http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arch...ap/459570/ Bernie Sanders answered two important questions with his strong showing in Iowa. But, despite his impressive finish, he’ll need to answer two more to truly threaten Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The most powerful lesson from the Iowa caucus results is that Democrats are facing not just a generation gap, but a Grand Canyon-sized chasm. As I wrote this week, age has emerged as the single most important dividing line in the struggle between Sanders and Clinton.
In the Iowa entrance poll (which questions voters on the way into a caucus, rather than on their way out the door, like “exit polls” in primaries) Sanders amassed astounding margins among young people. He crushed Clinton by an almost unimaginable six to one—84 percent to 14 percent—among voters younger than 30. For those tempted to dismiss that as just a campus craze, he also routed her by 58 percent to 37 percent among those aged 30 to 44.
But Clinton’s margins were almost as impressive among older voters: she beat Sanders 58 percent to 35 percent among those aged 45-64, and by 69 percent to 26 percent among seniors.
(02-02-2016 11:59 PM)bullet Wrote: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arch...ap/459570/ Bernie Sanders answered two important questions with his strong showing in Iowa. But, despite his impressive finish, he’ll need to answer two more to truly threaten Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The most powerful lesson from the Iowa caucus results is that Democrats are facing not just a generation gap, but a Grand Canyon-sized chasm. As I wrote this week, age has emerged as the single most important dividing line in the struggle between Sanders and Clinton.
In the Iowa entrance poll (which questions voters on the way into a caucus, rather than on their way out the door, like “exit polls” in primaries) Sanders amassed astounding margins among young people. He crushed Clinton by an almost unimaginable six to one—84 percent to 14 percent—among voters younger than 30. For those tempted to dismiss that as just a campus craze, he also routed her by 58 percent to 37 percent among those aged 30 to 44.
But Clinton’s margins were almost as impressive among older voters: she beat Sanders 58 percent to 35 percent among those aged 45-64, and by 69 percent to 26 percent among seniors.
....
so the IA geriatric set understands how their bread is buttered....like the rest of 'em that ain't got shite....
hoody whooooo.......nobody knew that going in.....not a fk'n soul.......
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.
(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.
Since Barry has never owned a car, He was given one of the limos to keep when His duties are up.
Check it Out !!!
(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.
Since Barry has never owned a car, He was given one of the limos to keep when His duties are up.
Check it Out !!!
(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.
(02-02-2016 11:59 PM)bullet Wrote: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arch...ap/459570/ Bernie Sanders answered two important questions with his strong showing in Iowa. But, despite his impressive finish, he’ll need to answer two more to truly threaten Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The most powerful lesson from the Iowa caucus results is that Democrats are facing not just a generation gap, but a Grand Canyon-sized chasm. As I wrote this week, age has emerged as the single most important dividing line in the struggle between Sanders and Clinton.
In the Iowa entrance poll (which questions voters on the way into a caucus, rather than on their way out the door, like “exit polls” in primaries) Sanders amassed astounding margins among young people. He crushed Clinton by an almost unimaginable six to one—84 percent to 14 percent—among voters younger than 30. For those tempted to dismiss that as just a campus craze, he also routed her by 58 percent to 37 percent among those aged 30 to 44.
But Clinton’s margins were almost as impressive among older voters: she beat Sanders 58 percent to 35 percent among those aged 45-64, and by 69 percent to 26 percent among seniors.
....
There is a lot in the media being made of the irony of Sanders having the young vote while being old but Hillary herself is going to be 69 in October.
Hillary is an old candidate with the old vote and Sanders is an old candidate with the young vote.
Sanders support is basically in two pieces. One is from left leaning voters which are normally divided between supporting the Democrats or a Socialist party. With a socialist candidate running on the democratic ticket they left vote is captured.
The second piece of support is from the anti-Hillary camp. When Joe Biden declared he wouldn't run for president, Bernie's polls shot up about 10 points. A mix of democrats and independent voters who don't view themselves as socialist but don't want Hillary.
Bernie showed in Iowa that he can compete tooth and nail in a tight race. Had Clinton outworked Bernie, Clinton would have won by a 15 point margin. Bernie showed legit contender ability with his organization by fighting pound for pound.
