And They're Off! The Democratic Candidates for 2020

[schnittkease]

You should stop, because you've tired of being told you're wrong, but you don't tire of calling people who disagree with you "idiots."

Really, you ought to have stopped, without the drama of creating, a pointless (judging by your present post) thread announcing that you're supposedly stopping.

Obviously none of us are going to change our minds, so maybe we should all just stop?

[71 dB]

You should stop, because you've tired of being told you're wrong, but you don't tire of calling people who disagree with you "idiots."

Really, you ought to have stopped, without the drama of creating, a pointless (judging by your present post) thread announcing that you're supposedly stopping.

What is it I am wrong about? I have been told 100 times leftist ideas are not popular in the US. If that was true, Elizabeth Warren's and Bernie Sanders' polling number would be very low because they campaign for "unpopular" lefty ideas. If the US population really wants a corporate president, Hillary Clinton should have won easily, but somehow she lost.

The evidence clearly doesn't support me being wrong. It supports my position.

I am calling people idiots, because I am frustrated. It should not be difficult to see what the corporate media is doing. It takes quite a low IQ to watch Sean Hannity or Stuart Varney fearmonger about how the Green New Deal will make the US Venezuela where people eats rats and conclude they speak the truth. Everything that would help the regular people make the corporate media ask "How are we going to pay for it", but when it's about increasing the military budget or about Wall Street bailouts, they never ask the same. Of course there is money when it's about helping the top 1 %.

[SimonNZ]

Bernie will beat Trump easily if given the nomination.

I don't know why you think this is obvious. There's a whole playbook of dirty tricks that would have been opened if he'd beaten Hilary and is still waiting to be opened if he wins the nomination this time. Just what his Swiftboat Benghazi Emails will be and how he will have to dwal with them are utterly unknown factors. You're also imagining some kind of level playing field where arguing better in a debate means winning the debate.

[71 dB]

I don't know why you think this is obvious. There's a whole playbook of dirty tricks that would have been opened if he'd beaten Hilary and is still waiting to be opened if he wins the nomination this time. Just what his Swiftboat Benghazi Emails will be and how he will have to dwal with them are utterly unknown factors. You're also imagining some kind of level playing field where arguing better in a debate means winning the debate.

I trust Kyle Kulinski's judgement on this. If you work full time or even multiple jobs and still struggle you want change. Bernie means change.

Just because the corporate media smears Bernie all the time doesn't mean you have to be a moron yourself and believe their nonsense. More people have donated to Bernie than any other candidate. How does the corporate media frame this? Bernie has collected LESS money than others. Of course he has, because he is least corrupt and most of his donations are small donations from regular people, not $2800 donations from millionaires. So, the corporate media frames everything against Bernie. That doesn't mean Bernie is weak. It means the media is uttrly corrupt.

For Bernie the difficult part is getting the Democratic nomination (beating Biden, Warren and Harris who has the support of corporate media). Beating Trump is easy.

[SimonNZ]

Well thanks for calling me a moron, pal.

You go right ahead and believe whatever you want to believe. In the meantime I'll be ignoring you.

[71 dB]

Well thanks for calling me a moron, pal.

You go right ahead and believe whatever you want to believe. In the meantime I'll be ignoring you.

I didn't mean you, pal. Surely you don't believe the nonsense of corporate media, do you?

[JBS]

I trust Kyle Kulinski's judgement on this. If you work full time or even multiple jobs and still struggle you want change. Bernie means change.

Just because the corporate media smears Bernie all the time doesn't mean you have to be a moron yourself and believe their nonsense. More people have donated to Bernie than any other candidate. How does the corporate media frame this? Bernie has collected LESS money than others. Of course he has, because he is least corrupt and most of his donations are small donations from regular people, not $2800 donations from millionaires. So, the corporate media frames everything against Bernie. That doesn't mean Bernie is weak. It means the media is uttrly corrupt.

For Bernie the difficult part is getting the Democratic nomination (beating Biden, Warren and Harris who has the support of corporate media). Beating Trump is easy.

