What if Trump runs as an independent, Bloomberg runs as an independent, Bernie gets the Democratic nod, and Cruz the Republican? Can Cruz handle New York values three fold?
Upside of that would be a significant number of voters bailing on the GOP. Down side is that it could keep them existing as a party for another election.
Upside of that would be a significant number of voters bailing on the GOP. Down side is that it could keep them existing as a party for another election.
If the Democrats could survive the Civil War then the GOP can survive a little schism like this.
In today's episode of Churba gets mildly annoyed at dumb Burnie memes:
Picture of Obama and hillary, with "We didn't vote for him because he was black, we voted for him because he wasn't Hillary."
For the few of you who didn't give a shit about politics in 2008 - Hillary took the majority of the public vote by a percentage point or two. Obama won on Superdelegates, and was chosen by "The Establishment" - exactly what they were freaking out that Hillary was going to do to Burnie last week.
"It’s not compromising, selling out, or picking the lesser of two evils to choose a candidate that can appeal to the broad middle of America—it’s democracy."
"But the reason these polls are meaningless is that most people still have no clear idea of who Bernie Sanders is or what he stands for."
The same could be said of Reagan in '84, when he carried 49 states. Nobody would vote for someone selling missiles to Iran to fund Latin American terrorists, but everyone did. Winning elections isn't about platform, it's about image, and Bernie's image is doing pretty well.
On a completely unrelated note, I did early voting for the primary cause I'll be out of town and I got a lollipop for casting my vote.
I'm seeing RIP Onion comments because this article is being taken as the Onion offically backing Clinton.. I'm officially tired of my Bernie Sanders supporter friends... :-p
Which is a shame because Onion comments sections are generally the best place for political discourse on the internet. They still are when discussing literally anything besides the Democratic race.
The funny part is that their mostviciousattacks on Clinton were immediately after the purchase. They've already proven their editorial staff is unaffected by the corporate politics.
I'm seeing RIP Onion comments because this article is being taken as the Onion offically backing Clinton.. I'm officially tired of my Bernie Sanders supporter friends... :-p
I'm guessing you're seeing the same type of comments I've been seeing, then.
It might sound a bit odd after this thread, but yeah, I'm biting my tongue a lot, unless it's something really simple that I can point to. And will at least be entertaining for me to point out, like the one above, where the guy they're claiming they voted for as being better than Hillary, actually did to Hillary what they think Hillary will do to Bernie. I like a story with a good twist.
But that aside, I've already had my fill. And it's not so much my friends, as their other friends, some of whom have reacted previously in ways that make some of the more vicious disagreements in this thread look calm, well reasoned, and practically scholarly.
Gah! It’s just so annoying to be inundated with Bernie fanaticism on my social media feeds. As someone who even donated to the guy’s campaign early on, I’m seriously getting sick of the unbridled hero worship and almost religious levels of fervor.
Gah! It’s just so annoying to be inundated with Bernie fanaticism on my social media feeds. As someone who even donated to the guy’s campaign early on, I’m seriously getting sick of the unbridled hero worship and almost religious levels of fervor.
It's true - there's maybe five people in my feeds who regularly post positive stuff about Burnie, and are either actually reasonable, or just not fanatical about it - the the TVHs are at least three of them. Four if you count Roxy, but honestly I think she's just going to vote for the candidate with the best platform on naps.
Roxxy is pretty mad the ACA doesn't cover pugs. At 15, she needs a lot of medicine and is uninsured. However, she usually goes back to sleep before she can finish her post on the subject.
I'm seeing RIP Onion comments because this article is being taken as the Onion offically backing Clinton.. I'm officially tired of my Bernie Sanders supporter friends... :-p
I'm going to be bold, not knowing other friends of yours, and say you're tired of them. I'm a Sanders supporter, saw that headline, and laughed. At no time did I take it as an endorsement because I know the business The Onion is about. I'd further put forth that anyone who takes that as an endorsement from The Onion, regardless of political outlook, needs their head examined.
Apparently the Onion was bought last week by a Clinton Donor. So that's the conspiracy theory....
What conspiracy theory? Their new parent company, Univision, made a press release about the Onion's purchase. Also, Univision is Clinton's top donor. It falls in line pretty well to me.
Apparently the Onion was bought last week by a Clinton Donor. So that's the conspiracy theory....
What conspiracy theory? Their new parent company, Univision, made a press release about the Onion's purchase. Also, Univision is Clinton's top donor. It falls in line pretty well to me.
The funny part is that their mostviciousattacks on Clinton were immediately after the purchase. They've already proven their editorial staff is unaffected by the corporate politics.