In order for Bernie to have a chance to win the nomination he's got to do like Barak Obama did in 2008. About this time Obama's national poll numbers were about 10 points below Hillary. He was able to use momentum to gradually boost those numbers up into the high 40's which helped him gain the delegates down the stretch to win. Bernie needs to capitalize on Iowa and New Hampshire nationally which will be tough to do.
Its going to be tough climb for Bernie. If the focus turns back to national security and there is a lot of talk about Hillary Clinton's email it may help him. You never know what could happen. He can't use 90% of the African American vote like Obama did in 2008 to upset the party front runner. Most likely he finishes behind Hillary with about 40% of the delegates.
(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.
Since Barry has never owned a car, He was given one of the limos to keep when His duties are up.
Check it Out !!!
(02-02-2016 11:59 PM)bullet Wrote: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arch...ap/459570/ Bernie Sanders answered two important questions with his strong showing in Iowa. But, despite his impressive finish, he’ll need to answer two more to truly threaten Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The most powerful lesson from the Iowa caucus results is that Democrats are facing not just a generation gap, but a Grand Canyon-sized chasm. As I wrote this week, age has emerged as the single most important dividing line in the struggle between Sanders and Clinton.
In the Iowa entrance poll (which questions voters on the way into a caucus, rather than on their way out the door, like “exit polls” in primaries) Sanders amassed astounding margins among young people. He crushed Clinton by an almost unimaginable six to one—84 percent to 14 percent—among voters younger than 30. For those tempted to dismiss that as just a campus craze, he also routed her by 58 percent to 37 percent among those aged 30 to 44.
But Clinton’s margins were almost as impressive among older voters: she beat Sanders 58 percent to 35 percent among those aged 45-64, and by 69 percent to 26 percent among seniors.
....
There is a lot in the media being made of the irony of Sanders having the young vote while being old but Hillary herself is going to be 69 in October.
Hillary is an old candidate with the old vote and Sanders is an old candidate with the young vote.
Sanders support is basically in two pieces. One is from left leaning voters which are normally divided between supporting the Democrats or a Socialist party. With a socialist candidate running on the democratic ticket they left vote is captured.
The second piece of support is from the anti-Hillary camp. When Joe Biden declared he wouldn't run for president, Bernie's polls shot up about 10 points. A mix of democrats and independent voters who don't view themselves as socialist but don't want Hillary.
Bernie showed in Iowa that he can compete tooth and nail in a tight race. Had Clinton outworked Bernie, Clinton would have won by a 15 point margin. Bernie showed legit contender ability with his organization by fighting pound for pound.
In order for Bernie to have a chance to win the nomination he's got to do like Barak Obama did in 2008. About this time Obama's national poll numbers were about 10 points below Hillary. He was able to use momentum to gradually boost those numbers up into the high 40's which helped him gain the delegates down the stretch to win. Bernie needs to capitalize on Iowa and New Hampshire nationally which will be tough to do.
Its going to be tough climb for Bernie. If the focus turns back to national security and there is a lot of talk about Hillary Clinton's email it may help him. You never know what could happen. He can't use 90% of the African American vote like Obama did in 2008 to upset the party front runner. Most likely he finishes behind Hillary with about 40% of the delegates.
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.
(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.
Since Barry has never owned a car, He was given one of the limos to keep when His duties are up.
Check it Out !!!
Really?
Well since every generation has it's own disease, This likely would have been His ride after being POTUS in the 1960's
I can't speak for other generations but as for mine there is a gap. The folks on each side of the isle are much more extreme. My generation has a wing on the right that is reactionary and there are a lot of them. The media only want to show off their left wing pets though. They do their best to avoid painting a picture that shows that a large segment has entrenched themselves completely against their narrative.
(This post was last modified: 02-04-2016 09:44 AM by HeartOfDixie.)
(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.
well done man....well fk'n done....like this cuntry and how I don't like my steak....
both sides are equal op fkbags......
I'm gonna say it one more time.....boston t_a p-arty is the only fk'n way....
stop paying taxes and watch how the shite folds and the country relearns...
I am going write-in owl65 just for shites and giggies in a psilicybin hopeful state....
(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?
![[Image: 0c61b73b04585b9e1345842b726df4c2.jpg]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0c/61/b7/0c61b73b04585b9e1345842b726df4c2.jpg)
![[Image: 59Limo_Cool.JPG]](http://www.angelfire.com/wa3/caddyville/1959/59Limo_Cool.JPG)
