deleted by creator
Imagine if Gore won.
*if Gore’s win wasn’t stolen by the supreme court
deleted by creator
Democrats did exactly the same to Bernie in 2016. Leaked emails confirm that the DNC actively conspired against Sanders.
And then Hillary was such a bad candidate that Trump won. Thank the DNC for that one.
Similar deal here in the UK with Corbyn, except he was already leader of the party. Destroyed by his own kind. Most politicians accept that the only way into office is to gain control of an existing party. I’m glad for Americans that Bernie Sanders still seems to have some mainstream credibility. Jeremy Corbyn was attacked so hard from all vested interests on all fronts that he has almost become a tragic meme, despite how exceptional he was/is as a figurehead.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah, it’s a big reason why I think civil disobedience is making a comeback.
People are realizing the government doesn’t exist for them; it exists for the ruling class. That’s not how it should work and we don’t have to play by the rules they make for us.
Full of invasive species, Florida man, woman, fucking craziness all around with zero hope. I’m glad i wasn’t born there.
Too bad the primary really was rigged
I keep seeing people say this. where can I find more information on the subject?
In November 2017, Brazile said in her book and related interviews that the Clinton campaign and the DNC had colluded ‘unethically’ by giving the Clinton campaign control over the DNC’s personnel and press releases before the primary in return for funding to eliminate the DNC’s remaining debt from 2012 campaign,
We need a national movement to take the primaries out of the hands of the parties and run them like regular elections. Even better would be rank choice voting so we are no longer stuck with the two choices the wealthy give us.
Maybe a national movement for a viable third party.
Tried and failed, over and over and over and over again, but sure, I’m sure it will end differently this time.
If we could get enough voter cooperation to replace one of the major parties, any strategy would work. If we can’t then going third party is the worst possibile strategy.
Things do change if people try.
deleted by creator
One can dream
World would be so much better off
deleted by creator
Or 2020
Bernie is a Zionist.
He’s a jew who also worked in Israel for a few years when he was younger. He’s also one of the most critical voices of Israel in America. He’s not a Zionist. Being accepting of Israel as a concept (while it’s not ideal how it exists at all) doesn’t make you a Zionist. A Zionist must want to take over the territory and make it a place for Jews exclusively.
He is a Zionist and engages in partisan discourse within zionism. He is only critical of who is empowering the Zionist state. He still supports the project, and you agree he does. Being accepting of it absolutely makes him a Zionist. Isreal does not have the right to exist.
No country has a “right” to exist. They just do. Yes, Israel was created under bad pretenses, but that’s true for basically every nation. It doesn’t prevent them from being better than they started, though Israel is only doing worse for the most part.
Too bad he was vocally pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian liberation up until now. Ready to blindly believe the lies about the 40 babies, and somehow that Israel is allowed continued support every year with our money. Dude has lost all my support ever since bowing to Dems both times and not fighting. He allowed Dems to get what they wanted and all of us are assholes for not fucking around about withholding votes. Bernie got people excited about real change, and then allowed the very establishment we need removed to bring it to a hard stop (like always). Fuck him and his masters that enabled Israel’s decades and decades of planned genocide started with the colonization of Palestine by Zionists! He is just doing what all the Dems do, good quotes/speeches and nothing changed.
What more do you want him to do? Politics moves on the margins, and Sanders is now and for as long as I can remember been one of the most Israel critical politicians both in terms of rhetoric and voting history. He is not a king; he is 1% of 1 chamber of the legislative branch of a country that has a lot of issues to deal with.
deleted by creator
He must be an anti-semite
If you rearrange the letters in “sanders” it actually becomes hamas.
-
Sanders
-
Sanhers
-
Sanhars
-
Samhars
-
amhas
-
hamas
-
Hamas
-
Start with the original name
-
Remove the bottom of the letter “d”, now it looks like a mirrored “h”, so let’s mirror it back tp a normal “h”
-
The letter “e” is just an upside down “a” with rounded corners and a tail, so rotate it into an “a”
-
The letter “n” looks and sound almost like the letter “m”, it is almost too easy, but let’s just swap it.
-
Remove the extra letters.
-
Rearange the letters to spell “hamas”
-
Capitalize the name properly.
Done!
/s
No need for /s - this is no less illogical than most of their other arguments.
Bulletproof.
-
If only the DNC could get their shit together, if he was the nomination last election, or the one before, or the one before, the world would be in such a better place.
We could have had Al Gore instead of Bush if the Supreme Court didn’t toss Bush the crown because… reasons
Because SCOTUS decided that it was perfectly fair and valid to have the final vote on who got to he president come down to one of the peoples’ brother and there was absolutely nothing wrong about that
If only we had AI Gore in the early 00s.
