Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 3

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 23 May 2016, 09:34:10

Newfie wrote:My gut feel is Trump has a much better chance against Clinton than Bernie. IMHO there is something about Hillary that wears on you, gets on your nerves. The more we hear her, or see her the less attractive she is.

Also, as bad as Trump is, he is a vote against the establishment and excites passion. I can see a lot of Bernie supporters either not voting or swinging to Trump.

Agreed on both counts.
I tried to find a simile to illustrate just how much Hillary already wears on me but nothing came to mind that wasn't an insult to skunks or child molesters.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Mon 23 May 2016, 23:27:50

Speaking of Trump, he's leading Clinton by +2 now:

Washington Post/ABC Poll: Donald Trump Leads Hillary Clinton; 11-Point Swing Since March
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/22/donald-trump-leads-hillary-clinton-11-point-swing-since-march/


Hillary Clinton Now Losing To Donald Trump

A new Washington Post/ABC News poll shows Donald Trump is now ahead of Hillary Clinton by two points. They can’t seem to believe their own poll. Cenk Uygur, host of The Young Turks, breaks it down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02Ol_5pWz7k


The poll shows voters view Trump as the "change" candidate whereas Clinton is viewed as the establishment. General election voters rate Clinton as more experienced, yet most say they prefer change to experience.

Same poll shows if Democrats nominate Bernie, he would beat Trump by fifteen points ish.

edit: Some other data breakdown from the above video.. Poll also shows that Clinton is only getting 33% of white voters. 57% pick Trump. I guess 10% are still undecided, but as it stands in that poll anyway, only 33% pick Clinton versus Trump -- that's a really bad polling number to have.

Trump is also doing better than Romney did among minorities, including latinos.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 03:34:59





Bernie and Clinton are neck and neck in California.. Clinton just two points ahead.. Bernie might win it.

Polls also still showing that while Clinton is tied or loses to Trump, Bernie would beat Trump by 12 points.

The Clintons got governor Jerry Brown's endorsement the other day..

Which is odd, considering that Brown was the first to call the Clintons out as corrupt and awful, back in that 1992 campaign. (I saw an extended segment about all this, on msnbc.. I'd forgotten about Jerry Brown in 1992, well after watching that, yikes now I really think the Clintons are corrupt. 8O )

Bernie Sanders is the independent progressive reformer now in 2016, that Jerry Brown wanted to be, in 1992.

Brown never liked the Clintons.. not one bit.. but then times changed and Bill endorsed his run for governor, so now Jerry does political back scratch and has endorsed Hillary.. well whatever..

Brown's words from 1992 are relevant today, Jerry Brown on how crooked the Clintons are:

Bill Clinton, Jerry Brown trade jabs at 1992 Democratic primary debate
https://youtu.be/K5kUITklALQ


"My wife is a fine person, who has not done anything unethical." -- Bill Clinton, 1992 :lol:

Truth is, the Clintons are two peas in a pod and always have been! :lol: :(

That 1992 primary -- that was before all that came after.. all those scandals, one after another, in the WH.. it was before IMPEACHMENT and trial in the senate.. it was before the devastating NAFTA and bank de-regulation that Clinton did..

It was twenty years before the Obama administration and all that the Clintons got into in these years.. their Global Foundation, the influence peddling, the email and server scandal, and still possibly indictment of Hillary Clinton before the year is out.

In a recent poll, 70% of Democrats say that Hillary should keep running and stay in the campaign, even if she is indicted.

Democrats -- what is WRONG with you, for goodness sake.. vote Bernie Sanders..


Leave the past, in the past..

She's going to lose against Trump anyway. Go with the winner, the future, and the ethical honest candidate.

Image
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 11:15:07

Interesting article in WSJ.

CLINTON MIGHT NOT BE THE NOMINEE

http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-mig ... 1464733898
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18510
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 11:27:49

Newfie wrote:
CLINTON MIGHT NOT BE THE NOMINEE



Get real.

A recent poll found that 71% of Ds would support Hillary even if she was indicted for violations of the Espionage Act for diverting thousands of classified government documents to her private server.

