I think Ted Cruz is slick in a way that appeals to conservatives and is new enough to be able to carry the most anti-government water in his jug. The local tea party conservative on talk radio in my neck of the woods fawns over his stood-up-for principles quite often.

Ya but capitalism isn't exactly treating the toothless morons well.

And I don't think myself or Bernie is advocating no capitalism. Just a system that works better for EVERYBODY.

Capitalism does and has worked great for our country. If it's run FDR style. Not this Reagan BS.

The guy cut his teeth as a Bush advisor. This whole libertarian bs seems like a way for the same people to rebrand themselves after the Bush debacle.

Pretty sure Bernie Sanders is an American and that neither capitalism, nor socialism are mentioned in the United States Constituion. Is the red scare ever going to quit?

Sanders is a self-described socialist spankie. While that should be an insult to just about anybody, it isn't really here. It's an entirely accurate description of his view of what government should be, and the difference between that and what most americans think is why he's not popular.

That is where we differ. Most Americans don't think. Hannity tells them what to think. If you lined up every American and had them listen to the clips I've posted I'm certain they would agree with Bernie. How that **** can't you? If youre a working stiff.

Red scare and now most Americans! It's becoming a greatest hits. Do I get put on a list as well?

I'm less concerned about Sanders "socialisticly" protecting American programs than I am about his "poors have no souls, inner city lazy kids" opponents.

Yes, we get it, you like Sanders more than conservatives. That's completely irrelevant to why he isn't popular nationwide.

So it's a swing and a miss for Ike's.

Anybody else wanna take a shot at this.

Is it as simple as these high school educated, bible thumping whites feeling left behind looking for somebody to blame and are so desperate they'll just believe any charlatan.

He's a Democratic Socialist. Since you seem to be so scared of the term. Let me dumb it down for you. He believes his job is to serve the interests of the people instead of the corps. You know, like that other ugly term "fascism" that both major party's seem to think is fine.

Sanders gets beat in a national presidential election if you eliminate this vote.

No matter what you think of his beliefs, he is way left of the majority of voters

The problem with born again commies is that they have good intentions, except whatever policy they try and implement is the majority of the time ******ed. They're so busy frothing at the mouth in rage that they're the equivalent of a poker player that ignores the flop and everyone else and just plays his hand.

I'll take obamer for third term again please.

From what I've seen of Sanders in progessive media, he spends his time in office defending already established social programs rather than advocating for the nationalisation of industry. I'm not endorsing him for POTUS or anything, but I think he deserves a fairer shake than light neo-mccarthyism.

Except, you know, the times he did advocate for nationalization of industry.

These are the type of people who should be voting for Bernie.
If he had them he could win, right?


And nobody had presented a solid reason why these ****ing dummy's will vote for Ted Cruz instead.

Maybe it's a simple as "preacher told um" these morons seem to be quite gullible and incapable of independent thought.

We've presented a solid reason, you've just rejected it out of hand because you disagree with those people's preferences.

Bull****. People like Liz Warren, Keith Ellison, or course Bernie. Are presenting ideas.

After Clinton gets elected in 16 we'll have had 3 dems serve a combined 24 years that have stood for ****ing **** except wall st. I mean jesus ****** Christ. Obamas latest budget actually advocates cuts to the post office. Liz warren thinks they should be in the banking industry serving these minority neiborhoods getting raped by check cashing and payday loan rip offs. I agree with her. And another thing. These ****ing conservatives with their less gov bs. Why make post office fund pensions for future employees. Their motivation is obvious. I thought you dumbasses think gov should not tell private biz what to do.

Meanwhile the average American is living under extreme duress. Something has to change. We need a real FDR style democrat (aka a socialist) to come in and start bitch slapping people.

You say he's to far left for them. I counter that is what they are being told and if they actually listened to his positions they would agree.

How is somebody who is an advocate of the working class to far left for the working class?

To far left for the elite, ya, but the working class, not so much.

I wasn't opining on whether they should be voting for Bernie (Personally, I like him personally, respect him more than most politicians, have had what I felt was thoughtful correspondence with him...but disagree with him on a lot of economic issues and think he'd be a poor choice for president).

Im saying if you carve out those voters and didnt let them vote Bernie would still get smoked by a generic Republican candidate. Its not as simple as "if only these uneducated idiots would vote smarter Sanders could be president". He'd win very few demographics in a nationwide election.

To hit the policy point you used as an example, opening the post office up to check cashing...could be fine. Having the post office do payday loans is borderline insane.

He carried heavily rebublican districts in Vermont. I know lol Vermont.

I hear what your saying though.

Are you familiar with Warrens proposals on post office or student loans? Would you supports these?

How much would it cost to load up those ten of thousands of post offices with simple banking services?

How much money would this increase in services bring back in revenue?


You're looking at banking systems and programs for tens of thousands of post offices, then increased hiring and training of post office employees to do banking services while you have no experience at all handling these banking services across retail branches.

Meanwhile no money is generated in these neighbourhoods.


You're better off just taking a few billion dollars and just handing it out for free in poor neighbourhoods. Saves all that hassle.

I'm not the guy to be answering those questions.

I'm just assuming if she's proposing it it can be done at a reasonable profit while helping millions of exploited working poor.

There is no reasonable profit in simple banking services across all banks unless they charge per transaction.

Why do you think banks don't charge you anything to pay bills?


Because retail branches are there to collect retail deposits. Retail deposits that give you 0% interest in return for free banking services will then lend out 0% money at higher rates to earn money on the spread.

That's why banks open retail branches and offer free services.

There is no money in free services in poor neighbourhoods. Poors don't have any money to deposit in their accounts so the entire retail branch makes no sense.


So if you think spending a few billion dollars to subsidize the poor people losing money in cashing checks, go ahead. But there's probably better return on investment for money to help the poors.

And reading more about this dumb ****, Elizabeth Warren wants minimum wage to jump to 22$ an hour.

The intention of paying people more for their labor taking into account real cost rises is a good thing. The policies they want to enact is so ****ing dumb without thinking of a host of other consequences. They're literally level 1 economic thinkers. Pokerstars penny tablers.

Why even waste your time hitching your bandwagon to her?