(02-04-2016 04:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

hahahaha

Bernie had the lucky luxury of being on the debate stage with only 2 others from the start, and one of them a forgettable no-name.

If, in 2012, the GOP field only featured Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Paul, you'd see Paul getting the same "wow, he could actually win this thing" comments as Bernie's getting today.

(02-04-2016 07:38 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 04:14 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 03:27 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  Did very well from 30 to 44 too.

Doubtful there are too many traditional middle class democrats supporting Bernie. I think this age spread is represented in general as

*Under-employed progressives who want free stuff and the easy way out.

*Over-employed progressives with all the money and luxury to support socialism as some sort of cute experiment.

As to his overwhelming support among the young, when you’re in college you wonder why the government doesn’t just create a program to fix all societies ills. It's when you grow up you come to realize that government is the source of most of our ills.

Bingo.

Yep!! Easy as hell to vote for something when you know NONE of the bill comes from your pocket. It's the same as going to a nice restaurant with the family and the college kid orders the most expensive stuff on the menu because he knows dad is picking up the tab.

I got a kick out of those middle- to upper-class white college kids wearing Che Guevara shirts. I don't see many anymore, but I'd see the occasional one back in the 90s.

Never mind that Che was murderous thug who didn't hide his racism and homophobia, and begged Castro to launch a nuke at New York City if the USSR succeeded in getting missiles to Cuba.

He's cool, he's radical, has movie star rugged looks, and 'fights for the poor.' (right, Tom Morello?)

(02-04-2016 10:04 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I got a kick out of those middle- to upper-class white college kids wearing Che Guevara shirts. I don't see many anymore, but I'd see the occasional one back in the 90s.

Never mind that Che was murderous thug who didn't hide his racism and homophobia, and begged Castro to launch a nuke at New York City if the USSR succeeded in getting missiles to Cuba.

He's cool, he's radical, has movie star rugged looks, and 'fights for the poor.'

While I agree, he did have the best last words ever

(02-04-2016 10:05 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 10:04 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I got a kick out of those middle- to upper-class white college kids wearing Che Guevara shirts. I don't see many anymore, but I'd see the occasional one back in the 90s.

Never mind that Che was murderous thug who didn't hide his racism and homophobia, and begged Castro to launch a nuke at New York City if the USSR succeeded in getting missiles to Cuba.

He's cool, he's radical, has movie star rugged looks, and 'fights for the poor.'

While I agree, he did have the best last words ever

Nonsense. The best last words are "goodbye Toledo."

(02-03-2016 04:03 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 12:40 PM)Kronke Wrote:  After the 30-point rout in South Carolina, Bernie will no longer be trendy, and his base will evaporate. Book it.

I hope so. They're the most annoying group of people I've experienced other than people who shop at Whole Foods.

I think Whole Foods is over priced & over hyped; however they do open stores in urban food deserts (with a high income demographic). If you have ever lived in an area with 10-30K people per sq mile & walked to a grocery store you may understand. For suburban residents with a choice. I agree with you.

(02-03-2016 03:59 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:04 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Those kids weren't adults in the 90's and never had to pay for gas in the 90's. They do not understand how awesome the 90's were. We've been in a rut for so long.

The 90's were awesome, but...

NAFTA led to the loss of hundreds of thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs, gutting the middle class....

Criminal sentencing reform and the war on drugs ruined lives and tore apart families....

Repealing Glass Steagall and allowing investment banks to gamble hand in hand with commercial banks sowed the seeds for the devastating 2008 crisis....

Welfare reform was all well and good until the crisis hit and people couldn't qualify for welfare because the jobs it required of them disappeared....

DADT and DOMA were bigotry codified...

I despise the GOP, but corporate Democrats like the Clintons who are owned by Wall Street and corporations leave too much to be desired.

I do not disagree with you, but as someone who lived in the closet for years - you do need to take baby steps at times. I am far more a moderate than a liberal, but as an old libertarian republican I am socially liberal, but believe in paying as you go.

Free trade is the reality in a global economy. The question is how can you protect & take care of american workers displaced by cheaper labor elsewhere. IMO one of the issues is health care - in the USA it is a cost of business. In most countries it is not.

