Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Trump Sanders Debate?
Topic Started: May 26 2016, 11:31 AM (953 Views)
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Quote:
 
Last night Donald Trump appeared on Jimmy Kimmel and said he would debate Bernie Sanders so long as the profits from the debate go to charity. Sanders quickly agreed via Twitter. There’s your headline for a few days, or more.


more...
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

clone
May 26 2016, 11:31 AM
Quote:
 
Last night Donald Trump appeared on Jimmy Kimmel and said he would debate Bernie Sanders so long as the profits from the debate go to charity. Sanders quickly agreed via Twitter. There’s your headline for a few days, or more.


more...
Good for Sanders.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

I think Trump should challenge Hillary to a mud wrestling duel............ :biggrin:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

It is completely inappropriate for Sanders to collude with the Republican nominee in an attempt to raise his profile in the Democratic race. I'd like to say I'm shocked at his continued disloyalty to the party he conveniently became a member of last year but, frankly, I'm not. Bernie is all about Bernie.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 12:50 PM
It is completely inappropriate for Sanders to collude with the Republican nominee in an attempt to raise his profile in the Democratic race. I'd like to say I'm shocked at his continued disloyalty to the party he conveniently became a member of last year but, frankly, I'm not. Bernie is all about Bernie.
And how, exactly, does the man who will not be the Democratic nominee debating the man who will be the Republican nominee, harm the Democratic party?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Katoblue
Member Avatar

ROTF! a Sanders Trump debate would be a "Yuge" slap in the face to Killary.. and major headache for her also! and it just may happen early June! :lol:
Killary, DNC, Obummer's DOJ and FBI all Lied and Spied and Good People Died!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

Opinionated
May 26 2016, 12:52 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 12:50 PM
It is completely inappropriate for Sanders to collude with the Republican nominee in an attempt to raise his profile in the Democratic race. I'd like to say I'm shocked at his continued disloyalty to the party he conveniently became a member of last year but, frankly, I'm not. Bernie is all about Bernie.
And how, exactly, does the man who will not be the Democratic nominee debating the man who will be the Republican nominee, harm the Democratic party?
Because he is doing it to undercut his opponent. I used to believe Sanders had some integrity. I now believe he has none. None at all. His only loyalty is to himself. That I share a political party with this charlatan sickens me. At this point, if the Republican nominee were anyone other than Trump, Cruz or Carson, I'd have to genuinely consider voting for him or her over Sanders. The man has done nothing but whine endlessly - and often baselessly - about how the Democratic Party has sleighted or him in one way or another yet Sanders himself has shown absolutely zero loyalty to that party at any point. He accuses it of fraud and wrongdoing regularly, sues it in court, uses it as a scapegoat every time he loses. He ignores the advice of its leaders and only grudgingly condemns threats of violence toward it by his supporters whose flames he fans regularly. He does not respect the party's rules, processes or traditions (except when those things benefit him). He refused for decades to even be a member of the party - until it suited his interest. He is a fake Democrat employing the party's resources and position as a vehicle for his own agenda.

I can understand if people believe Hillary Clinton is dishonest or who doubt her integrity. What I cannot understand is how someone could believe a disloyal, manipulative and opportunistic demagogue like Sanders - whose actions have borne out his true nature at every turn - is somehow a better or more honest alternative.
Edited by Two a.m., May 26 2016, 01:18 PM.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 12:50 PM
It is completely inappropriate for Sanders to collude with the Republican nominee in an attempt to raise his profile in the Democratic race. I'd like to say I'm shocked at his continued disloyalty to the party he conveniently became a member of last year but, frankly, I'm not. Bernie is all about Bernie.
Or Bernie is all about the cause...While Hillary is all about her personal cause............... :dunno:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 01:15 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 12:52 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 12:50 PM
It is completely inappropriate for Sanders to collude with the Republican nominee in an attempt to raise his profile in the Democratic race. I'd like to say I'm shocked at his continued disloyalty to the party he conveniently became a member of last year but, frankly, I'm not. Bernie is all about Bernie.
And how, exactly, does the man who will not be the Democratic nominee debating the man who will be the Republican nominee, harm the Democratic party?
Because he is doing it to undercut his opponent. I used to believe Sanders had some integrity. I now believe he has none. None at all. His only loyalty is to himself. That I share a political party with this charlatan sickens me. At this point, if the Republican nominee were anyone other than Trump, Cruz or Carson, I'd have to genuinely consider voting for him or her over Sanders. The man has done nothing but whine endlessly - and often baselessly - about how the Democratic Party has sleighted or him in one way or another yet Sanders himself has shown absolutely zero loyalty to that party at any point. He accuses it of fraud and wrongdoing regularly, sues it in court, uses it as a scapegoat every time he loses. He ignores the advice of its leaders and only grudgingly condemns threats of violence toward it by his supporters whose flames he fans regularly. He does not respect the party's rules, processes or traditions (except when those things benefit him). He refused for decades to even be a member of the party - until it suited his interest. He is a fake Democrat employing the party's resources and position as a vehicle for his own agenda.

