• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Media treatment of Bernie Sanders: a story in pictures

The idea that a Bernie Sanders victory will somehow significantly alter the US's prospects any more than any other Democratic candidate is fanciful. Unless the Dems take the Senate (a big if) and hold the House, it won't really matter very much which Dem wins the POTUS.

Refer to my post in Democrats 2020 for why this is a nonsense take.

TL;DR: you are right that no Democratic candidate will alter the US's prospects, but it doesn't even matter if they take the Senate and hold the House or not. Nothing changes in the US unless there is a popular movement that is ready to fight the class war that has been going on for decades, with a resurgent and unionized labor force prepared to extract concessions from our broken system via work stoppages and other disruptions. The only candidate whose victory depends on the existence of that movement is Bernie Sanders. In other words, don't support him because you think HE can change things, support him because WE need to change things, and that's a hell of a lot easier to do with him as president versus a neoliberal who will always (and I mean always) side with corporate interests in the event of any tangible popular or labor-driven threat to their power.
 
The idea that a Bernie Sanders victory will somehow significantly alter the US's prospects any more than any other Democratic candidate is fanciful. Unless the Dems take the Senate (a big if) and hold the House, it won't really matter very much which Dem wins the POTUS.

Refer to my post in Democrats 2020 for why this is a nonsense take.

TL;DR: you are right that no Democratic candidate will alter the US's prospects, but it doesn't even matter if they take the Senate and hold the House or not. Nothing changes in the US unless there is a popular movement that is ready to fight the class war that has been going on for decades, with a resurgent and unionized labor force prepared to extract concessions from our broken system via work stoppages and other disruptions. The only candidate whose victory depends on the existence of that movement is Bernie Sanders. In other words, don't support him because you think HE can change things, support him because WE need to change things, and that's a hell of a lot easier to do with him as president versus a neoliberal who will always (and I mean always) side with corporate interests in the event of any tangible popular or labor-driven threat to their power.

Very well said. Getting a progressive elected may not immediately fix things, but it does get a progressive elected, and that is one less force fighting against progress. He can put the spotlight on what the oligarchs want hidden at the very least.
 
The idea that a Bernie Sanders victory will somehow significantly alter the US's prospects any more than any other Democratic candidate is fanciful. Unless the Dems take the Senate (a big if) and hold the House, it won't really matter very much which Dem wins the POTUS.

Refer to my post in Democrats 2020 for why this is a nonsense take.
LOL - that is delusional. If you really think Medicare for All is possible, it will take a revolution of the likes that Sanders and his unthinking bootlickers cannot imagine.
TL;DR: you are right that no Democratic candidate will alter the US's prospects
I did not write that. I will rephrase my point for the obtuse: any Democratic candidate who becomes President will improve the US's prospects significantly compared to those under Trump, but the difference in prospects does not really depend on who the candidate is.

Once the phrase "fight the class war that has been going on for decades", I know there is no rational analysis to follow.
 
LOL - that is delusional. If you really think Medicare for All is possible, it will take a revolution of the likes that Sanders and his unthinking bootlickers cannot imagine.
TL;DR: you are right that no Democratic candidate will alter the US's prospects
I did not write that. I will rephrase my point for the obtuse: any Democratic candidate who becomes President will improve the US's prospects significantly compared to those under Trump, but the difference in prospects does not really depend on who the candidate is.

Once the phrase "fight the class war that has been going on for decades", I know there is no rational analysis to follow.

No doubt about it. The differences between Dem candidates 1 through 18 is far less than the difference between any Dem candidate X and Donald Trump. Hell, any random citizen who becomes President will improve the US's prospects significantly compared to those under Trump.
 
LOL - that is delusional. If you really think Medicare for All is possible, it will take a revolution of the likes that Sanders and his unthinking bootlickers cannot imagine.
TL;DR: you are right that no Democratic candidate will alter the US's prospects
I did not write that. I will rephrase my point for the obtuse: any Democratic candidate who becomes President will improve the US's prospects significantly compared to those under Trump, but the difference in prospects does not really depend on who the candidate is.

Once the phrase "fight the class war that has been going on for decades", I know there is no rational analysis to follow.

No doubt about it. The differences between Dem candidates 1 through 18 is far less than the difference between any Dem candidate X and Donald Trump. Hell, any random citizen who becomes President will improve the US's prospects significantly compared to those under Trump.

