• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Bernie Would Have Won

Trump is an idiot, but Bernie is a moron. Anyone who says we should only have one brand of deodorant and one type of sneaker has absolutely no idea about economics, etc. He is a 5 year plan/stainist from way back. The state will decide what you need....
 
When did Bernie say no one should make a million dollars or there should only be one deodorant?
 
ImTheCaptain said:
because centrists in the UK realized Brexit was dumb and changed their minds
Click to expand...

This was undoubtedly part of it -- especially the big swings in London -- but there are two main problems with making this the sole reason for Labour's gains:

1) Labour did not run an anti-Brexit campaign. They said they would go along with it.
2) Labour scored ... dare I say ... YUUUUGE upsets in towns with a gigantic youth population. See Canterbury, which Labour had not won in a century and where the conservs had a majority of 10,000 (out of a approx. 60,000 population) just two years ago. Corbyn attracted the Bernie bros of the UK to his cause, and they flipped that shit
 
I actually mis quoted him, but his intent is clear.



Channeling his inner Hugo Chavez in an interview with CNBC, Sanders bemoaned the choice of deodorant and sneakers in this country, because children are starving. Via CNBC:

You can't just continue growth for the sake of growth in a world in which we are struggling with climate change and all kinds of environmental problems. All right? You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country. I don't think the media appreciates the kind of stress that ordinary Americans are working on.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
The narrative of the scorned Bernie Bro who voted for Trump, leading to a Trump victory, is just wrong. Trump won because millions of people who voted for Obama stayed home on election day.
Click to expand...

wsc8521s said:
This was undoubtedly part of it -- especially the big swings in London -- but there are two main problems with making this the sole reason for Labour's gains:

1) Labour did not run an anti-Brexit campaign. They said they would go along with it.
2) Labour scored ... dare I say ... YUUUUGE upsets in towns with a gigantic youth population. See Canterbury, which Labour had not won in a century and where the conservs had a majority of 10,000 (out of a approx. 60,000 population) just two years ago. Corbyn attracted the Bernie bros of the UK to his cause, and they flipped that shit
Click to expand...

Establishment Democrat centrists have created this boogeyman/strawman of the young white privileged male liberal who could have voted for Hillary but instead stayed home or voted for Trump or Jill Stein. For all intents and purposes that boogeyman voter doesn't exist. College educated liberals voted for Hillary in nearly the same numbers as Obama. Hillary lost working class voters, poor voters, and young black male voters. They didn't believe in her and they werent scared of Trump.
 
Last edited:
This bullshit that Bernie Bros lost Hillary the election is just that, bullshit.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fiveth...ot-income-predicted-who-would-vote-for-trump/

"Hillary Clinton improved on President Obama’s 2012 performance in 48 of the country’s 50 most-well-educated counties."

"Now here’s the opposite list: The 50 counties (minimum population of 50,000) where the smallest share of the population has bachelor’s degrees:
These results are every bit as striking: Clinton lost ground relative to Obama in 47 of the 50 counties — she did an average of 11 percentage points worse, in fact. These are really the places that won Donald Trump the presidency, especially given that a fair number of them are in swing states such as Ohio and North Carolina."
 
Regardless of who exactly didn't vote (and TBF I hate the Bernie Bro term as much as anyone), you need a campaign and politician that actually get people excited. Like Corbyn did with the UK's youth, and Bernie prolly would've done with the youth and midwesterners/working class who turned on Hills. Neoliberalism ain't doing that anymore.

Also, the UK election is further proof that you can't win campaigns off of relying on primarily stressing your opponent's negatives. That just doesn't work
 
Corbyn very neatly wove a slow brexit vs a hard brexit narrative into the issue of austerity measures. He got the olds and the youths out to vote.
 
bobknightfan said:
http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sand...le-slamming-rich-people-campaign-trail-621131

Bernie came out OK in the deal. He is one of those one-percenters that he constantly railed against on the campaign trail.

Nothing surprising here. Liberalism is rife with hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

This is the stupidest article and stupidest take I've read. He made money off a book as he got really super crazy popular. His book is probably something he thinks does good for the country, he's not a hypocrite. He may have even given a good amount to charity.

I heart BKF, but this take is dumb.

And Bernie woulda won in a landslide. The DNC and superdelegates fucked up, royally.
 
Last edited:
DG3 said:
Jesus Townie, too many PBRs at the Philly Antifa chapter meeting?
Click to expand...

Box wine in a tent in central VA

Got a little hype about the Brit elections

Some of my sentences were utter nonsense

Still, #berniewouldawon
 
palmab03 said:
This is the stupidest article and stupidest take I've read. He made money off a book as he got really super crazy popular. His book is probably something he thinks does good for the country, he's not a hypocrite. He may have even given a good amount to charity.

I heart BKF, but this take is dumb.

And Bernie woulda won in a landslide. The DNC and superdelegates fucked up, royally.
Click to expand...

Ironically, by actually rigging an election.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Ironically, by actually rigging an election.
Click to expand...
Yeah the election was rigged by forcing minorities in the South to vote for Clinton at such overwhelming majorities that it was almost impossible for Sanders to win at that point
 
I voted for Bernie. I wanted him to win. He was nowhere close to beating Hillary. #facts
 
ChrisL68 said:
Yeah the election was rigged by forcing minorities in the South to vote for Clinton at such overwhelming majorities that it was almost impossible for Sanders to win at that point
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
I voted for Bernie. I wanted him to win. He was nowhere close to beating Hillary. #facts
Click to expand...

How do you guys respond to the notion that a front desk commentator in CNN was handing her debate questions under the table? Put aside the DNC stuff (remind me what Trump has been proven to do that comes even close to that evidence....but ignore it for now).



Is the argument, "Who cares? She was going to win anyway."?

Please tell me you see how average voters would be skeptical of this type of conduct. After all, that actually is collusion.
 
Last edited:
I think it was a mistake and a dumb thing to do. CNN fired her and she deserved to get fired.

Did it have any impact? No.

The DNC emails? Office chatter after the election was over.
 
ChrisL68 said:
I think it was a mistake and a dumb thing to do. CNN fired her and she deserved to get fired.

Did it have any impact? No.

The DNC emails? Office chatter after the election was over.
Click to expand...

That's fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top