What conspiracy theory? Their new parent company, Univision, made a press release about the Onion's purchase. Also, Univision is Clinton's top donor. It falls in line pretty well to me.
Well, there's some big problems there. Let's walk through the two biggest.
First, and simplest - That's not evidence of any wrongdoing. They donated to her campaign, but if you want to claim something beyond that, the fact that they donated to her campaign is not sufficient.
Second - That's false. Univision is not Hillary's biggest donor, Haim and Cheryl Saban together are the biggest donors. "So what," you might say, "Saban Owns univision, so same difference?" - well, there's quite a bit of difference. Leaving aside the fact that that's two people, not one person, and one of those people has nothing to do with Saban Capital Group, Saban doesn't own Univision. He's the CEO and Board chairman for Saban capital group, who control a sixth of Univision via Broadcasting Media Partners, who in turn own a 40% stake in The Onion, who in turn operate as an editorially and operationally separate entity.
It only makes sense IF you assume that there's actual wrongdoing(which there's no evidence of), and IF you assume that Haim and Cheryl Saban actually own Univision(which they don't), and assume that The Onion operates under strict editorial control of Univision(which they don't), AND you assume that NOBODY at the onion would be quitting, leaking, or otherwise telling people about a directive coming from on high to not make fun of Hillary(which is pretty absurd even if you assume all those other things are true, which they're not).
And also, as Greg said - It hasn't actually borne out in their coverage. Most of the conspiracy theory isn't from people who give a shit about the editorial integrity of The Onion, it's people who are spinning a theory because they see it as attacking Bernie, so they're attacking back.
Comments
Which, let's be honest, was his plan from the start.
I hope he does. I want that split badly.
Picture of Obama and hillary, with "We didn't vote for him because he was black, we voted for him because he wasn't Hillary."
For the few of you who didn't give a shit about politics in 2008 - Hillary took the majority of the public vote by a percentage point or two. Obama won on Superdelegates, and was chosen by "The Establishment" - exactly what they were freaking out that Hillary was going to do to Burnie last week.
Please visit www.jebbush.com for details.
Actually, that's exactly what it is.
The same could be said of Reagan in '84, when he carried 49 states. Nobody would vote for someone selling missiles to Iran to fund Latin American terrorists, but everyone did. Winning elections isn't about platform, it's about image, and Bernie's image is doing pretty well.
On a completely unrelated note, I did early voting for the primary cause I'll be out of town and I got a lollipop for casting my vote.
There's no way a 79 year old man with health problems just up and died in bed.
I'm seeing RIP Onion comments because this article is being taken as the Onion offically backing Clinton.. I'm officially tired of my Bernie Sanders supporter friends... :-p
And apparently they don't understand the irony that the article is going for...
It might sound a bit odd after this thread, but yeah, I'm biting my tongue a lot, unless it's something really simple that I can point to. And will at least be entertaining for me to point out, like the one above, where the guy they're claiming they voted for as being better than Hillary, actually did to Hillary what they think Hillary will do to Bernie. I like a story with a good twist.
But that aside, I've already had my fill. And it's not so much my friends, as their other friends, some of whom have reacted previously in ways that make some of the more vicious disagreements in this thread look calm, well reasoned, and practically scholarly.
First, and simplest - That's not evidence of any wrongdoing. They donated to her campaign, but if you want to claim something beyond that, the fact that they donated to her campaign is not sufficient.
Second - That's false. Univision is not Hillary's biggest donor, Haim and Cheryl Saban together are the biggest donors. "So what," you might say, "Saban Owns univision, so same difference?" - well, there's quite a bit of difference. Leaving aside the fact that that's two people, not one person, and one of those people has nothing to do with Saban Capital Group, Saban doesn't own Univision. He's the CEO and Board chairman for Saban capital group, who control a sixth of Univision via Broadcasting Media Partners, who in turn own a 40% stake in The Onion, who in turn operate as an editorially and operationally separate entity.
It only makes sense IF you assume that there's actual wrongdoing(which there's no evidence of), and IF you assume that Haim and Cheryl Saban actually own Univision(which they don't), and assume that The Onion operates under strict editorial control of Univision(which they don't), AND you assume that NOBODY at the onion would be quitting, leaking, or otherwise telling people about a directive coming from on high to not make fun of Hillary(which is pretty absurd even if you assume all those other things are true, which they're not).
And also, as Greg said - It hasn't actually borne out in their coverage. Most of the conspiracy theory isn't from people who give a shit about the editorial integrity of The Onion, it's people who are spinning a theory because they see it as attacking Bernie, so they're attacking back.