But Seriously...

I guess your question I bolded above would really depend on who is defining what is considered a Democrat these days. Not saying that your question is inherently wrong, but yeah, the current leadership will generally throw their weight behind keeping the status quo because it keeps their interests in the forefront. However, if you ask others that support Sanders and other "Democrats" like him (Elizabeth Warren immediately comes to mind) whether or not they believe they're true Democrats, their opinion might be different because they want the party as a whole to change or evolve.

I do agree with you that his foreign policy experience is his biggest weakness, but compared to Hillary currently and presumptively Trump if in the general election, he still seems to have a better position of not immediately trying to jump into war(s) halfway across the globe, or race-baiting our border countries into making us the laughing-stock of the globe.

 

Absolutely right. That was Carter's downfall...he was much to honest and a decent human being to boot. Sadly, with the way politics are, that is not a good combination for a president. Bernie is probably the most honest, and the best human being, in the race...but that's one of the things that would make him bad for the job.

 

And, sadly, I think that's the reason Hillary could make for a good President. I could totally see her being good at the job, which is crazy because I absolutely hate her as a candidate and a person. She is the exact type of person who, in my opinion, SHOULD NOT be President, and yet I think she'd make a really good one.

How fucked up is our political system when the people you expressly don't want for office are the ones who'd hold down the fort well?

I really want someone who's going to change it up, get rid of the old guard, all the corruption in DC. I know makes me sound like a Trump supporter, even though I wouldn't vote for him if someone held a gun to my head.

 

This is gonna go over well...

NK claims to have miniaturized nukes to fit on missiles. The article shows pictures of them.

I'm sure Putin is getting a hard on and sighting in his tanks as I type.

 

Actually he is a democrat. He joined the party in 2015. There's no initiation and there's no way for current party leaders to keep people out. All it comes down to is whether you choose to identify with the party or not.

Now, it's obvious that he only joined the party recently because he liked his chances of running as a democrat better than running as an independent. There's a clear distinction between between him and the long term party members. That being said nearly all of his stances fit well within the democratic party dogma, albeit further left than the mainstream.

I don't mind other party leaders giving support to the candidate they prefer. There are however, a few things that bother me. The use of superdelegates is in direct conflict with the democratic process. The justifications are extremely weak, and they have no place in our election process that advocates of liberty and democracy should approve of. The fact that they are used by an oligarchy to so directly influence the election is a major problem. While the use of abusing superdelegates historically is debateable, the potential is obvious, and I don't like how they've been used in this election to shape perceptions. I absolutely detest that they could be used to decide the election. As I've said before, I do not think they would, but the fact that that's even possible is a problem.

This feeds into a larger problem that the parties have so much control over how candidates are elected. In my opinion election rules should be fully established by an independent organization that only seeks to create a level playing ground. Gerrymandering, superdelegates, corporate buy offs, the party arbitrarily determining how many delegates each state is worth, control over election scheduling - it's all bullshit.

My second major contention is control of the media. Far too many outlets - hell, nearly all of them now, seem to exist solely to propagate one party's ideology. When I can change from one channel to the other, and hear a completely different story about the same event, and know that neither of the versions are likely to be ethical or accurate, that's really fucked up. The parties do their best to use this control to shape elections. The only kicker here is that neither is fully in control. Just as the media pumped up the Iraq war when they were told to do so, the Republicans were forced to publicly disavow the war when the media turned on them. Regardless, it's a terrible system that leads to awful reporting and demagogic directing rather than factual analysis.

As far as Bernie on foreign policy there's a few reasons I like him:

- He voted against the Iraq war.
- Following that, he, like other elected leaders at least should be, will be better informed than the public and won't just mindlessly follow the polls, or make decisions based on the demands of an angry mob. Public opinion will of course help shape foreign policy, but there's a reason we need to hesitate and make careful decisions.
- His stance on trade agreements is pro-America, not pro corporate.
- He has an established history of not only voting the right way on foreign policy issues, but accurately predicting the outcomes of those policies.
- For America I believe he's going to be a better international representative than Clinton with regards to America's image, and I know for damn sure he'll be better than Trump.
- He wants to move in what I feel is the right direction regarding the middle east and with our military. Clinton's track record here fucking blows.

