Why does everyone focus on Trumps background, but not Bernies?

[Pogo]

Why does everyone focus on Trumps background, but not Bernies?

Bernie was not considered a threat to the nomination. That's why the Right has spent so many years beating up on Clinton.

Now that Bernie IS a threat, you will be seeing all kinds of manufactured bullshit about Bernie, and you will probably parrot much of it.

You just proved my point. Partisan bullshit excuse for not vetting your own

My point just sailed a mile over your head.

Manufactured bullshit only destroys the manufacturer's integrity. It leaves the target unharmed. After years and years and years and years of repeating manufactured bullshit, and being defeated by Obama, TWICE, you parroting rubes haven't learned a thing.

Now that Bernie is moving on up, you rubes will be hand fed manufactured bullshit about him, which you will obediently parrot.

Like "trump wants to ban all immigration"?
Maybe we can discuss the OP, instead of your hypotheticals?

"Cool post, bruh"​

 

[deltex1]

"I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.” April 1985
Back in the 70s and 80s he called for govt takeover of various businesses, including utility and oil companies. He advocated money seizure and more.
So, why not talk about it?

Same reason they would never talk about the Magic Neeeeeeegro's background...they don't want to have to defend it.

 

[Si modo]

One good thing about Trump running...it shows the Partys' puppeteers that Americans don't give a shit about a candidate being a choir boy, or a contrived choir boy.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I'm hoping this campaign is a wake-up call to the Partymasters.

 

[Pogo]

One good thing about Trump running...it shows the Partys' puppeteers that Americans don't give a shit about a candidate being a choir boy, or a contrived choir boy.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I'm hoping this campaign is a wake-up call to the Partymasters.

From your post to the parties' ears.... a pox on both their entrenched, established houses.

But realistically I fear that is indeed too optimistic. More likely they'll both circle the wagons to fend off any threat of change to the status quo. Whether they'll succeed in circling those wagons, well that's an interesting question....

"The whole world's watching"....

 

[bendog]

[

Bernie was not considered a threat to the nomination. That's why the Right has spent so many years beating up on Clinton.

Now that Bernie IS a threat, you will be seeing all kinds of manufactured bullshit about Bernie, and you will probably parrot much of it.[/QUOTE]

You just proved my point. Partisan bullshit excuse for not vetting your own[/QUOTE]
My point just sailed a mile over your head.

Manufactured bullshit only destroys the manufacturer's integrity. It leaves the target unharmed. After years and years and years and years of repeating manufactured bullshit, and being defeated by Obama, TWICE, you parroting rubes haven't learned a thing.

Now that Bernie is moving on up, you rubes will be hand fed manufactured bullshit about him, which you will obediently parrot.[/QUOTE]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

 

[sealybobo]

"I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.” April 1985
Back in the 70s and 80s he called for govt takeover of various businesses, including utility and oil companies. He advocated money seizure and more.
So, why not talk about it?

Bernie would love to talk about it. And no middle class person will disagree with a word he says. When the oil companies were gouging us at over $4 a barrell, when healthcare is skyrocking because of Blue Cross profitters, when they are trying to privatize Detroit Edison. When you guys privatize prisons and our election process. When you don't consider defense contractors to be socialism even though their only customer is the government, when you give rich people tax breaks while the debt skyrockets,

 

[Pogo]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

Fun fact: Hillary grew up Republican.
Just sayin'.

 

[bendog]

One good thing about Trump running...it shows the Partys' puppeteers that Americans don't give a shit about a candidate being a choir boy, or a contrived choir boy.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I'm hoping this campaign is a wake-up call to the Partymasters.

That is the question about Trump. Has he just been watching the packaging of professional stooges in the gop for the past 5 elections. Even W who wore a mask of a conservative? (Maybe that's unfair to McCain who at one time had a soul). None of these guys actually had core beliefs.