I can understand if people believe Hillary Clinton is dishonest or who doubt her integrity. What I cannot understand is how someone could believe a disloyal, manipulative and opportunistic demagogue like Sanders - whose actions have borne out his true nature at every turn - is somehow a better or more honest alternative.
So, you are now a mind reader and can intuit correctly, without any doubt, exactly what Sanders' motives might be?

Worse case scenario, Trump makes Sanders look like a buffoon. Win for Hillary. Best case scenario, Sanders makes Trump look like a buffoon. Still good for Hillary.

Seems like a win/win for the Democrats.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

The Democratic Party has been punking Sanders from the beginning and 2AM expects him to grin and bear it....The worm turns................. :nana:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
voted4reagan
Member Avatar

Opinionated
May 26 2016, 01:47 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 01:15 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 12:52 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Because he is doing it to undercut his opponent. I used to believe Sanders had some integrity. I now believe he has none. None at all. His only loyalty is to himself. That I share a political party with this charlatan sickens me. At this point, if the Republican nominee were anyone other than Trump, Cruz or Carson, I'd have to genuinely consider voting for him or her over Sanders. The man has done nothing but whine endlessly - and often baselessly - about how the Democratic Party has sleighted or him in one way or another yet Sanders himself has shown absolutely zero loyalty to that party at any point. He accuses it of fraud and wrongdoing regularly, sues it in court, uses it as a scapegoat every time he loses. He ignores the advice of its leaders and only grudgingly condemns threats of violence toward it by his supporters whose flames he fans regularly. He does not respect the party's rules, processes or traditions (except when those things benefit him). He refused for decades to even be a member of the party - until it suited his interest. He is a fake Democrat employing the party's resources and position as a vehicle for his own agenda.

I can understand if people believe Hillary Clinton is dishonest or who doubt her integrity. What I cannot understand is how someone could believe a disloyal, manipulative and opportunistic demagogue like Sanders - whose actions have borne out his true nature at every turn - is somehow a better or more honest alternative.
So, you are now a mind reader and can intuit correctly, without any doubt, exactly what Sanders' motives might be?

Worse case scenario, Trump makes Sanders look like a buffoon. Win for Hillary. Best case scenario, Sanders makes Trump look like a buffoon. Still good for Hillary.

Seems like a win/win for the Democrats.

Trump and Bernie make Hillary look like a Buffoon.... Hillary loses more ground...
Trump needs to focus more so on the male vote. He should have nationalized the Boy Scouts when they decided to admit girls.

Harambe4Trump AKA "FASHY"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
70-101
Member Avatar

clone
May 26 2016, 11:31 AM
Quote:
 
Last night Donald Trump appeared on Jimmy Kimmel and said he would debate Bernie Sanders so long as the profits from the debate go to charity. Sanders quickly agreed via Twitter. There’s your headline for a few days, or more.


more...
Trump still hasn't explained what he did with the millions he raised for veterans - which was money he promised them. Now he wants more money to give to his favorite charity - himself.

"Trumpty Dumpty didn't serve. Trumpty Dumpty broke his word."



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

Opinionated
May 26 2016, 01:47 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 01:15 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 12:52 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Because he is doing it to undercut his opponent. I used to believe Sanders had some integrity. I now believe he has none. None at all. His only loyalty is to himself. That I share a political party with this charlatan sickens me. At this point, if the Republican nominee were anyone other than Trump, Cruz or Carson, I'd have to genuinely consider voting for him or her over Sanders. The man has done nothing but whine endlessly - and often baselessly - about how the Democratic Party has sleighted or him in one way or another yet Sanders himself has shown absolutely zero loyalty to that party at any point. He accuses it of fraud and wrongdoing regularly, sues it in court, uses it as a scapegoat every time he loses. He ignores the advice of its leaders and only grudgingly condemns threats of violence toward it by his supporters whose flames he fans regularly. He does not respect the party's rules, processes or traditions (except when those things benefit him). He refused for decades to even be a member of the party - until it suited his interest. He is a fake Democrat employing the party's resources and position as a vehicle for his own agenda.

I can understand if people believe Hillary Clinton is dishonest or who doubt her integrity. What I cannot understand is how someone could believe a disloyal, manipulative and opportunistic demagogue like Sanders - whose actions have borne out his true nature at every turn - is somehow a better or more honest alternative.
So, you are now a mind reader and can intuit correctly, without any doubt, exactly what Sanders' motives might be?