The Ds want Hillary. The D establishment want Hillary. Wall Street wants Hillary. Big business wants Hillary. We're going to get Hillary.

I predict her first act as president will be to clean out the current top people at the FBI and get her supporters in control there, and they will make sure there won't be anymore investigations of Hillary scandals----or else.
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26634
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 16:54:36

There's some conflicting polls..

Most show it very close, neck and neck, but then there was one new poll a day or so ago that has Clinton up by 13 points:

If This New California Poll Is Right, It Might Be All Over For Bernie Sanders
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/05/31/california-poll-right-bernie-sanders.html


So, we'll see what happens.. I really think Californians ought to vote Bernie.. if Bernie ain't California, then I don't know what is.

But, who knows.. maybe the D party is finally falling in line as Republicans do..

We'll see.

What Happens If Hillary Clinton Loses California to Bernie Sanders

"We may actually be witnessing the same electoral conditions here that occurred in Michigan, where Sanders had a surprise victory on election night, mostly due to spotty polling, pollsters underestimating the millennial vote and Hillary Clinton underestimating the appeal of Sanders," Vasquez told ABC News.

A loss for Clinton there would be "in a word, embarrassing," Vasquez said.

The state's delegates are divided proportionally, and Clinton and Sanders are expected to have a close finish, so it is unlikely that a Sanders win would prevent Clinton from securing the number of delegates she needs to clinch the nomination next week. Most likely, both candidates will come out of California with three-figure delegate hauls.

California is one of six states that hold their primaries next week, and Clinton needs only 73 delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination. Given that voting in New Jersey, a state that will be awarding 142 Democratic delegates, close first, there's a chance she will clear the threshold before polls in California close.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-loses-california-bernie-sanders/story?id=39501409
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 16:59:34

Sixstrings wrote: it is unlikely that a Sanders win would prevent Clinton from securing the number of delegates she needs to clinch the nomination .... Clinton needs only 73 delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination....she will clear the threshold....


The only way Hillary "clears the threshold" is with the votes of hundreds of "super delegates" who weren't elected by anybody.

If you just look at the delegates selected by the people, Hillary is no where near clinching the nomination.

Of course the undemocratic party bigwigs don't care what the people say or how many states Bernie wins.......they are out to steal the nomination from Bernie no matter what :lol:

FEEL THE BERN
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26634
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Wed 01 Jun 2016, 17:17:15

A new NBC / wall st journal poll has it at Clinton 49% and Sanders 47%, with 4% margin of error, among likely Democratic voters.

Among ALL Democratic voters in California, Sanders leads clinton by something like 51-48%. (going off memory, saw this on msnbc)

Now here's the problem though..

California has early voting. It's like a Texas situation on the R side, how so many already voted Cruz that by the time Trump had momentum -- he couldn't win.

Same thing in Cali, on the D side.. half of voters have *already voted*, with early voting. So among them, Clinton leads with 58%.

This early voting stuff is bad. I generally like all pro voter convenience reforms, but not this one. What it's doing is just cutting short campaigns.. voters that may normally have voted for a change candidate -- if given time to fully hear them out -- are instead just "early voting" establishment, very early on in the process.

Half of California has already voted, before Bernie had a chance to campaign out there.

We'll see what happens.. if he can surmount Clinton's early voter lead..

Another thing going on though, is that New Jersey primary is before California. NJ may wind up putting Clinton going over the top in delegates, before California votes (this is what the media says, I don't know if they're including the 500 super delegates or not, I think it ought to be just EARNED delegates before someone is declared winner).
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 17:25:25

Some Bernie news..

He's under pressure to back out before California primary.

Today, he gave a speech saying neither he nor clinton will have enough earned delegates to win the nomination, without superdelegates. Therefore, Sanders says, it's a contested convention and he will take it to the convention floor and campaign for superdelegates at the convention.