We should have! Republicans illegally stole that from us as well
Because reasons that cannot be used in future jurisprudence due to the extraordinary nature of the, ahem, decision
Also, many progressives stayed home or voted for the Green Party. Not that it is more the fault of progressives than SCOTUS, but blame aside, it’s a cautionary tale.
How DARE they vote for the candidate they wanted! They should be maligned!
I wonder how the Nader voters feel.
I’m missing the part where people are responsible for voting for a bad candidate in the DNC primaries.
I’m not sure what you mean.
You’re shaming progressives for staying home, but you aren’t casting judgement at the people who voted for a loser candidate in the primaries.
Yes, progressives who stay at home for the general election do not understand US democracy. The US has a 2 party FPTP system, not proportional representation. Unlike multi-party parliamentary systems, we usually have to vote for a compromise, not our top choice. If you don’t vote, you don’t “send a message”, you simply forfeit your political power. If Republicans win, and keep winning, then that’s a signal for Democrats to shift right, to try to win back the median voter.
I hate the argumentative strategy of criticizing candidates for being political “losers”. Rightwingers do that all the time. By that logic, progressives also had “loser candidates”, since many fail in the primaries. I personally don’t think Sanders, for example, was a “loser”, even if he lost in the primary.
We might as well skip all the pomp and circumstance and just assign the votes automatically based on party registration. That’s how it’s done currently with the added facade of having a “choice.”
The Overton window continues to shift to the right regardless of who wins elections because there are power people benefiting from it and it’s incredibly easy to spread propaganda to the masses with tv/radio/internet.
Yes, progressives who stay at home for the general election do not understand US democracy.
Or we do? “We lose regardless. Let’s stay home.”
I’m getting really sick of this inversion of responsibility. Moderates dominate the primaries and elect someone who doesn’t resonate with the leftists and progressives but aren’t responsible for how that candidate does in the general? They control the outcome in the primaries but aren’t responsible for what happens in the general? That makes no sense.
As the majority moderates must take the lions share of the responsibility. Where is that happening?
That argument goes both ways. “Nader would have won if progressives hadn’t handed the election to the Republicans by throwing their votes away on Gore.” Same is true for 2016 with Bernie and Clinton.
It really doesn’t go both ways. The winning presidential candidate needs to get the most votes, and most US voters are not progressive. They’re moderate, or indifferent.
I don’t know how you could say that about HRC and Sanders. That’s not even a hypothetical: they literally had a head to head match where, to my huge disappointment, HRC won. Protesting HRC helped elect Trump, and obviously that hasn’t been good for progressive interests or democracy.
Your argument makes no sense.
You acknowledge progressives won’t vote for moderates. But what makes you think moderates won’t vote for progressives if they don’t have a choice?
Do you really believe the people who voted for Clinton wouldn’t have voted for Sanders in the general? If so, then shouldn’t the blame be on them too? If not, then can you admit you’re wrong?
I’ve read your comment a few times but I’m having a genuinely hard time parsing your point.
The person I’m responding to was saying that Nader could have won if progressives voted for him instead of Gore. I pointed out that presidential candidates need a broad coalition of voters to get enough votes, not just far left progressives.
You seem to be making a totally different argument. You claim that if Nader was the only choice, then Democratic leaning moderates would have voted for him.
I don’t mean to be rude, but what is the point of this thought experiment? Nader wasn’t the only choice. Moreover, US politics in 2000 was significantly less polarized: MANY Gore voters would have definitely voted for Bush, who campaigned under “compassionate conservatism” and was seen as a moderate, over the farthest left candidate, Nader.
If Sanders had won the nomination, I think he would have kicked ass against Trump, but Sanders sadly lost. I’m trying to understand your last line: are you asking if I would blame HRC supporters for refusing to vote for Sanders in the general and allowing a fascist corrupt dictator in? Uh, yes. Obviously I would blame them. That precisely aligns with everything I’ve said.
Nah, they reiterated my point pretty well. You can’t claim that “candidate ‘A’ is the correct choice because of their broad appeal” when they wind up losing the election. Obviously, they didn’t have the most appeal. The attitude that “I picked the right person and it’s everyone else’s fault they didn’t win” is absurd. Anybody can make that argument about any candidate and be just as equally ‘correct.’
im confused on this, didnt they do like three recounts??
Recounts only matter if you’re counting all the ballots instead of just the ballots you want you count because your brother happens to be one of the candidates. They invalidated a bunch of ballots that were hole-punched because the paper that was punched out didn’t completely tear away (see: “hanging chad”).
i dont understand? did bush have a governor brother in florida?
Yes Jeb Bush is his brother and was governor at the time.
He alone wouldn’t have been able to do much. As instead of just having conservatives/Republicans against him, the Democratic party’s members in Congress and in other fed and state level spots would also be against him. Until we get third parties in there to break up the eternal gridlock of never moving forward for real people. We just keep being pulled to the right and the centrists only care about not making the rich happy. Burn them and all of it to the ground.