Worse case scenario, Trump makes Sanders look like a buffoon. Win for Hillary. Best case scenario, Sanders makes Trump look like a buffoon. Still good for Hillary.

Seems like a win/win for the Democrats.


Yeah, because clearly he wants to help Hillary. That's a far more realistic assumption of his motives. Makes total sense.

If he wants to help Hillary so badly, his endorsement of her and his immediate departure from the race would be the best way of doing so.

He's helping himself and he is perfectly comfortable partnering with Donald Trump to do that. How do you not see that? Is there anything he can do where you might judge his actions negatively? He stands at the bank window with a gun and a ski mask and your reaction when he hands the teller a note is, "Hey, we can't infer anything from his actions. Maybe he's just asking her out on a date."

He's trying - yet again - to undercut the nomination process, raise his own profile on the big stage and act like he's the presumptive nominee. It wouldn't even really be appropriate for Hillary to do this and she IS the presumptive nominee. He's doing it because he's lost the Democratic electorate so now he's going outside the family to take a role he hasn't earned, pull in extra votes before a big primary and try desperately to sway the superdelegates hoping they'll override the popular vote.
Edited by Two a.m., May 26 2016, 02:13 PM.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 02:11 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 01:47 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 01:15 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So, you are now a mind reader and can intuit correctly, without any doubt, exactly what Sanders' motives might be?

Worse case scenario, Trump makes Sanders look like a buffoon. Win for Hillary. Best case scenario, Sanders makes Trump look like a buffoon. Still good for Hillary.

Seems like a win/win for the Democrats.


Yeah, because clearly he wants to help Hillary. That's a far more realistic assumption of his motives. If he wants to help Hillary so badly, his endorsement of her and his immediate departure from the race would be the best way of doing so.

He's helping himself and he is perfectly comfortable partnering with Donald Trump to do that. How do you not see that? Is there anything he can do where you might judge his actions negatively? He stands at the bank window with a gun and a ski mask and your reaction when he hands the teller a note is, "Hey, we can't infer anything from his actions. Maybe he's just asking her out on a date."

He's trying - yet again - to undercut the nomination process, raise his own profile on the big stage and act like he's the presumptive nominee. It wouldn't even really be appropriate for Hillary to do this and she IS the presumptive nominee. He's doing it because he's lost the Democratic electorate so now he's going outside the family to take a role he hasn't earned, pull in extra votes before a big primary and try desperately to sway the superdelegates hoping they'll override the popular vote.
I hadn't realized that helping the Democrats meant kissing Hillary's backside. I guess we have different definitions of "helping Democrats".

Hillary could of course step forward and demand to be included in this debate so she would every opportunity to make both Trump and Sanders look like idiots.

But we know this isn't going to happen.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
If Hillary hadn't turned down the opportunity to debate Sanders recently Kimmel never wouldn't have asked Trump the question and thereby Sanders would not have had the opportunity to accept....bottom line this event was triggered by Hillary being a wuss...

the OP link has really good insight on the pros and cons and for whom...

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/144955383691/the-sanders-debate-gambit
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

Opinionated
May 26 2016, 02:14 PM
Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 02:11 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 01:47 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep

Yeah, because clearly he wants to help Hillary. That's a far more realistic assumption of his motives. If he wants to help Hillary so badly, his endorsement of her and his immediate departure from the race would be the best way of doing so.

He's helping himself and he is perfectly comfortable partnering with Donald Trump to do that. How do you not see that? Is there anything he can do where you might judge his actions negatively? He stands at the bank window with a gun and a ski mask and your reaction when he hands the teller a note is, "Hey, we can't infer anything from his actions. Maybe he's just asking her out on a date."

He's trying - yet again - to undercut the nomination process, raise his own profile on the big stage and act like he's the presumptive nominee. It wouldn't even really be appropriate for Hillary to do this and she IS the presumptive nominee. He's doing it because he's lost the Democratic electorate so now he's going outside the family to take a role he hasn't earned, pull in extra votes before a big primary and try desperately to sway the superdelegates hoping they'll override the popular vote.
I hadn't realized that helping the Democrats meant kissing Hillary's backside. I guess we have different definitions of "helping Democrats".

Hillary could of course step forward and demand to be included in this debate so she would every opportunity to make both Trump and Sanders look like idiots.

But we know this isn't going to happen.
Yes, surprisingly, supporting the Democratic nominee - or at least making a vague effort to not harm her too badly - is indeed part of being a Democrat. The Democratic Party is not a sewing club or a bowling league or a fast food franchise. It is an organization composed of members who select candidates for the purpose of those candidates being elected. Outside of electing candidates to office, a political party has no function. Those candidates and their supporters, in turn, are expected to support the agenda of the party. In exchange, they receive the opportunity to help shape that agenda in collaboration with other party members. If one is not interested in the primary function of a party, it is a mystery to me why they choose to be a part of one.

