When CNN realises they gone and fucked up and TheBern gains support from this they’ll try again and push more folks over…
If they attacked Warren as a rebublican she would have gained support in this crazy world…
CNN is the enemy of all
When CNN realises they gone and fucked up and TheBern gains support from this they’ll try again and push more folks over…
If they attacked Warren as a rebublican she would have gained support in this crazy world…
CNN is the enemy of all
Give me a break, anyone who isn’t in the top 1% is better off under Ds. I see the difference in policy, anyone can, Ds are marginally better. The question is why our two choices were a) Repeal and Go Fuck yourself dogshit, and b) you are forced by law to buy bloated, wildly overpriced health insurance/healthcare dogshit.
It’s because D politicians are blatantly looking out for themselves 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and only offer policy slightly better than Rs because the sick game they are playing dictates such. The game specifically being offering voters just enough crumbs to get people to vote D over R, but no where close to enough to stop the flow of donations and support from their corporate donors and corporate media.
No one other than Bernie has the courage to consistently just do the right thing as best they can, and offer people a real choice.
Even typing out “less than 50% of what he had in 2016” is so intellectually dishonest it’s hard to read whatever else is in that post.
And we wonder how to attract new users
But sometimes you just gotta tell the truth instead of just pander to whatever might get you there […cough…]
It’s just a fact. He has lost support since last cycle and he isn’t polling hire than when this race started. How does that jive with him gaining a ton of support?
Prove it?
Ok, maybe I’m mistaken. What are you talking about? His favorability? (Cite?) Or how well he polls vs 1 opponent compared to how he polls vs 7 or whatever there is left?
Lol at thinking polling at 40% vs. 1 candidate is twice as much support as 20% vs. 20 candidates.
I mean about 20% want him to win the nomination. Same as a year ago and half of what he got heads up vs Clinton. I feel like that’s enough to say he hasn’t gained a ton of support. The fact of the matter is he needs to bring in 10-15% more to win and even that doesn’t guarantee it imo
Oof. What’s weird about this bad post is you go ahead and explain why it’s a bad post in the last sentence of it.
I wonder how many republicans in open primaries are gonna see all this reporting about Bernie getting shafted by CNN and actually go out and vote for him in the dem primary as a way to what [they think] would ‘own the libs’. Or alternatively, and perhaps more likely, vote for him because they see him as the ‘anti-establishment’ candidate that the media doesn’t want to win.
What do you think his support would be if it was just him and Biden? Bernie is the second choice of a lot of other candidates voters. He has an enormous chance to continue moving up from here once some of the other main players drop out.
I was quoting someone who said Bernie is gaining a ton of support. that’s wrong. Just like it would be wrong to say Biden is gaining a ton of support.
Sorry but it’s just beyond obvious that Sanders said something like “I think it’d be very difficult for a woman to beat Trump because he will maxbox misogyny etc” and that Warren chose to hear “very difficult for a woman to beat Trump” and got annoyed that it sounded like he was suggesting a woman wasn’t up to the job. I know that’s not very #believewomen of me but it’s by a mile the most plausible explanation for the whole controversy. As long as the Warren camp won’t provide a rough rundown of what was actually said, as opposed to a summary of what she felt he meant, then we’re all going to have to make up our own versions, and that’s mine.
Edit: Sanders may actually have gone as far as to say “I don’t think a woman can beat Trump” or words to that effect but it’s still not the same thing if you shear it of context.
So, I don’t get why people are uncritically accepting the premise that not believing Warren on this is analogous to not believing women who come forward with accusations of sexual assault. Like, when a woman comes forward with a rape accusation, she basically always faces serious consequences that threaten their physical, financial, and emotional security and well-being. Thus, the idea that there are women routinely lie about being assaulted or raped, is absurd and evil. Not to mention that there is very good, convincing evidence that cases of sexual assault and rape are vastly underreported. That’s the basis for the whole believe women thing. A politician, even a female politician, revealing what was said in a private conversation with a political rival does not carry carry anywhere near the same type of consequences as does coming forward with a rape accusation. People should not cede the premise that accusing a woman of lying in this context is inherently misogynistic.
It just being the 1% is an exaggeration though. The 1% is earning like $420,000 a year. People earning half of that or maybe not much more than a quarter of it will be paying more in taxes than they would save in health insurance premiums. It’s still a relatively small percentage of people but a lot of professionals, doctors and lawyers, are going to pay more and they know it.
To get into the top 1% you have to make more than that by a good bit I’m pretty sure.
Edit: nope you’re right.
He seems to be gaining lots of support.
By pissing off some of his closest potential allies? You guys posting snake memes know we’re going to need Warren voters, right?
JFC, I can’t believe anyone is still chuffing over such an obviously manufactured drama.
https://twitter.com/elivalley/status/1217502449130524672?s=21
Warren voters vote blue no matter who
At least that’s what they claim when it’s Bernie supporters being told what to do.
Sanders: Sanders’ proposals would double federal spending over a decade; how will he avoid bankrupting the country?
That one was definitely my favorite. Fair and balanced.