As for honesty as a presidential attribute I'm not sure the historical verdict is out. You reference Carter, but it could be said he was a weak president for a lot of reasons. Typically honesty isn't a winning virtue in the elections either, but we'll see.

I don't know how someone can be so against honesty though. You want more spying on citizens and more lying about it? Less disclosure with torture, civilian bombing, and 'dirty war' tactics? You'll get it with Clinton and Trump. I think Sanders has the sense to withhold information for a time when national security demands it. This is all just projection and prophesy though. Nobody can rightfully say how he'll tackle this question.

 

If these numbers are anywhere near accurate, the GOP better create the Cruz/Rubio ticket and tell Kasich to hit the bricks right now, or Trump will run away with this whole thing.

(FOX News poll)

"In the race for the Republican nomination, Trump receives 43 percent among Florida likely GOP primary voters. Rubio is a distant second with 20 percent, closely followed by Ted Cruz at 16 percent. John Kasich comes in fourth with 10 percent."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...minates-gop-race-in-florida.html?intcmp=hpbt1

 

Man the slow implosion of the Republican Party is glorious to watch.

 

I'm not sure "slow" is the word I would use to describe it... Maybe "public"? In the age of the 24 hour news cycle and social media everywhere, this is hilarious and awesome. The SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage was the beginning of the end. It started to spiral down from there.

As much as I can't stand Trump, he's the perfect clown to put as a face on this whole mess. A few years from now when the GOP has officially splintered into different parties, the GOP wikipedia page is gonna have a picture of Trump's shit eating grin and heil hitler salute.

 

I used to strongly identify as a Republican before they were hijacked by religious zealots. All the southern Democrats have migrated to the Republican party and brought their worst qualities with them. When I moved to Georgia in 1992 Republicans were rare, and there had never been a Republican governor since Reconstruction. Now it's nearly impossible for a Democrat to get elected outside of Atlanta.

 

Oh look! Mizzou enrollment is down 20% and they face a $32M deficit. All because of hurt feelings.

Mizzou expects $32 million budget gap next year

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/...-expects-32-million-budget-gap-next-year.html

 

I don't know if anybody is watching the Democratic debate right now, but these moderators are attempting to anally fist the candidates. They're bringing shit up that happened a decade plus ago.

This is how debates should be.

 

So you're saying you like watching anal fisting?

That should be your new title: "likes anal fisting"

 

Obviously students are seeking safe spaces. Enrollment is down because of the racial injustices throughout the university, like the KKK showing up in their imagination.

 

They were totally there. Jennie said so.

 

I feel like this hispanic angle of this debate would be much more enjoyable with Trump.

 

Only when it's being administered by a Latino.

All this debate is doing is making me more sure that Sanders is the right guy for the job. One thing that I really appreciate is that I know how he'll act. Even if there are things Sanders does that you don't support, at least you know where he stands.

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but his record working with both parties doesn't make me think I'm getting at least 4 years of Congressional obstruction.

 

year ago i would have put money on and did that Trump would never get the nomination or even be in the running at this point. $1000.00 down and totally confused I honestly have no idea where this election is going nor where it will end up. Will Trump tough it out?, Will he try to shortcut the party by naming Rubio/Kasich his running mate?, Will Hillary be indicted?, Will POTUS nominate a Justice?, Will Bernie get out the youth vote enough to make a difference?.. I am an probably always will be a diehard Republican. Generally vote the straight party ticket except in city,county,local elections because noone in the MS delta runs locally as a Repub. I have no idea what or who to vote for in this election.