EXCUSE ME?!..The OFFICIAL Bernie Sanders For President 2016 Thread

[abandonconflict]

I like how Bernie Sanders is kinda sabotaging the Democratic party.

 

[schuylaar]

I think I'm seeing early signs of the rats leaving the sinking Chump, which means that Mr Sanders' leverage over the party may be waning.

What do you mean?

 

[schuylaar]

I like how Bernie Sanders is kinda sabotaging the Democratic party.

Let's talk about it..its so much fun to wallow in Clinton misery

 

[schuylaar]

Which drug(s) would cause a man to act like Corey Lewandowski?

Anyone hear him yet?

 

[schuylaar]

Nothing actionable? Revolution not an option? Inequality, systematic oppression and imperialism are but symptoms of a wider ailment that threatens the planet. The crisis is capitalism. This aspect of our civilization is what makes it an extinction event. The hard pill to swallow, which liberal normie babyboomers absolutely refuse to consider is that it is THE ONLY OPTION!

You know who needs to die off? Anyone standing in the way. That's not a threat, it is the nature of things. Making an ecological difference starts with alleviating social inequality. It's not the Trump supporters putting social movements in the grave. It's the Democratic party. That's who props up the status quo. That's who keeps capitalism from failing. That's who prevents revolutions and maintains and defends the privatization of the earth.

Yeah I sound crazy. I'm just a few steps ahead.

++++++++rep

 

[schuylaar]

If she had a conscience she would have failed to defend the guy. Simple as that. She gets my enduring disdain, not the people who are genuinely afraid of Trump. She deserves it. The system is oppressive and she IS THAT SYSTEM.

The problem with choosing the lesser evil in this case is that no matter who wins, the Trump supporters will still be there. They will be there because of a status quo, not because of Trump. They're there because of her just as much as they are because of him because they're both really just status quo. voting for the lesser evil is status quo. Your opinion is status quo. I don't blame you.

So why vote for status quo? That may sound like a vague appeal but what I mean is, I am genuinely opposed to the democratic party and I'm sick of seeing the populace shunted into them by fear of the GOP. It's time to oppose this shit, no matter how scared we are of the other bad guy.

You say that she will be president and that it is unavoidable, does that mean embrace it? Defend it? Like it? Stop voicing genuine opposition to it? Delay the revolution against it because of the minority of bigots who threaten to have a voice? My guess is that this election will have record low voter turnout.

++++++++++++++++++rep

 

[Fogdog]

Nothing actionable? Revolution not an option? Inequality, systematic oppression and imperialism are but symptoms of a wider ailment that threatens the planet. The crisis is capitalism. This aspect of our civilization is what makes it an extinction event. The hard pill to swallow, which liberal normie babyboomers absolutely refuse to consider is that it is THE ONLY OPTION!

You know who needs to die off? Anyone standing in the way. That's not a threat, it is the nature of things. Making an ecological difference starts with alleviating social inequality. It's not the Trump supporters putting social movements in the grave. It's the Democratic party. That's who props up the status quo. That's who keeps capitalism from failing. That's who prevents revolutions and maintains and defends the privatization of the earth.

Yeah I sound crazy. I'm just a few steps ahead.

Then I read you correctly. Violent revolution?.

 

[schuylaar]

Then I read you correctly. Violent revolution?.

You say that she will be president and that it is unavoidable, does that mean embrace it? Defend it? Like it? Stop voicing genuine opposition to it? Delay the revolution against it because of the minority of bigots who threaten to have a voice? My guess is that this election will have record low voter turnout.

I don't see the word violent anywhere..^^^

 

[Fogdog]

You say that she will be president and that it is unavoidable, does that mean embrace it? Defend it? Like it? Stop voicing genuine opposition to it? Delay the revolution against it because of the minority of bigots who threaten to have a voice? My guess is that this election will have record low voter turnout.

I don't see the word violent anywhere..^^^

Nope, not telling anybody to stop voicing opposition. Not saying to delay action. I'm asking what action?

There is some stuff about people needing to die in his post and I'm asking AC what he means by that. Violent revolution is something I'm not willing to support.

I can't figure out what is actionable and meaningful from what you say. All I see is pointing out how bad Hillary is and how great Bernie is and how the primary stolen, blah blah. I just don't think agitating on a pot board is doing any good and simply pointing out the inequities of the world isn't going to accomplish much.

I'm not telling you to be silent, I just read you posts and try to figure out what is actionable from your posts in the real world. So, where is the best place to put effort to achieve the change you look for?

 

[abandonconflict]

Then I read you correctly. Violent revolution?.

Hopefully. Violence is status quo though. Who can tell the future? I can only look at empires in the past and remember that today's empire is tomorrow's ashes. Rome went from stable to freefall after the Vandals took North Africa but it is arguable that it took a century for the empire to collapse from its height.

Kinda puts Trump's wall into perspective eh?

 

[Fogdog]

Hopefully. Violence is status quo though. Who can tell the future? I can only look at empires in the past and remember that today's empire is tomorrow's ashes. Rome went from stable to freefall after the Vandals took North Africa but it is arguable that it took a century for the empire to collapse from its height.

Kinda puts Trump's wall into perspective eh?

Agree.

Violence is status quo right now. To use violence against it would mean taking the resistance to a level that matches it. I think supporters of the new authoritarian right will do that when Trump goes down and so violence is going to escalate. When that happens, the oligarchy will use those actions as justification to tighten their grip in the form of controls of people. It's what they do. The oligarchy is perfectly prepared to raise the level of violence if anybody tries to match theirs. And where does that cycle end?

The Vandals weren't exactly the nicest people either.

So, I reject the idea of applying the tool of violence to enact change.

 

[abandonconflict]

Agree.

