Sanders defeats Clinton in Indiana

Indiana understands that Clinton is going to drop out after the criminal indictment anyway,,,,,,,,,,,,,for health reasons, and to sneak over to Moscow with her new hero Edward Snowden.
 
the usual from MSNBC, WAPO, corporatist press..*surprise not*

"Bernie can't beat Trump -he's too left wing" ( ignoring Bernie has better poll numbers then Clinton vs. Trump)

It's a rigged economy, election, process, Party- facilitated by the corporatist press/pundits.
 
It doesn't matter. The Trump supporters, white supremacists, and neo-fascists will be defeated in the end. History always winds up on the side of justice, evil is always defeated.
 
The world should pray for the Dems to select Bernie over Billary- even them that don't.
 
Hillary is just another Hawk, she's basically a neocon

Exactly so- a neocon nemesis for decent Americans.

Trump verges on being certifiable. What is America to do ?

How the hell can such a powerful nation be forced to choose between just two people ?
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sanders-defeats-clinton-in-indiana-throwing-014401639.html

I think this shows how divided the Dem party is. Maybe not the open split that the repubs are in, but I don't think either party will come out of this election unscathed.

You can thank Trump for that. :)

I agree but the voters should be thanked for it.

Win lose or draw, the Republican Party is changed. Trump is broadening it, which needed to happen; it will almost certainly be less conservative---at least at the national level.

The Democrats will need to decide if they want to further their leftward march toward outright socialism [thanks to Bernie] or come back to the center.

It's historic however it pans out. People will reference it for decades when talking about domestic politics.
 
Exactly so- a neocon nemesis for decent Americans.

Trump verges on being certifiable. What is America to do ?

How the hell can such a powerful nation be forced to choose between just two people ?

Decent Americans don't support socialist nonsense like Bernie Sanders supports. Decent people contribute to society not expect the contributors of society to provide for them what they aren't willing to provide for themselves.

Bernie supports free college tuition and calls it an investment. Tell me why something a kid's own parents won't invent in is worth me investing in.
 
Its different with the Democratic party for several reasons. In the Republican party, you have a large group of people who do not accept the majority view of what is acceptable in our society, and they feel they have been forced out (in my opinion rightfully so) of the national discussion. I am talking about racists, bigots and religious zealots. The elected officials in the Republican party (mostly educated people who are not bigots or zealots) know that to accept this group is to marginalize the party and turn it into a regional power without national influence. Trump plays to these people, while trying to keep a foot outside of the bigot arena. He can do well with that in a primary campaign, but in a general campaign he will have to moderate and bet on short memories. If elected he will have a hard time governing from both places and the bigots will likely be even more pissed off when Trump abandons them.

On the Democratic Party side, the structure of the party is very different. The insiders have more power and thus an outsider has a harder time doing what Trump did. The Democrats have their share of people who push for ideas outside of the mainstream but for the most part the Party has been able to keep them under control by promoting the idea of incramentalism. Telling those who are ready for more radical ideas to be patient, that change comes slowly and to look at the progress we have made by taking one step at a time instead of trying to go too far too fast. Its easier to be the party that promotes slow change than to be the party that demands we return to a fictionalized past. Its impossible to return to a fictionalized past, because it never really existed. Its easier to make slow change to a place that was not defined in the first place and will never reach the ideal, but slowly make progress toward it.

I'm not calling all Republicans bigots or racists or Zealots, but there are plenty of them that are attracted to the Republican party and they are like a fly to a light with Donald Trump. This is why you see the more educated and more intelligent Republicans revolting against Trump. The problem with Trumps future campaign is that thus far he has done a great job of keeping one foot in each boat, but the further into the future he gets the more those boats drift apart. It will be interesting to see if he can keep two groups together long enough to get elected.
 
Its different with the Democratic party for several reasons. In the Republican party, you have a large group of people who do not accept the majority view of what is acceptable in our society, and they feel they have been forced out (in my opinion rightfully so) of the national discussion. I am talking about racists, bigots and religious zealots. The elected officials in the Republican party (mostly educated people who are not bigots or zealots) know that to accept this group is to marginalize the party and turn it into a regional power without national influence. Trump plays to these people, while trying to keep a foot outside of the bigot arena. He can do well with that in a primary campaign, but in a general campaign he will have to moderate and bet on short memories. If elected he will have a hard time governing from both places and the bigots will likely be even more pissed off when Trump abandons them.

On the Democratic Party side, the structure of the party is very different. The insiders have more power and thus an outsider has a harder time doing what Trump did. The Democrats have their share of people who push for ideas outside of the mainstream but for the most part the Party has been able to keep them under control by promoting the idea of incramentalism. Telling those who are ready for more radical ideas to be patient, that change comes slowly and to look at the progress we have made by taking one step at a time instead of trying to go too far too fast. Its easier to be the party that promotes slow change than to be the party that demands we return to a fictionalized past. Its impossible to return to a fictionalized past, because it never really existed. Its easier to make slow change to a place that was not defined in the first place and will never reach the ideal, but slowly make progress toward it.

I'm not calling all Republicans bigots or racists or Zealots, but there are plenty of them that are attracted to the Republican party and they are like a fly to a light with Donald Trump. This is why you see the more educated and more intelligent Republicans revolting against Trump. The problem with Trumps future campaign is that thus far he has done a great job of keeping one foot in each boat, but the further into the future he gets the more those boats drift apart. It will be interesting to see if he can keep two groups together long enough to get elected.

It is different with Democrats. They refuse to hold themselves to the same standards they hold everyone else. Democrats claim they believe in freedom and choice then support things that take that away trying to justify how it's OK to do so.
 
Decent Americans don't support socialist nonsense like Bernie Sanders supports. Decent people contribute to society not expect the contributors of society to provide for them what they aren't willing to provide for themselves.

Bernie supports free college tuition and calls it an investment. Tell me why something a kid's own parents won't invent in is worth me investing in.

Many kids, smart kids who could contribute greatly to society have parents who don't have the money to invest in them.

The kids are worth it, the parents don't have the ability.
 
Many kids, smart kids who could contribute greatly to society have parents who don't have the money to invest in them.

The kids are worth it, the parents don't have the ability.

Doesn't mean the rest of us, by default, should be forced to fund it.

If the kids are worth it, their parents will find a way. If the parents fail to do so, tells me it's not a good investment.
 
Doesn't mean the rest of us, by default, should be forced to fund it.

If the kids are worth it, their parents will find a way. If the parents fail to do so, tells me it's not a good investment.

Or, that parents just don't have the cash.

It's weird how simplistic your thinking is.
 
Doesn't mean the rest of us, by default, should be forced to fund it.

If the kids are worth it, their parents will find a way. If the parents fail to do so, tells me it's not a good investment.

Good smart kids can have idiotic parents.
 
Or, that parents just don't have the cash.

It's weird how simplistic your thinking is.

Simplistic thinking comes from those that think what a parent won't do for their own kids should become the responsibility of someone other than the kid's parents.

If you think it's a good investment, find all you can and pay for their college with your money. The only two that are with my investment are mine.
 
Back
Top