Trump's blue collar voters are not going to vote for a man who decided to have his honeymoon in Moscow during the Cold War....

BTW, I listened to the YouTube you posted in the other thread in which Kulinski discusses high drug prices.  It's a good demonstration of why you should take everything Kulinksi says with the same skepticism you give to the "corporate media".

Drug prices are high in the US because "Big Pharma" is able to manipulate the patent process and the FDA approval process in their favor.  When you are the only company that can legally manufacture a drug, of course you can price gouge.   Where in that featurette does Kulinski even mention that aspect of the problem?  The "solution" he seems to advocate--government setting prices--would only increase the cronyism and corruption that exists between the manufacturers and the government agencies that supposedly oversee them.  And it would do nothing to resolve the real source of the problem. 

So he's really just advocating on behalf of Big Pharma in that clip, not against them!

[JBS]

BTW, if it's corrupt for some politicians to take donations from corporations in exchange for advocating on behalf of those donors, why is not corrupt for Bernie to take donations from people in exchange for advocating on their behalf? [That leaves aside the question of whether he is actually advocating on their behalf.]

[71 dB]

BTW, if it's corrupt for some politicians to take donations from corporations in exchange for advocating on behalf of those donors, why is not corrupt for Bernie to take donations from people in exchange for advocating on their behalf? [That leaves aside the question of whether he is actually advocating on their behalf.]

The left wants money out of politics, but without money the left has no change so they have to take money. Corporations are not people, people are people. Democracy is for people, not corporations. If you don't see the problem of billionaires buying the elections you are dumb.

[71 dB]

Trump's blue collar voters are not going to vote for a man who decided to have his honeymoon in Moscow during the Cold War....

BTW, I listened to the YouTube you posted in the other thread in which Kulinski discusses high drug prices.  It's a good demonstration of why you should take everything Kulinksi says with the same skepticism you give to the "corporate media".

Drug prices are high in the US because "Big Pharma" is able to manipulate the patent process and the FDA approval process in their favor.  When you are the only company that can legally manufacture a drug, of course you can price gouge.   Where in that featurette does Kulinski even mention that aspect of the problem?  The "solution" he seems to advocate--government setting prices--would only increase the cronyism and corruption that exists between the manufacturers and the government agencies that supposedly oversee them.  And it would do nothing to resolve the real source of the problem. 

So he's really just advocating on behalf of Big Pharma in that clip, not against them!

Single payer healthcare fixes this problem. Big Pharma loses their power to manipulate the market.

Who the fuck care where Bernie spend his honeymoon some 50 years ago?

[JBS]

Single payer healthcare fixes this problem. Big Pharma loses their power to manipulate the market.

It would actually increase Big Pharma's power since it would maximize the cronyism of the current structure.  I understand what you think would happen: government bureaucrats would negotiate lower prices.  There's no reason to think that would happen once you understand that the bureaucrats would be immune from public pressure to lower prices.

Like I said, Kulinski in that clip nowhere addresses the real problem--Big Pharma's ability via patent and regulatory manipulation to monopolize production and therefore set prices.  Any proposal that does not do that is doing nothing that Big Pharma needs to be afraid of.

[JBS]

Who the fuck care where Bernie spend his honeymoon some 50 years ago?

It shows how far left he was.  You actually had to want to go visit Russian in that era. It was not a normal tourist destination.

[North Star]

It shows how far left he was.  You actually had to want to go visit Russian in that era. It was not a normal tourist destination.

A mayor is rarely a normal tourist. Sanders was obviously interested in foreign affairs and had a kind of foreign policy of his own, and a part of it was helping Russians and Americans learn from each other, establishing a sister city relationship with a Russian city at a time of Soviet Union opening to the West under Gorbachev. But yeah, there are a lot of voters who will vote for Putin's pawn to keep the Commie out.



https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/12/george-will/george-will-reminds-readers-about-bernie-sanders-u/

Along with sister-city relationships with Bethlehem in the West Bank and Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua, the Yaroslavl program was part of Sanders' unorthodox attempt to take on international issues from a small city in New England. Sanders also actively pursued his agenda outside of the country, writing letters to world leaders and even traveling to Cuba to meet with the mayor of Havana.