Violence is status quo right now. To use violence against it would mean taking the resistance to a level that matches it. I think supporters of the new authoritarian right will do that when Trump goes down and so violence is going to escalate. When that happens, the oligarchy will use those actions as justification to tighten their grip in the form of controls of people. It's what they do. The oligarchy is perfectly prepared to raise the level of violence if anybody tries to match theirs. And where does that cycle end?

The Vandals weren't exactly the nicest people either.

So, I reject the idea of applying the tool of violence to enact change.

To be honest, I tend to agree with the opposition to an organized revolution which by virtue must employ violence to keep itself relevant. One need only look to the guillotine and that whole Bolshevik revolution event as examples of what can go wrong in revolution. However, I would not consider anything right wing to be revolution since it can never truly threaten private power structures. Just look at Italy, the wealthiest families have been the same since the days of the Medicis. They had their Machiavelli and much later their il duce, yet the wealth has stayed in certain bloodlines.

Regarding the final statement, I disagree. When some fight for equality, the option of violence remains valid.

 

[ttystikk]

Agree.

Violence is status quo right now. To use violence against it would mean taking the resistance to a level that matches it. I think supporters of the new authoritarian right will do that when Trump goes down and so violence is going to escalate. When that happens, the oligarchy will use those actions as justification to tighten their grip in the form of controls of people. It's what they do. The oligarchy is perfectly prepared to raise the level of violence if anybody tries to match theirs. And where does that cycle end?

The Vandals weren't exactly the nicest people either.

So, I reject the idea of applying the tool of violence to enact change.

We need non violent revolution, a la Ghandi. Bernie is the closest we have.

 

[Big_Lou]

Observation: The Sanders thread is considerably more civil and generally more polite than the Drumpf thread....go figure, eh? Forum threads mimicking reality, or?


Also, growing up we knew him as Mayor/Senator Sanders. He was the Mayor of Burlington for many years, the city I was born in (better hospitals at the time) before being carted back across the Champlain Bridge, heh.
Here's to you, Mr. Sanders - Never give up the good fight, you are on the right side of history, and you've got tons of love and support back home!

 

[ttystikk]

What do you mean?

If there's no one putting Shillary's ascendancy in doubt, she needn't listen to Bernie supporters or their concerns.

 

[ttystikk]

To be honest, I tend to agree with the opposition to an organized revolution which by virtue must employ violence to keep itself relevant. One need only look to the guillotine and that whole Bolshevik revolution event as examples of what can go wrong in revolution. However, I would not consider anything right wing to be revolution since it can never truly threaten private power structures. Just look at Italy, the wealthiest families have been the same since the days of the Medicis. They had their Machiavelli and much later their il duce, yet the wealth has stayed in certain bloodlines.

Regarding the final statement, I disagree. When some fight for equality, the option of violence remains valid.

Or founding fathers made an enormous mistake when they assumed the people would want to revolt against their government 'from time to time'.

There is no mechanism in the US Constitution to address a system that's been systematically corrupted.

So what's left? More Occupy? What's wrong with demanding that all public servants be held personally accountable for their actions under the law and the Constitution? If cops went to prison more often for overstepping their bounds, fewer cops would do it. If more politicians were prosecuted for corruption, fewer would try it.

The judiciary branch is actually the most insulated from the demands of the People, we cannot expect it to be anything but an obstacle. If more judges were censured for upholding unconstitutional decisions, fewer would do it.

ACCOUNTABILITY. A solid standard, applied universally.

This could be the way forward.

 

[spandy]

Hopefully. Violence is status quo though. Who can tell the future? I can only look at empires in the past and remember that today's empire is tomorrow's ashes. Rome went from stable to freefall after the Vandals took North Africa but it is arguable that it took a century for the empire to collapse from its height.

Kinda puts Trump's wall into perspective eh?

Well get out there and kick some ass then! Woot Woot.

 

[ttystikk]

Observation: The Sanders thread is considerably more civil and generally more polite than the Drumpf thread....go figure, eh? Forum threads mimicking reality, or?


Also, growing up we knew him as Mayor/Senator Sanders. He was the Mayor of Burlington for many years, the city I was born in (better hospitals at the time) before being carted back across the Champlain Bridge, heh.
Here's to you, Mr. Sanders - Never give up the good fight, you are on the right side of history, and you've got tons of love and support back home!


View attachment 3713514

View attachment 3713516

He has support everywhere. People are finally realizing that he's been fighting for US all this time!

 

[spandy]

Or founding father's made an enormous mistake when they aimed the people would want to revolt against their government 'from time to time'.

There is no mechanism in the US Constitution to address a system that's been systematically corrupted.

So what's left? More Occupy? What's wrong with demanding that all public servants be held personally accountable for their actions under the law and the Constitution? If cops went to prison more often for overstepping their bounds, fewer cops would do it. If more politicians were prosecuted for corruption, fewer would try it.

The judiciary branch is actually the most insulated from the demand of the People, we cannot expect it to be anything but am obstacle. If more judges were censured for upholding unconstitutional decisions, fewer would do it.

ACCOUNTABILITY. A solid standard, applied universally.

This could be the way forward.

Founding Fathers knew the people would become complacent and allow the leaders to abuse their power. Not sure if you meant the mistake was made in favor of the people, or government. People need to stand up to their leaders, because over time power is always abused.

There is too much money in politics. Fire fighters are public servants and get paid dick compared to what they do for a living, among many other public servant positions. Why does being a senator for 2 fucking years entitle you to a lifetime of more than triple the pay of your average american? Bullshit, they should get the national average as far as salary goes, and locked in a cage if caught taking any amount of money for any reason during their services to avoid being bought. When your service is up, so are your benefits.

 

[Rrog]

Some cops make $100k+

That's some bullshit