(02-04-2016 02:46 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 12:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:11 AM)gsu95 Wrote:  Interesting assessment. I'm voting for Sanders because he's real and I believe in what he seems to stand for and has a clear record of being consistent in his stands and his views.
I can't say that for Hillary, who I fear is as much a part of the establishment as anyone else and will say or do anything to be elected.
And I'm older than the demographics now associated with Sanders. I'm white, married, Southern descendant of Confederates on both sides of my family, veteran, gun owner, employed and a former Republican who grew tired of the increasing rightward drift of the party and its monopolization by evangelicals and Tea Partiers whose only ideas seem to be government as a sort of Christian Taliban funded by the few taxes they might agree to pay.

How do you think the economy will function under Sanders? Who would be willing to risk investment in the US on Sanders's terms?

Hypothetical. I have $100 million to invest in a factory that will employ 3,000 people to manufacture a new and inventive product for sale worldwide. I expect to sell $1 billion a year and to realize $100 million pretax profit. Why would I build it in the US?

Assume that all factors other than those manipulated by government are basically a push with anywhere else in the world. Why would I invest in the US? If you can't give a compelling reason to invest in Bernie's USA, how can the economy be sustained?

Boils down to this. I "like" Bernie personally as I believe he is genuine and truly trying to do the right thing. I can't say that about anyone else particularly now that Paul has dropped out.

However any idea I might have had of protest voting with Bernie is out the window now that he might actually win the nom. I can't help that part of me wants to see him take down Hillary, though.

I don't think Sanders can do it.

(02-04-2016 09:38 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  Bernie had the lucky luxury of being on the debate stage with only 2 others from the start, and one of them a forgettable no-name.

If, in 2012, the GOP field only featured Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Paul, you'd see Paul getting the same "wow, he could actually win this thing" comments as Bernie's getting today.

Paul is not his dad. He is more two faced and untrusted. Ron was consistent in his votes and statements regardless of if you agreed with what he said. Ron had some respect for that.

(02-04-2016 12:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:11 AM)gsu95 Wrote:  Interesting assessment. I'm voting for Sanders because he's real and I believe in what he seems to stand for and has a clear record of being consistent in his stands and his views.
I can't say that for Hillary, who I fear is as much a part of the establishment as anyone else and will say or do anything to be elected.
And I'm older than the demographics now associated with Sanders. I'm white, married, Southern descendant of Confederates on both sides of my family, veteran, gun owner, employed and a former Republican who grew tired of the increasing rightward drift of the party and its monopolization by evangelicals and Tea Partiers whose only ideas seem to be government as a sort of Christian Taliban funded by the few taxes they might agree to pay.

How do you think the economy will function under Sanders? Who would be willing to risk investment in the US on Sanders's terms?

Hypothetical. I have $100 million to invest in a factory that will employ 3,000 people to manufacture a new and inventive product for sale worldwide. I expect to sell $1 billion a year and to realize $100 million pretax profit. Why would I build it in the US?

Assume that all factors other than those manipulated by government are basically a push with anywhere else in the world. Why would I invest in the US? If you can't give a compelling reason to invest in Bernie's USA, how can the economy be sustained?

What would Sanders have to do with your inability to realize your $100 million pretax profit?

I'm again voting for no one, because our system is garbage and so are our candidates.

Election season is fun because you get to see and hear people hate another group of people so much, to the core of their beings really, and just fight over stupid crap. Like they forget that both parties have been in power when times were good and when times were crap. It doesn't matter who the president is anyway...what happens, happens.

(02-04-2016 03:43 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 03:27 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 03:25 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:03 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  It's not surprising college students will gravitate more toward the more fiery/anti-establishment candidates and social causes. Been like that for decades.

84% is pretty phenomenal.

It's easy to have those views when one lives in a bubble and still depends on mom and dad, etc.

Did very well from 30 to 44 too. I don't share their views but I don't think you can pin all of his support on people who depend on mom and dad.

I agree, there's also all the takers to account for.