Also in the news -- Puerto Rico had their primary, and the Democratic Party cut the number of polling stations in half from what they usually are. This resulted in very long lines.. elderly people standing for hours and they couldn't wait any longer, and people that had to go to work, and many gave up and couldn't vote. Some polls also closed early.

It's unclear whose fault this is -- Chris Matthews on msnbc was questioning whether it benefits hillary and that's why the party did it, but the local party says they didn't have any money this year due to puerto rico's financial crisis, to have enough polls open.

In any event, the turnout was high in PR but many Sanders voters were disenfranchised because they couldn't stand in a line all day long.

Bernie says that it's up to CLINTON to make a case to his supporters to get their support -- to take on some of his issues, like wall street reform, anti war, environment, $15 minimum wage, universal healthcare and college cost / debt relief, and not cutting social security or raising the age.

I was watching a clinton surrogate on msnbc.. when asked if he believes in universal healthcare, he said "well, I believe in *more affordable* healthcare." When asked about free college, he said "no, everyone should have some skin in the game." (the problem with that, is that it's not like students and their families have no "skin in the game" -- the problem is these days it's a hundred thousand dollars in debt.)

I just heard another Clinton surrogate on msnbc, he said "under no circumstances will she agree that people with no money should get free college." (yikes, these people sound more far right than Ted Cruz, that's pretty blunt. :lol: )

Anyhow, Clinton world ain't too liberal, that's for sure. 8O

Bernie's actually been winning over some superdelegates lately, he just got a few more:

Sanders picks up more superdelegates

Sen. Bernie Sanders picked up another superdelegate on Thursday: New Hampshire Democratic Party vice chairwoman Martha Fuller Clark, who also serves as a state senator.

Clark's backing on Thursday, confirmed by the Sanders campaign, is the latest in a string of superdelegate endorsements Sanders has gained in the past week.

On Thursday afternoon Maureen Monahan, vice chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, announced that she would back Sanders and encouraged other unpledged superdelegates to support him.

"In the primaries and caucuses held so far, Senator Sanders has won about 45% of the pledged delegates, yet has pledges from only about 6% of the “super delegates.” No wonder Sanders voters are so frustrated with the party," Monahan said in a statement. "Party leaders need to acknowledge and embrace Senator Sanders and his supporters."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/06/bernie-sanders-superdelegates-223824
Last edited by Sixstrings on Sun 05 Jun 2016, 17:34:47, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 17:30:33

Sixstrings wrote:I was watching a clinton surrogate on msnbc.. when asked if he believes in universal healthcare, he said "well, I believe in *more affordable* healthcare."


Its funny to watch Clinton and the Ds turn their backs on universal healthcare. As I predicted, Obamacare is killing off any chance of getting universal healthcare in the USA. The Rs sure as heck aren't going to vote for it, and even the Ds don't support universal healthcare anymore (except for Bernie and his voters, of course, but they've marginalized by the establishment of the undemocratic party).

Cheers!
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26634
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby AgentR11 » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 17:45:07

Sixstrings wrote:I just heard another Clinton surrogate on msnbc, he said "under no circumstances will she agree that people with no money should get free college." (yikes, these people sound more far right than Ted Cruz, that's pretty blunt. :lol: )

Anyhow, Clinton world ain't too liberal, that's for sure. 8O


Hillary's a neocon; plain and simple, nothing more, and not one tiny spec less.

neocon's come in both R and D; but they are both neo-liberal economic, globalist, interventionist empire builders. They differ on what the top income tax rate should be, and whether healthcare should be fully private or fully public responsibility. One favors large corporations from the labor side, one favors large corporations from the investor side.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6376
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 18:23:09

Sixstrings wrote:Some Bernie news..

........
I just heard another Clinton surrogate on msnbc, he said "under no circumstances will she agree that people with no money should get free college." (yikes, these people sound more far right than Ted Cruz, that's pretty blunt. :lol: )
.............