This Jewish man must be an antisemite! It’s the only explanation…
There is a hamas tunnel under him /s
I love hummus with olive oil flowing in the tunnels!
deleted by creator
I can’t believe how much Larry David hates jews.
He clearly hates Jews. /s
To be fair hating the Israeli goverment is a very jewish thing statisticaly
Probably a majority of Israelis hate the Israeli government.
The caveat is that they don’t all want a better alternative, and some want a worse alternative, because they’re in a blind trauma spiral.
Most jews do, near as i can tell
2edgy4me
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Who replaces Netanyahu? The crimes of Israel are not all rooted in one man.
The crimes of Donald Trump were not rooted in one man either but getting rid of one major malignant tumor does help things along.
True but the difference here is the parliament keeps putting him back in power
His replacement is (like the one he replaced) one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history, and is actively aiding the genocidal Netanyahu government.
Can we all agree there was no good option in the Biden/Trump election?
His replacement is (like the one he replaced) one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history
Biden: Unpopular
Trump: ???
Obama: UnpopularAnd you get your facts from FOX News, right?
The one he(Biden) replaced, who was also record-breakingly unpopular, was Trump. Not sure how you managed to shoehorn Obama into this.
My apologies. I misinterpret the “he” as Trump.
did it though, nothing has really changed sense his presidency has ended and arguably it has all gotten worse, all be it at a SLIGHTLY less breakneck pace. Not only that but his popularity never weigned and he is poiesed to come back, and I will be honest as much as I do not want trump to come back I would be a fool to say I did not expect him to win the election in 2024.
So no, temporarily removing him did basicly nothing, except allow feckless liberals to go to brunch and ignore everything that is going on in the world
It would take quite an argument for me to believe things are worse now than November of 2020.
Roe vs. Wade was still in effect in 2020. Of course, it being struck down was a consequence of things that happened before 2020 (mostly during Trump’s term, but Obama bending over for McConnell didn’t help matters) so that doesn’t really count.
Abortion is now illegal in many States, we have a potential civil war, with several states in a stand off with the federal government over weather or not death traps can be put in the rio grand, instead of actually doing didily squat about it our lovely president has sat their with his thumb up his ass and just let it happen, the wall is still going up, we are having more deportations than we ever did under trump, and also more kids in cages, really the only difrence on the imigration front the only difrence is its more effective, quieter, and they use nicer words,
Oh and the special council investigating the president all but said he would not indite soly because of dementia.
Oh and the genocide in Isreal got worse
November 2020 was pre Covid vaccine. The election denial that started that month led to an actual insurrection, not just the cowboy fantasy of Texas pushing back on a court ruling.
US GDP is 15%+ higher today, the S&P500 is up like 40%, unemployment is 3.7% instead of 6.7%, we have an infrastructure investment plan actively fixing bridges and building tunnels, we are in progress to reduce carbon emissions to 40% below 2005 levels due to the IRA. There was a bipartisan gun control law passed. Things just are better.
unemployment is 3.7% instead of 6.7%
this is literally just from him ending covid restrictions. getting us to the same exact point Trump had us at before the pandemic by just pretending its over is not exactly a great endorsement of his presidency.
The covid restrictions are gone, that’s better. In spite of all predictions there has been no recession over 4 years and unemployment has stayed low the entire presidency. That’s better. I literally don’t know what more you could want in the metrics of unemployment and covid restrictions.
Removed by mod
Make your argument that the economy is worse now than in November 2020, I’ll wait.
Cancer is prone to relapse.
Im saying he isnt the cancer, heck he isn’t all that different from biden except he says the stuff he is not suposed to say, The cancer is capitalism, the fact we let society get this bad,
Do you have a better socioeconomic ideology to propose?
Anarchy can’t work on a large scale.
Communism was tried and tested, and it resulted in a dictatorship (North Korea), a “democratic” country ruled by a man whose opposition mysteriously keeps falling out of windows (Russia), or a capitalist society with eroded human rights that still calls itself communist (China).
The best option, in my opinion, is to keep what works but tax the fuck out of the rich and corporations and use their money to provide services to the less fortunate. But, thanks to decades of propaganda, half the country refuses to support that idea because socialism = communism = bad.
North Korea is not a dictatorship, all information coming out of it is either one video about a hair cut (very good documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BO83Ig-E8) or sources all trace back to the CIA… Russia is very much a capitalist oligarchy that got erodied from the golory days of the USSR by the CIA, and China is communist and has better human rights than the United states, Have you even read their constitution or foundational documents.