All party members will not like each other or agree on everything. But those who do not come together to support candidates from the party should not consider themselves a member of it. It'd be like saying you are a New York Yankees fan. But you cheer against them in games, badmouth its players and wear a Boston Red Sox cap.

I'm increasingly curious as to what exactly being a member of the Democratic Party means to Sanders supporters. What exactly do they think parties do? For what purpose do they think they exist? Sanders himself seems to exemplify this. He joins a party completely at his convenience about five minutes before running for office, shows no respect whatsoever for it, accuses it obsessively of conspiracy against him, slanders it in the press, works to turn his followers against it and then expects blithely to be its nominee. In fact, he seems confused as to why it doesn't like him very much.

To paraphrase Kennedy, maybe Sanders and his backers need to spend less time crying about how little the party does for them and a little more time asking what they can do for the party.
Edited by Two a.m., May 26 2016, 02:36 PM.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

Ah, I see. The Democratic idea of competition is that the candidate running behind should ease up so the one ahead can win more easily. Because of course, that's exactly what Clinton did for Obama. :rollseyes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

I think this debate is a fantastic idea - and according to the media it is progressing on both sides.

There are several outcomes - and none bode well for Hillary Clinton.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Two a.m.
Member Avatar

Opinionated
May 26 2016, 02:43 PM
Ah, I see. The Democratic idea of competition is that the candidate running behind should ease up so the one ahead can win more easily. Because of course, that's exactly what Clinton did for Obama. :rollseyes:
Bernie isn't simply "running behind." He's lost the race by any rational measure. Most candidates would have dropped out by now. Those few who stay in generally don't do anything to harm the nominee once their own fate is clear.

But, yes, that is what Hillary did for Obama. After he claimed a slightly larger delegate count then her, she did indeed back off, concede and waved off the idea of a convention fight. She then gave a rousing speech backing him and fought to elect him. This wasn't easy. In fact, it took a couple of days as I recall for her to decide to give up.

Notably, her moral case for waging a superdelegate war as Bernie is doing was far, far stronger than Bernie's is. Her popular vote total was virtually even with Obama's while Bernie is down by three million votes. DNC rules robbed her of a significant share of delegates from Michigan and Florida, two large states where she was popular. Bernie has suffered nothing similar. Most of her wins were in primaries which better represent the voters' will. Most of Bernies' wins were in caucuses - like Washington State - where he won huge margins despite the bulk of primary voters backing Hillary Clinton. She also had more superdelegate support than he has.

But still she conceded. She didn't incite her supporters against the party with baseless charges of favoritism. She didn't try to undercut Obama by staging debates with John McCain. She didn't promise thing could get "messy" at the convention.

That's because Hillary Clinton has loyalty to something larger than herself.

If Sanders has such a loyalty, it certainly isn't to the Democratic Party.
Edited by Two a.m., May 26 2016, 03:22 PM.
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Two a.m.
May 26 2016, 03:22 PM
Opinionated
May 26 2016, 02:43 PM
Ah, I see. The Democratic idea of competition is that the candidate running behind should ease up so the one ahead can win more easily. Because of course, that's exactly what Clinton did for Obama. :rollseyes:
Bernie isn't simply "running behind." He's lost the race by any rational measure. Most candidates would have dropped out by now. Those few who stay in generally don't do anything to harm the nominee once their own fate is clear.

But, yes, that is what Hillary did for Obama. After he claimed a slightly larger delegate count then her, she did indeed back off, concede and waved off the idea of a convention fight. She then gave a rousing speech backing him and fought to elect him. This wasn't easy. In fact, it took a couple of days as I recall for her to decide to give up.

Notably, her moral case for waging a superdelegate war as Bernie is doing was far, far stronger than Bernie's is. Her popular vote total was virtually even with Obama's while Bernie is down by three million votes. DNC rules robbed her of a significant share of delegates from Michigan and Florida, two large states where she was popular. Bernie has suffered nothing similar. Most of her wins were in primaries which better represent the voters' will. Most of Bernies' wins were in caucuses - like Washington State - where he won huge margins despite the bulk of primary voters backing Hillary Clinton. She also had more superdelegate support than he has.

But still she conceded. She didn't incite her supporters against the party with baseless charges of favoritism. She didn't try to undercut Obama by staging debates with John McCain. She didn't promise thing could get "messy" at the convention.

That's because Hillary Clinton has loyalty to something larger than herself.

If Sanders has such a loyalty, it certainly isn't to the Democratic Party.
To be fair though - the delegates have only pledged their support. That isn't cemented until the convention.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic »
Add Reply