Well of course they don't want to change the college system. They have it just the way they want it. The over paid college presidents ,deans and tenured professors (Elizabeth Warren being a prime example) shove off the bulk of the teaching to grad students and adjunct professors while collecting all the scholarship money people have donated plus all the states and federal government will send in plus all the students parents can afford Plus made most of the graduates indentured servants for decades after graduation . Who would want to mess with a cash cow like that?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Lore » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 18:57:43

Does anybody know what Trump's plan is for education in comparison to
Bernie's?
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 20:46:20

Lore wrote:Does anybody know what Trump's plan is for education in comparison to
Bernie's?


Is there some plan mandated by the Constitution that I am unaware of? If you want to go to college, there are several ways of going about it that do not tap my wallet to pay for your spawn.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 21:39:34

pstarr wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:Who would want to mess with a cash cow like that?

How much does Warren make in a year? Sounds mighty corrupt to me?

Currently 831K a year. 174K as a senator. 350K as a Harvard professor. for teaching one class.90K as a consultant and the rest from royalties from books she has written. She is also getting full Senate healthcare and retirement accumulation.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 22:17:18

Cog wrote:
Lore wrote:Does anybody know what Trump's plan is for education in comparison to
Bernie's?


Is there some plan mandated by the Constitution that I am unaware of? If you want to go to college, there are several ways of going about it that do not tap my wallet to pay for your spawn.


True, it's not in the Constitution, but neither is it in the Constitution that voters must vote Republican.

To actually win the WH -- it would help if Republicans had some kind of real plan that x number of left of center voters would like, and then maybe they'd vote Republican.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 22:20:19

Lore wrote:Does anybody know what Trump's plan is for education in comparison to
Bernie's?


In 2000, he mentioned getting rid of that thing with student loans where the government actually makes profit on it. So in other words, there should be LOW interest rate loans.

In this campaign, he's said before "I'll be coming out with something on college affordability" -- but he hasn't said anything about it since then and that was months ago.

Trump's website is sparse on issues. Just a few -- immigration, border control, veterans.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 22:37:20

Okay, I know I posted those quotes from "clinton surrogates" I saw talking on msnbc.

To be clear -- I don't know if they are OFFICIAL campaign surrogates, but it's the usual panel that's always on there that is pro Clinton. The one that said "she ain't ever gonna agree people with no money should get free college," was former PA governor Ed Rendel. (he actually is an official clinton surrogate)

OK, SO HMM.. that sounds like more hardcore Republican than any Republican ever does..

But then I just looked at Clinton's website, and if one reads that (and if it's believable) then it SOUNDS like she's for free college too. She says "debt free," so what does that mean exactly. And who exactly gets to participate, JUST the poor and it would still be like it is now where so many millions are frankly lower middle class, yet "not poor enough for a pell grant."

With Clinton sometimes, she can make something sound like one thing but then it's really a whole other thing, she's really tricky that way with lawerly language.

BUT ANYWAY.. on her website anyway, it sounds good, so I don't understand why her surrogates don't talk about that? And I've never heard her actually talking about this policy on her website either.

While her surrogates say on tv "we ain't doin' nothin' for nobody," for whatever it's worth, here's what her website says:

The New College Compact:
Costs won’t be a barrier, debt won’t hold you back.


Hillary will:
Ensure no student has to borrow to pay for tuition, books, or fees to attend a four-year public college in their state.

Enable Americans with existing student loan debt to refinance at current rates.

Hold colleges and universities accountable for controlling costs and making tuition affordable.

“We need to make a quality education affordable and available to everyone willing to work for it, without saddling them with decades of debt.”

Here’s what every student and family should expect under Hillary’s plan:

Costs won't be a barrier.

Students should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, books, and fees to attend a four-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. Pell Grants are not included in the calculation of no-debt-tuition, so Pell recipients will be able to use their grants fully for living expenses. Students at community college will receive free tuition.

Students will do their part by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week.

Families will do their part by making an affordable and realistic family contribution.

The federal government will make a major investment in the New College Compact by providing grants to states that commit to these goals, and by cutting interest rates on loans.

States will have to step up and meet their obligation to invest in higher education by maintaining current levels of higher education funding and reinvesting over time.