This is where we disagree, on multiple clauses within both of your statements. Biden is much closer to Trump than he is to Sanders ideologically.
 
This is where we disagree, on multiple clauses within both of your statements. Biden is much closer to Trump than he is to Sanders ideologically.

First of all, that doesn’t pass the sniff test. You would need to demonstrate that.
Second - who ON EARTH thinks that Trump’s ideology is the only thing wrong with him!?!?
 
This is where we disagree, on multiple clauses within both of your statements. Biden is much closer to Trump than he is to Sanders ideologically.

First of all, that doesn’t pass the sniff test. You would need to demonstrate that.
It's a matter of where the one making the statement is situated ideologically. From my perspective, it's obvious that Trump and Biden are representatives of imperialism and market capitalism, leading to inevitable climate destruction, further income inequality, millions of preventable deaths due to lack of health care, continued incarceration of immigrants and people of color, uncritical support of Israel, dismissive contempt for the poor and homeless, and a cozy relationship with big financial interests. Those things matter to me more than whatever differences there may be between the two.

Second - who ON EARTH thinks that Trump’s ideology is the only thing wrong with him!?!?
If you're referring to his personality, in that sense he's still much closer to Biden than Biden is to Bernie. If I just made your fingers fly to the keyboard and start to type something about old white men all being interchangeable, ask yourself whether there is anything constructive or reality-based about that sentiment before you begin.
 
Bernie tilts but often votes interests of constituents. Not gonna ruin that winter wonderland anytime soon. He knows that butter should be applied to the up side of bread.

Huh? Bread, butter? What are you on about?

The interests of his constituents are that they should have jobs, including jobs in extractive industries and that they should pay reasonable price for natural gas and oil derivatives instead of oil going north of $100/bbl like it was before the shale revolution.
And yet, Bernie wants to ban fracking.
Bernie Sanders wants to eliminate fracking. Here's how many jobs may go with it
Mind you, working class folk he claims to fight for can't afford any of the S3XY Tesla models or even a Nissan Leaf, so they are reliant on ICE power for the time being.

Then there is him wanting to take the military aid to Israel and give it to Gaza instead.
Democratic hopeful Sanders urges giving chunk of US military aid to Gaza instead
He also mentioned Gaza in this week's debate.
Never mind that Israel withdrew from Gaza 14 years ago. Never mind that Gaza has since 2006 been run by an islamofascist terrorist organization whose head in Gaza vows to "tear down the border with Israel and rip their [Israelis'] hearts out from their bodies". Never mind that Hamas has plenty of money to build and stockpile thousands of rockets, dig attack tunnels into Israel and enrich the upper echelons of Hamas - some are even billionaires. Gaza has major problems, but they should be blamed on Hamas (and other terror groups like PIJ), not Israel. For example, when Hamas invests in the people of Gaza, they don't do things like upgrading water or sewer infrastructure, but instead hand out free IVF treatments, thereby increasing the already astronomic birth rate and exasperating systemic problems in the Strip.
If Gaza doesn't want to be bombed by Israel, they should stop shooting rockets at Israeli civilians and cease other acts of aggression such as throwing explosive devices at soldiers across the border, trying to infiltrate into Israeli territory or sending explosive or incendiary balloons across the border. Israel has a right to defend itself after all.

How Sanders would pump billions into historically black colleges and universities
Black colleges are an anachronism and should not be subsidized by the federal government. They certainly should not be beneficiaries of special subsidies because of their racial makeup.
Politico said:
The Vermont independent is building out his left-leaning posture on higher education with plans to send big sums of money to private colleges, eliminate more than $1 billion in schools’ debt to the government and expand job training programs for minorities.
Why should federal government bail out private colleges, esp. if the reason for that bail-out is race? And job training programs should be open to all, not just so-called "minorities".
“Historically Black Colleges and Universities have educated generations of African American leaders, and helped build and grow the culture of diversity that makes our country what it is today,” Sanders said in a statement.
Wrong. Black colleges are not about diversity. They are the least diverse colleges we have in the US.
Take Morehouse, where he was speaking.
chart-ethnic-diversity_xl.png
Or Clark, where Elizabeth Warren was speaking.
chart-ethnic-diversity_xl.png

Yet the need for HBCUs and the education they provide has never been greater."
Why does he think there is a great need today for colleges that cater to one race? I believe he does not really believe that, but is saying what his handlers told him to say in order to have a better chance at the nomination. Because he is smarter than to actually believe that. Or maybe he has gotten so senile to really believes this crap.

