all his being in that hierarchy, with of course himself at the top. They are polar opposites.

 

[basquebromance]

NO!

HILLARY IS NOT CHRISTLIKE!

SHE'S THE OPPOSITE! THE OPPOSITE! THE OPPOSITE!

 

[gallantwarrior]

I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation.

Looks like you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.... how exactly do you get "both for the same reason"? If they were the same reason there would be no point in choosing one over the other.

First: the same reason is that each represents a departure from the mainstream of either party. Sanders is running on the Dem ticket, but is an avowed Socialist.

No, he's a Democratic Socialist, and he's never put it any other way. I don't get why some people need to keep changing it. It's somebody else's term; leave it alone.

His appeal as an alternative to the typical, run-of-the-mill, DC demoncrat for liberals/progressives is similar to the appeal Trump has for conservatives who would otherwise find any GOP candidate preferable to a liberal candidate. Both Trump and Sanders fail to fit into the mold of either party. I suspect the electorate of both parties is searching for some relief from the business-as-usual, bullshit dished by the establishment-approved shills.
No contradiction. Just a difference in ideology.

That I'll agree with. But being "not-something" doesn't make for common ground. You could say they're both "not-basket weavers" but that doesn't give them any kind of common ground.

We analyze a candidate based on what they are, not by what they lack. Sanders is an idealist who identifies with the common class and despises hierarchical class striations, while Rump is a narcissist who identifies with himself, manipulates everyone around him to that end, and believes with all his being in that hierarchy, with of course himself at the top. They are polar opposites.

Regardless, being "not something" seems most popular this election cycle. Idealist, narcissist...what is the difference? Neither is "run-of-the-mill", and both appeal to a base that rejects "run-of-the-mill", politics-as-usual. Both terrify the party elites who think they should determine who runs on their tickets.

 

[Pogo]

I fully understand why both Sanders and Trump are attractive to the electorate, both for the same reason. For my part, I cannot understand why any decent, thinking human being would even consider the Hildabeest a viable candidate to represent us (collectively) as a nation.

Looks like you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.... how exactly do you get "both for the same reason"? If they were the same reason there would be no point in choosing one over the other.

First: the same reason is that each represents a departure from the mainstream of either party. Sanders is running on the Dem ticket, but is an avowed Socialist.

No, he's a Democratic Socialist, and he's never put it any other way. I don't get why some people need to keep changing it. It's somebody else's term; leave it alone.

His appeal as an alternative to the typical, run-of-the-mill, DC demoncrat for liberals/progressives is similar to the appeal Trump has for conservatives who would otherwise find any GOP candidate preferable to a liberal candidate. Both Trump and Sanders fail to fit into the mold of either party. I suspect the electorate of both parties is searching for some relief from the business-as-usual, bullshit dished by the establishment-approved shills.
No contradiction. Just a difference in ideology.

That I'll agree with. But being "not-something" doesn't make for common ground. You could say they're both "not-basket weavers" but that doesn't give them any kind of common ground.

We analyze a candidate based on what they are, not by what they lack. Sanders is an idealist who identifies with the common class and despises hierarchical class striations, while Rump is a narcissist who identifies with himself, manipulates everyone around him to that end, and believes with all his being in that hierarchy, with of course himself at the top. They are polar opposites.

Regardless, being "not something" seems most popular this election cycle. Idealist, narcissist...what is the difference? Neither is "run-of-the-mill", and both appeal to a base that rejects "run-of-the-mill", politics-as-usual. Both terrify the party elites who think they should determine who runs on their tickets.

"What is the difference"?? YUUUGE, that's what it is.

Again you're veering off to side effects of their relationship with the party they're running with. That's got nothing to do with who they are. "Both terrify the party" is simply not a basis for comparison. Running Pee Wee Herman and Ted Nugent would terrify any party too -- doesn't make the two "comparable".

You can't vote for a candidate based on a non-present trait. How would that work --- ""vote for me, I can prove I'm not Hitler"?