Second I hate to say this but Communism IS socialism, or atleast from all the origional texts, more precicely Socialism is now used as the lower form of communism, before we get rid of states and money. so yes I do have a better socieo economic ideology, its Communism, and we put the rich to the wall,
Also lets look here at Cuba 0 homeless, one of the higest life expectencies, the higest literacy rate, one of the most flurishing democratic participations in the world, and the best protection of minority rights anywhere in the world, all done while under a genocidal blocade of the US. and they still find time to send doctors all around the globe. I would call this a sucsess. and what ever the US is doing a monumental falure.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=2BO83Ig-E8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Pretty sure you are comparing finacial fraud to genocide, maybe don’t do that.
deleted by creator
But not genocide nor enabling genocide.
Probably Benny Gantz.
The key benefit of the replacement being anyone who is not Netanyahu is that Netanyahu knows he is going to lose the next election and probably be arrested for prior crimes, so he personally has reason to keep the conflict going as long as possible.
Yeah, I wonder what Sanders would do if it were up to him. Netanyahu is part of the problem but it’s so much bigger than him, especially after all the years he’s been in power influencing things.
Facts! If Netanyahu is removed, it will just be like the US where the next guy is still evil but just lesser.
Not even lesser, there’s always a chance that a more extreme person/system replaces them.
We are damned.
Good with Judaism but fuck the Israeli state. Don’t let people try to confuse the two.
The Holocaust is real, stop trying to cosplay it in Gaza.
As a non-american it gives me an innocent and sincere joy to see Bernie Sanders being celebrated. Keep that integrity alive you crazy BAMFs.
To me, Bernie proved that there can be no positive change in the US via voting. When Bernie was looking strong, the democrats and the news media did everything they could to stop him and they succeeded. They were willing to do it even though the polling numbers showed that Hillary was the only legitimate primary candidate who couldn’t beat Trump. They wanted Bernie out no matter what because he represented the positive change that would hurt the ruling class just a little.
Glad he’s coming around
Coming around? When was he on the wrong side of this issue?
His October 10 statement includes:
Right now, the international community must focus on reducing humanitarian suffering and protecting innocent people on both sides of this conflict. The targeting of civilians is a war crime, no matter who does it. Israel’s blanket denial of food, water, and other necessities to Gaza is a serious violation of international law and will do nothing but harm innocent civilians. The United States has rightly offered solidarity and support to Israel in responding to Hamas’ attack. But we must also insist on restraint from Israeli forces attacking Gaza and work to secure UN humanitarian access. Let us not forget that half of the two million people in Gaza are children. Children and innocent people do not deserve to be punished for the acts of Hamas.
October 10. 3 days after the initial attack.
Back in January he tried conditioning aid to Israel and requiring the state department to issue human rights report on their conducts.
The Palestinian conflict did not start on Oct 7th it’s been happening for decades now. Specifically my gripes are with “The United States has rightly offered solidarity and support to Israel in responding to Hamas’ attack. But we must also insist on restraint from Israeli forces attacking Gaza and work to secure UN humanitarian access.” I do not agree that any support should have been given period, Israel has been a genocidal Zionist entity for a long time now and Sanders is well aware of this I’m certain. I’m also frustrated by his request for restraint as if anything other than the dismantling of the Israeli state could possibly suffice.
He is also a proponent of the two state solution which is inherently sympathetic to the settler colonial state.
I’m glad he is wants the genocide to stop but conditional fucking Israeli aid is not the way to do that. They should not be aided. Was it wise to aid apartheid South africa through continued trade relations? Was it right to vilify Mandela as a terrorist? Of course not, we can look back on these actions and see how wrong they were because we know what came to be. So why are we doing it again?
Yes obviously apartheid South Africa and the current palestinian genocide are not a flawless comparison but they are similar enough.
Essentially my point is that he has been much too sympathetic towards Israel for a while. Sure he’s probably one of the most radical politicians we have on this issue but I find that to be incredibly disheartening.
Why is the two-state solution inherently sympathetic to the settler colonial state ?
The settlers never should have been there in the first place. It isn’t their land and never was. They arrived touting violence and have not ceased. A two state solution validates their self professed “right to the land” and allows for eventual further expansion of the settler colonial state some time in the future should we not keep constant surveillance and management on the proposed Israeli state.
In addition, a single state solution does not necessarily require the forceful expulsion of every settler. It is not inherently violent or oppressive either. In apartheid South Africa many settlers left of their own volition once their privileged status had dissolved.
deleted by creator
Sanders cannot change the value Israel has to the US but at the very least he could advocate for a ceasefire which he doesn’t think is possible with a “terrorist organization that is dedicated to perpetual war” [source]
If I rolled my eyes any harder they’d rotate completely
He never was. But he didn’t say the exact thing that people wanted him to, which is a mortal sin
Wow 20 downvotes lol , are you saying he did not say this or are you just mad I pointed it out?
Then why does he keep give nickels to political parties supporting it?
Bernie’s retiring from politics then?