Has he just gone "f it, I'll give the masses a show and throw them some meat for their fears, and if I get elected I'll actually try and forge deals? Or is he simply an egomaniacal demigod?

 

[Pogo]

One good thing about Trump running...it shows the Partys' puppeteers that Americans don't give a shit about a candidate being a choir boy, or a contrived choir boy.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I'm hoping this campaign is a wake-up call to the Partymasters.

That is the question about Trump. Has he just been watching the packaging of professional stooges in the gop for the past 5 elections. Even W who wore a mask of a conservative? (Maybe that's unfair to McCain who at one time had a soul). None of these guys actually had core beliefs.

Has he just gone "f it, I'll give the masses a show and throw them some meat for their fears, and if I get elected I'll actually try and forge deals? Or is he simply an egomaniacal demigod?

The bolded part.

 

[bendog]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

Fun fact: Hillary grew up Republican.
Just sayin'.

Hillary is a neoliberal, I don't think there's argument there.

 

[TNHarley]

"I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.” April 1985
Back in the 70s and 80s he called for govt takeover of various businesses, including utility and oil companies. He advocated money seizure and more.
So, why not talk about it?

Bernie would love to talk about it. And no middle class person will disagree with a word he says. When the oil companies were gouging us at over $4 a barrell, when healthcare is skyrocking because of Blue Cross profitters, when they are trying to privatize Detroit Edison. When you guys privatize prisons and our election process. When you don't consider defense contractors to be socialism even though their only customer is the government, when you give rich people tax breaks while the debt skyrockets,

"you guys" like I would have supported any of that..
One not needs to forget, I like the idea of Bernie. I would vote for Bernie over almost ever republican. But that's not going to stop me from talking about things.

 

[Pogo]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

Fun fact: Hillary grew up Republican.
Just sayin'.

Hillary is a neoliberal, I don't think there's argument there.

Could be. What does that term mean?

 

[bendog]

Here's the thing for me. How can any rational person vote for this?

Bernie Sanders Is Proposing Really Big Tax Increases

Even if you think it's good policy, this is doa in the house, and unless the dems take the senate, it is there as well.

 

[TNHarley]

Here's the thing for me. How can any rational person vote for this?

Bernie Sanders Is Proposing Really Big Tax Increases

Even if you think it's good policy, this is doa in the house, and unless the dems take the senate, it is there as well.

He is a socialist. What else do you expect? lol

 

[aaronleland]

People are aware of both candidate's backgrounds. One has always been a liberal. The other was always a liberal until he decided to run for president.

 

[bendog]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

Fun fact: Hillary grew up Republican.
Just sayin'.

Hillary is a neoliberal, I don't think there's argument there.

Could be. What does that term mean?

Hardly an unbiased site, but it has links
UPDATED: What is Neoliberalism?

It asserts the following which are not entirely true

"
* Economy is a self-regulating entity that always balances out.
* Government is inefficient and costly.
* Private business is efficient and therefore the best way to solve our problems.
* Wealth trickles down from the wealthiest to the middle class and the poor because businesses create jobs that then puts more money into the economy leading, in turn, to more jobs."

the overall economy and markets only "self-regulate" when there are no artificial barriers (such as tariffs to tax expenditures that favor one player in the market differently than another) and every player has the same information about the market as the other players, i.e. the market is transparent. And, govt's purpose, or even raison d'être, is to bring the economy and markets to this state.

govt is less efficient in allocating capital than a free market, but free markets may not do a great job with things like pollution.

the right to act privately is the basis for the United States to exist. Rights are not absolute, but any restriction on private action must be justified as being the least intrusive means to reach some necessary effect.

the private allocation of capital to receive profit on accepting risk to an investment is the most effective way to create jobs, and overall econ benefit to society.

 

[Pogo]

Yep. The thing about Bernie is his past suggests he first looks to how govt can find an answer to a problem and/or how govt can affect a market to reach an outcome on which group "wins" or derives a certain level of benefit. His present pandering is simply that "I can do more than Hill by soaking the rich with whom she's in bed" or to that effect.