"Burlington had a foreign policy," he wrote in his 1997 book Outsider in the House, "because, as progressives, we understood that we all live in one world."


The timing of the trip was unusual. Bernie and Jane were married May 28, 1988. The delegation left Burlington the next day.

"Trust me," Sanders writes in the book. "It was a very strange honeymoon."

When reached for comment, Sanders' campaign said that the dates for the trip had already been set, and the couple "set their wedding date to coincide with that trip because they didn't want to take more time off."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/17/bernie-sanders-mystery-soviet-video-revealed-1330347

Throughout the videos, as well as in the final episode of "Bernie Speaks With the Community," Sanders speaks at length about his dream of reducing conflict between the two nations by building relationships between ordinary citizens. While being interviewed by a Russian man on a bus, he says he would "love" for young people to participate in exchange programs between the two cities.

Sanders suggests a similar initiative for media outlets. He tells the man that a Vermont editor is coming to the Soviet Union soon and that "I have asked her to drop in [to] your newspaper."

Sanders' wife also talks to teachers in the Soviet Union over tea. She asks them detailed questions about their work and proposes a teacher and student exchange program.

"One thing we are very impressed with is the cultural life," she tells them. "We strive in Burlington to enrich the cultural life as much as possible. But we have much further to go."

Bruce Seifer, a top economic development aide to Sanders when he was mayor, said that 100 residents from Yaroslavl immigrated to Burlington after the trip and others visited.

"Over time, it had a positive impact on to the economy," he said. "Businesses started doing exchanges between Burlington and Yaroslavl."

Davitian, who lived in Burlington at the time, said progressives were thrilled by Sanders' trip to the Soviet Union, while everyday residents didn't mind. "As long as the streets were getting paved, there wasn't opposition to him as an activist mayor," she said.

When Sanders' delegation returned to Burlington, CCTV captured the group on film in a hopeful mood, applauding the Soviet Union's after-school programs, low rent costs and hospitality.

At the same time, they admit the poor choices of available food. Sanders says he was impressed by the beauty of the city and Soviet officials' willingness "to acknowledge many of the problems that they had."

"They're proud of the fact that their health care system is free," he says, but concede that the medical technology is far behind that of the United States.

Later that year, the relationship was officially established. Since then, "exchanges between the two cities have involved mayors, business people, firefighters, jazz musicians, youth orchestras, mural painters, high school students, medical students, nurses, librarians, and the Yaroslavl Torpedoes ice hockey team," according to Burlington's city government. A delegation traveled there as recently as 2016.

"They were just as friendly as they could possibly be," Sanders said at a news conference at the airport after returning from the trip. "The truth of the matter is, they like Americans, and they respect Americans, and they admire Americans.

[JBS]

A mayor is rarely a normal tourist. Sanders was obviously interested in foreign affairs and had a kind of foreign policy of his own, and a part of it was helping Russians and Americans learn from each other, establishing a sister city relationship with a Russian city at a time of Soviet Union opening to the West under Gorbachev. But yeah, there are a lot of voters who will vote for Putin's pawn to keep the Commie out.



https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/12/george-will/george-will-reminds-readers-about-bernie-sanders-u/
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/17/bernie-sanders-mystery-soviet-video-revealed-1330347

The quote mentions the sister city in Nicaragua.  At that point, the Sandinistas were still in control.  This (with the visit to Havana) merely reinforces Sanders's well-to-the-left-of-center image.

[Karl Henning]

Trumpkins support Trump no matter what.  Maybe Poju likes Bernie, no matter what.

[JBS]

Trumpkins support Trump no matter what.  Maybe Poju likes Bernie, no matter what.

I think it simply that he mistakes political advocacy for impartial presentation of the facts, and therefore seriously misjudges the US political climate.

[Karl Henning]

I think it simply that he mistakes political advocacy for impartial presentation of the facts, and therefore seriously misjudges the US political climate.

Yes, you've hit the mark, where my bolt was wide.