Colleges and universities will be accountable for improving outcomes and controlling costs to ensure that tuition is affordable and that students who invest in college leave with a degree.

We will encourage innovators who design imaginative new ways of providing a valuable college education to students—while cracking down on abusive practices that burden students with debt without value.

A $25 billion fund will support HBCUs, HSIs, and other MSIs serving a high percentage of Pell Grant recipients to help lower the cost of attendance and improve student outcomes at low-cost, modest-endowment nonprofit private schools.

Debt won’t hold you back.
Under Hillary’s plan, if you have student debt, you will be able to refinance your loans at current rates. An estimated 25 million borrowers will receive debt relief, and the typical borrower could save $2,000 over the life of his or her loans.

For future undergraduates, the plan will significantly cut interest rates so they reflect the government’s low cost of debt. This could save students hundreds or thousands of dollars over the life of their loans.

Everyone will be able to enroll in a simplified, income-based repayment program so that borrowers never have to pay more than 10 percent of what they make.

Fully paid for: This plan will cost around $350 billion over 10 years—and will be fully paid for by limiting certain tax expenditures for high-income taxpayers.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/


The thing about all the above, is that it's general statements written by lawyers so the "devil is in the details."

This sounds specific:

Students at community college will receive free tuition.


Well if that's what she's for, that's some good progress. But why does she never TALK about this? She never, ever, talks about the policies on her website (that I've ever heard).

Why? It makes me think that she doesn't really want to commit to them.. like, "just have it up on the website but then don't talk about it in speeches."

If she's for free community college for all then that sounds good, why not talk about it?

Then another thing the policy statement says is very general -- that college should not be free, but that families should make an "affordable and realistic family contribution."

Okay, so what does that mean?

There's no exact detail.. what is "affordable and realistic," what does that mean?

Does it mean $20,000? $40,000? Does it mean roll it back to the 90s, and students could work a part time job and pay their way through?

edit: it's like.. it's NICE if a candidate has a detailed website. And Trump does not.

BUT, one does not vote just based on some website text, either.

It's odd to me -- if there is a plan, then I as a voter want to HEAR it, and hear it a lot, not just "it's on the website."
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bernie Sanders for President Pt. 2

Unread postby Sixstrings » Mon 06 Jun 2016, 00:39:17

I found a youtube of Clinton during the Kentucky primary.

It's a short clip, mentioning education:

Clinton Touts Her Education Plan in Louisville
https://youtu.be/xsokYKvwsHw


Clinton says "we're going to do everything we can to make sure students have the education they need."

That's a very general kind of statement, there's nothing specific about "we're going to make sure kids get the education they need."

And then she says, "here's what I'd like to do, I think community college should be free." And then she says four year college should be "debt free."

But she doesn't go into any detail or specifics, and her tone of voice and style isn't firm and resolute nor impassioned. (compare that to when she talks about neocon stuff, and it's like a whole different tone of voice and presentation -- she BELIEVES in that, she's firm, and resolute)

Does Clinton just hit my ears wrong?

It's just something off about her tone of voice all the time, when she talks about lefty things. It sounds like Trump when he talks about conservative things, like empty things to say to the base.

Being a Democrat, in his case I'm GLAD he's not really a Ted Cruz true believer conservative.

In Clinton's case -- I'm NOT glad, she's not a true believer progressive.

Compare Clinton to Sanders -- Clinton mentions free community college with a tone of voice that's like "well maybe this is something we maybe might think about."

Whereas Sanders waves his finger to point for emphasis, like he's serious business about it, and thunders that college should be free and a universal right, and he yells it in literally every speech for the last year.

Clinton -- she sort of mentions it some times, but usually doesn't talk about it, and her surrogates and campaign never talk about it on tv, and yeah, it's "there's on the website" kind of thing.

Here's Bernie Sanders talking recently about education and some other issues:

Bernie Sanders on education funding
https://youtu.be/suaiUH-SF94


Long story short, Clinton just does not seem honest to me, in voice tone and communication and body language. And, there's not a concise set of core things that her campaign is about -- that would be her mandate, if elected.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests