Bernie Sanders' agenda (assuming he could've pulled any of it off, which is a huge long shot), would have demolished long held Democratic positions. He wasn't even proposing Democratic views. He's a socialist! Yeah, I think you can combat income inequality and wealth disparity through socialism. So what? Do you see socialism in our future any time soon?

I see a lot of socialism in our (American) past and present, and even more in the future. Did I blow anyone's mind?

I do get confused because knowing politics isn't my primary or any source of income. But I thought I said Shultz last time when I meant Feinstein and that's what you made fun of me for? Either way. It's one of them (and many others Dems) who tied their support to HRC while dismissing Sanders out of hand.

And P.S. He's not left wing. He's socialist. And I don't give a **** if he's Jewish. What difference is that supposed to make?

Yeah, you're blowing my mind because it should be obvious by now that partly socialism, or even half-way socialism isn't working. In fact, it might be worse than no socialism at all. Socialism mixed with capitalism is what's corrupting our political system and creating greater wealth disparity by giving all the power to politicians, lobbyists, and special interests. Either go balls out or don't go it at all.

What I mean is, either have a small government and give the power to the people, or give ALL power to a FAIR and HONEST government that has no need to cater to special interests.

Bernie is left wing but he is not a socialist or far left. He is more part socialist or communist...

Which per the above is another reason you should not be for him. You should vote with the socialists or communist.

Notice when we get to talking about Bernie's policies, not only does Lestat not appear to know any specifics besides the broad strokes("he's a socialist") one could've picked up from Fox, he's parroting the centrist critique of him by saying socialism is impossible. So like, your ask here is that left wingers provide MORE solutions than the ones we've already proposed? **** off.

As to the bolded: wut.

As to your question about what difference it makes, oh, I think you know. Once your stories got up and running on that **** you'd know for sure.

Social Security is socialism. Public education/universities is socialism. Public roads is socialism. Hell, government run military industrial complex is socialism. Environmental protections are socialism. Federal disaster relief is socialism. It's largely the driver of American prosperity since the new deal. It affords individuals the ability to prosper within societies by pooling their resources and power.

Here's another mind blowing fact. There is far more successful examples of socialism in USA than there ever was in say USSR, and the reason why Russia has failed its citizens since soviet days is because it's social programs were gutted to fail in favor of oligarchs who are stealing money from the populus.

You don't think of it that way because you swallow the right wing talking points all day with no filter, while claiming that you are a political amateur.

ETA: farming, energy, and fuel subsidies is socialism. Lol.

Lestat if all you say is true you need to look at what that libertarian friend of yours is saying with a little more skepticism.

Lestat has thousands, maybe over ten thousand words on this page alone. But he can't do basic research on someone he voted for to know their policies, despite posting hundreds of times about them.

It's just endless JAQing off.

The excerpt that struck me was her assertion that she regretted not calling out Comey for overstepping his bounds with his criticisms during his announcement to exonerate her. But the excerpt didn't say that she thought she could have refuted those criticisms. Only that he overstepped his bounds. Perhaps the book itself elaborates. But if it doesn't, it means that Clinton delusionally doesn't realize that if she called out Comey merely because he disobeyed protocols, the average voter would ask "OK but what about what he said" and it would have been even worse for her.

Anyone else notice that Hillary has become something like a martyr to feminist communities?

I've seen this both online (on twitter especially, check out the replies to the Yglesias and Daou tweets) and in person with some of my strong feminist friends.

I'm not really sure what to make of it, to be honest.

I mean she got totally ****ed over largely because she's a woman so its understandable.

Because if she was a guy she would've been treated a bit differently on the campaign trail. The fact you even asked might mean you need to ask women these questions directly.

I think it's understandable that feminists who viewed Clinton's run as an important moment in feminism would see in her loss a reflection of the of sexism in American culture, and I don't think they're wrong to see it. On the other hand, feminists who were strong Bernie supporters (I knew more than a few) seem less interested in making her a martyr, even though they agree about the role of gender. The obvious difference is just how much they like Clinton or agree with her. I'm not really very keen to turn Clinton into any kind of icon for a movement but not that's not because I don't think gender played a role in the election.

That post itself comes off as a little sexist. It's very dismissive. You may have in Chezland too long.

I don't think stating a disagreement with someone or some group is automatically dismissive of their point of view. As I said, I am sympathetic to their point of view in large part. I also don't think it's up to me to decide whether Clinton is or becomes a feminist icon or whatever, but it doesn't stop me from having an opinion about it.

No, I get that.

It's the extent to which it's happening now (compared to during the campaign) that is surprising to me.

You're the patriarchy, dude. You just mansplained away legitimate reasons women might hold empathetic views on Clinton as being a martyr because it depends on how much they agree with her.

Like I said Jake should ask those sorts of questions to women directly. I don't think us men can really understand their perceptions by speculating amongst one another. Gizmo might have insight.

Well, that's an easy one.

Before loss: Clinton was hope our country overcame all that ****.

After loss: Clinton was the victim of it to some extent.

I agree that it makes sense for Jake to talk to feminists he knows directly, rather than asking here, if he wants to understand what those feminists think.

The part of my post you are reading as trying to explain away empathetic views towards Clinton was actually about why some feminists might view her as a "martyr" or some kind of iconic figure while other feminists do not. What I said immediately before that is that I agree with feminists who view Clinton as an iconic figure that the effects of sexism in American culture are visible in the election, and important to understanding the outcome. I too empathize with Clinton in that regard.

I'm not attempting to dismiss their point of view as illegitimate. I don't think it should seem particularly adventurous however to think that the esteem in which you hold someone as a movement figure is going to depend on how much you agree with their politics or admire them as a person. That's not really a normative judgement.

I plead guilty to being the patriarchy and throw myself upon the mercy of the court.

Yes, because the emails were complete bull****. It's a shame the Bernie bros couldn't follow his ****ing lead

If we're talking about Verritt I'm still totally in the dark. I thought it would be some insta-Politifact for tweets, like, somebody tweets some bull**** and there's a Verritt button you click and when the tweet gets insta-non-Verritted the tweeter is forced to live their days with The Scarlet V Of Shame haunting them to their grave.

Which obviously sounds way too awesome to be remotely real.

Eh, I'm still pretty sure that was trump.

Yeah, there is a veritable cornucopia of Blame Hillary talking points to choose from, so when the ones you trot out parrot right-wing derp at the very least you should pause and compose yourself in the mirror.

microbet2020