Not that I really like Hill all that much, but I don't have some pathological hate .... but she is a died in the wool (-: neoliberal.

Fun fact: Hillary grew up Republican.
Just sayin'.

Hillary is a neoliberal, I don't think there's argument there.

Could be. What does that term mean?

Hardly an unbiased site, but it has links
UPDATED: What is Neoliberalism?

It asserts the following which are not entirely true

"
* Economy is a self-regulating entity that always balances out.
* Government is inefficient and costly.
* Private business is efficient and therefore the best way to solve our problems.
* Wealth trickles down from the wealthiest to the middle class and the poor because businesses create jobs that then puts more money into the economy leading, in turn, to more jobs."

the overall economy and markets only "self-regulate" when there are no artificial barriers (such as tariffs to tax expenditures that favor one player in the market differently than another) and every player has the same information about the market as the other players, i.e. the market is transparent. And, govt's purpose, or even raison d'être, is to bring the economy and markets to this state.

govt is less efficient in allocating capital than a free market, but free markets may not do a great job with things like pollution.

the right to act privately is the basis for the United States to exist. Rights are not absolute, but any restriction on private action must be justified as being the least intrusive means to reach some necessary effect.

the private allocation of capital to receive profit on accepting risk to an investment is the most effective way to create jobs, and overall econ benefit to society.

Well I dunno, she may fit certain parts of all that, and one notes the special guest appearance by Ronald Reagan....

I have to reject the use of the term though. I don't believe in terms that morph their meanings every two weeks. Your own link title's first word is "updated". And then you proceed to note "which are not entirely true".

As a proud linguistic archconservative, I like my terms to have a certain stability. Not a big fan of definitional nomadics. Who knows where this particular label will be living next week in the world of rhetorical vagabondity...?

 

[bendog]

Well, I put up a "liberal" link. But if you want to google you'll find that at the core of the DLC was an acceptance of Thatcher/Regan market economics or neoliberalism. Wiki has a good site. A guy named Harvey wrote a very conscise book

IF you're really inquiring PBS did a 6 hour series

Commanding Heights: Storyline | on PBS

I think it's for free on youtube. And perhaps interestingly, I thought it debunked the notion that Reagan won the cold war with the arms buildup.

 

[Pogo]

Well, I put up a "liberal" link. But if you want to google you'll find that at the core of the DLC was an acceptance of Thatcher/Regan market economics or neoliberalism. Wiki has a good site. A guy named Harvey wrote a very conscise book

IF you're really inquiring PBS did a 6 hour series

Commanding Heights: Storyline | on PBS

I think it's for free on youtube. And perhaps interestingly, I thought it debunked the notion that Reagan won the cold war with the arms buildup.

I'm not inclined to disagree with the dynamics of it. I'm just not on board with the creation of this label-of-the-day.
Or with labels in general.

 

[g5000]

Why does everyone focus on Trumps background, but not Bernies?

Bernie was not considered a threat to the nomination. That's why the Right has spent so many years beating up on Clinton.

Now that Bernie IS a threat, you will be seeing all kinds of manufactured bullshit about Bernie, and you will probably parrot much of it.

You just proved my point. Partisan bullshit excuse for not vetting your own

My point just sailed a mile over your head.

Manufactured bullshit only destroys the manufacturer's integrity. It leaves the target unharmed. After years and years and years and years of repeating manufactured bullshit, and being defeated by Obama, TWICE, you parroting rubes haven't learned a thing.

Now that Bernie is moving on up, you rubes will be hand fed manufactured bullshit about him, which you will obediently parrot.

Like "trump wants to ban all immigration"?
Maybe we can discuss the OP, instead of your hypotheticals?

Speaking of hypotheticals, I haven't heard any propaganda outlets claim "Trump wants to ban all immigration".

You are manufacturing more bullshit!