Which is half the country and includes a lot of retired folks and others, according to some right-wingers. But I like this write up, from a conservative slant. It actually makes sense.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/28...sh-ponnuru

(02-04-2016 07:38 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:03 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  It's not surprising college students will gravitate more toward the more fiery/anti-establishment candidates and social causes. Been like that for decades.

84% is pretty phenomenal.

84% are dumb enough to believe Bernie will get their college paid for. 16% are smart enough to know that he's full of sh*t.

Proud to be part of the 16%!

(02-05-2016 04:56 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 07:38 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:03 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  It's not surprising college students will gravitate more toward the more fiery/anti-establishment candidates and social causes. Been like that for decades.

84% is pretty phenomenal.

84% are dumb enough to believe Bernie will get their college paid for. 16% are smart enough to know that he's full of sh*t.

Proud to be part of the 16%!

Hillary only got 14%. 2% went for O-Malley.

(02-05-2016 04:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 04:56 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 07:38 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 02:03 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  It's not surprising college students will gravitate more toward the more fiery/anti-establishment candidates and social causes. Been like that for decades.

84% is pretty phenomenal.

84% are dumb enough to believe Bernie will get their college paid for. 16% are smart enough to know that he's full of sh*t.

Proud to be part of the 16%!

Hillary only got 14%. 2% went for O-Malley.

I'm conservative, but I wouldn't be surprised if you polled every college student that the ratio would be nearly the same.

(02-05-2016 04:20 PM)gsu95 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 12:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:11 AM)gsu95 Wrote:  Interesting assessment. I'm voting for Sanders because he's real and I believe in what he seems to stand for and has a clear record of being consistent in his stands and his views.
I can't say that for Hillary, who I fear is as much a part of the establishment as anyone else and will say or do anything to be elected.
And I'm older than the demographics now associated with Sanders. I'm white, married, Southern descendant of Confederates on both sides of my family, veteran, gun owner, employed and a former Republican who grew tired of the increasing rightward drift of the party and its monopolization by evangelicals and Tea Partiers whose only ideas seem to be government as a sort of Christian Taliban funded by the few taxes they might agree to pay.

How do you think the economy will function under Sanders? Who would be willing to risk investment in the US on Sanders's terms?

Hypothetical. I have $100 million to invest in a factory that will employ 3,000 people to manufacture a new and inventive product for sale worldwide. I expect to sell $1 billion a year and to realize $100 million pretax profit. Why would I build it in the US?

Assume that all factors other than those manipulated by government are basically a push with anywhere else in the world. Why would I invest in the US? If you can't give a compelling reason to invest in Bernie's USA, how can the economy be sustained?

What would Sanders have to do with your inability to realize your $100 million pretax profit?

owl is right....

however, and as you will hopefully endure to understand the 'aging process', welcome to that 'hell upon'

(02-05-2016 04:20 PM)gsu95 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 12:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:11 AM)gsu95 Wrote:  Interesting assessment. I'm voting for Sanders because he's real and I believe in what he seems to stand for and has a clear record of being consistent in his stands and his views.
I can't say that for Hillary, who I fear is as much a part of the establishment as anyone else and will say or do anything to be elected.
And I'm older than the demographics now associated with Sanders. I'm white, married, Southern descendant of Confederates on both sides of my family, veteran, gun owner, employed and a former Republican who grew tired of the increasing rightward drift of the party and its monopolization by evangelicals and Tea Partiers whose only ideas seem to be government as a sort of Christian Taliban funded by the few taxes they might agree to pay.

How do you think the economy will function under Sanders? Who would be willing to risk investment in the US on Sanders's terms?
Hypothetical. I have $100 million to invest in a factory that will employ 3,000 people to manufacture a new and inventive product for sale worldwide. I expect to sell $1 billion a year and to realize $100 million pretax profit. Why would I build it in the US?
Assume that all factors other than those manipulated by government are basically a push with anywhere else in the world. Why would I invest in the US? If you can't give a compelling reason to invest in Bernie's USA, how can the economy be sustained?

What would Sanders have to do with your inability to realize your $100 million pretax profit?

What difference does that make? Assume he has no impact on pre-tax profit. Now answer the question. Why would I invest in the US?