[71 dB]

Trumpkins support Trump no matter what.  Maybe Poju likes Bernie, no matter what.

If Bernie starts to take corporate money and backpedal on Medicare for all, tuition free education, etc. my opinion about Bernie will change.

[North Star]

The quote mentions the sister city in Nicaragua.  At that point, the Sandinistas were still in control.  This (with the visit to Havana) merely reinforces Sanders's well-to-the-left-of-center image.

True, but then again, the world does seem to be well to the left of the center of US politics.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/who-was-naive-about-bernie-sanders-meeting-the-sandinistas/

Initially, the Sandinistas had tried to establish a good relationship with the United States. But Ronald Reagan had won the presidency in 1980 in part on the basis of his promise to reject Jimmy Carter's human rights–centered approach to foreign policy, and instead be more "assertive"—to use the Times' word—especially when it came to communism.

Contrary to some assumptions at the time (and to Chait's error-filled column this week), Nicaragua was not communist. Neither was Ortega. But some Sandinistas were Marxist-Leninists, and the government had accepted Cuban military assistance. That was all Reagan needed to know.

Just six years after America's defeat in Vietnam, Reagan's advisers knew they needed to be covert in their support of the Contras—or at least covert enough not to arouse too much attention at home. Reagan directed the CIA to arm the Contras with money, weapons, and training.

One of the first Contra groups to receive this support was the Nicaraguan Democratic Force, or FDN, the group that massacred the coffee pickers. It was just one of the thousands of similar atrocities they would carry out with the financing and support of the US government.

By mid-decade, it had become abundantly clear that US policy was drowning Nicaragua in blood. When the Democratic-controlled Congress learned the CIA was putting explosive mines in Nicaraguan harbors in early 1984, it voted to outlaw military aid to the Contras.

Defying Congress, Lt. Colonel Oliver North, a member of the National Security Council, flew down to reassure the FDN in person that "President Reagan remained committed to removing the Sandinistas from power." North then helped oversee a scheme to illegally funnel money and weapons to the rebels, in part by using profits from jacked-up weapons sales to Iran.

Since the sub-episode involved Republicans arguing with Democrats, that illegal slice of the enterprise got Americans' attention. It became known as the Iran-Contra affair and resulted in a string of nationally televised hearings, and a few indictments and convictions.

But Americans were not nearly as interested in the more than 30,000 Nicaraguans killed in a war financed by their tax dollars. Even as the administration scrambled to cover up its crimes against Congress, the president could keep publicly boasting about his support for the Contras. In March 1985, four months after the coffee pickers were slaughtered, Reagan went to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington and called for millions more in military aid to Nicaragua. He said the Contras were "the moral equal of our Founding Fathers."

Sanders' visit to Nicaragua came that summer.

...

Human Rights Watch, then known as Americas Watch, found the Contras had "systematically violated the applicable laws of war throughout the conflict. They have attacked civilians indiscriminately; they have tortured and mutilated prisoners; they have murdered those placed hors de combat by their wounds; they have taken hostages; and they have committed outrages against personal dignity."

The observers found that the Sandinista government, by contrast, had committed far fewer abuses, particularly after its first year in power. Despite attempts by the Reagan administration to convince Americans otherwise, there was "no systematic practice of forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings or torture" on the Sandinistas' part—as there was with, for instance, US-backed right-wing regimes in nearby El Salvador. A State Department official told Americas Watch, "What we see is that the Sandinista casualties are usually legitimate battle victims," whereas "the Contras have a tendency to kidnap young girls."

[JBS]

True, but then again, the world does seem to be well to the left of the center of US politics.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/who-was-naive-about-bernie-sanders-meeting-the-sandinistas/

I will just leave off with the following observations.
1) Mother Jones is a magazine that itself is well to the left. Any magazine named Mother Jones that wasn't firmly leftist would be an insult to its namesake. If you search you will find other accounts that are much less sympathetic to the Sandinistas.
2) I knew through work some Nicaraguans who came to Miami to escape  the violence of that period. All of them pointed to the Sandinistas as the bad guys.