This article is even worse:
Bernie Sanders Launches HBCU Funding Proposal At Morehouse

GPB said:
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders says if he is elected president, attending any historically black college would be tuition-free.
Most so-called HBCUs are private. And yet Bernie wants to transfer tax-payer money to these private institutions just because they are black.
“We are going to encourage young people to go into teaching because we're going to give educators the respect and compensation they deserve,” he said. “And that means that no teacher in America should earn less than $60,000 a year.”
That's kind of high for just teaching, especially basic teaching like elementary school or high school English.
Speaking specifically about HBCUs, Sanders said that students who attend those institutions have struggled financially from a lack of federal funding.
If they struggle to go to a private college, they should go to a state school instead. Why should federal government pay for them just because they are black and want to go to a college where at least 95% of people are black?
One proposal would make HBCUs, tribal colleges and other minority-serving institutions tuition free.
Screw white people, right? They don't matter in the modern Democratic Party.
Sanders wasn’t the only candidate to talk HBCU funding while in town for the debate. South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg released details of his plan at Morehouse on Monday.
Too bad. I had hopes for that guy.

2016 Bernie was for the interests of his constituents. I kinda liked that Bernie. In 2020, he is a very different candidate, more of a regular, doctrinaire US leftist. I blame his age and failing health that made him more susceptible to the "staff infection", i.e. relying more on advice by those around him, including such toxic people as Linda "Cockroach" Sarsour.[quote
 
Last edited:
Any other Yang Gang on here? Anybody else been following the MSNBC debate and fallout from it regarding him? Wow. He's getting a TON of media attention now for not getting any MSNBC media attention and their past shenanigans against him. This is exactly how they treated Sanders in 2016 and as this thread has shown still are to a large degree.

Yang Gang has had a great effect. And so has Yang's calm demeanor.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwKIVbWOezA[/youtube]
 
Bernie, Tulsi, and Yang, the 3 most likely to actually beat Trump, because they can each chip away at his supporters and Bernie/Yang have large grassroots movements behind them, are also the 3 that the mainstream media tries to vanish.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRlxVLB-rUE[/youtube]

As the lady above says, they don't want somebody who is going to go in, shake things up and actually push for change. They want to retain the status quo.
 
Any other Yang Gang on here? Anybody else been following the MSNBC debate and fallout from it regarding him? Wow. He's getting a TON of media attention now for not getting any MSNBC media attention and their past shenanigans against him. This is exactly how they treated Sanders in 2016 and as this thread has shown still are to a large degree.

Yang Gang has had a great effect. And so has Yang's calm demeanor.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwKIVbWOezA[/youtube]

He has grown on me, I like his attitude, but he has taken some steps backwards with all the whining about his media attention.
 
I think he played that perfectly. It has drawn in a ton of other media seeking to distinguish themselves and compete with MSNBC. He has played them off of each other and their sense of competition with each other. And it's about time he said something about what they have been doing to him since day one. It's really quite remarkable, and Bernie has faced similar shenanigans.

For anyone who is curious about how extensive this has been:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/news/2019/11/andrew-yang-msnbc/amp/
 
I think he played that perfectly. It has drawn in a ton of other media seeking to distinguish themselves and compete with MSNBC. He has played them off of each other and their sense of competition with each other. And it's about time he said something about what they have been doing to him since day one. It's really quite remarkable, and Bernie has faced similar shenanigans.

For anyone who is curious about how extensive this has been:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/news/2019/11/andrew-yang-msnbc/amp/
Outside candidate with no political experience upset over lack of coverage of his 2 to 4% polling results, since July. Complains that current US Senators, US House Representatives, and former Governors getting more exposure from media.
 
I think he played that perfectly. It has drawn in a ton of other media seeking to distinguish themselves and compete with MSNBC. He has played them off of each other and their sense of competition with each other. And it's about time he said something about what they have been doing to him since day one. It's really quite remarkable, and Bernie has faced similar shenanigans.

For anyone who is curious about how extensive this has been:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/news/2019/11/andrew-yang-msnbc/amp/
Outside candidate with no political experience upset over lack of coverage of his 2 to 4% polling results, since July. Complains that current US Senators, US House Representatives, and former Governors getting more exposure from media.

You clearly haven't followed the story. He has consistently been given less time than anyone else, including many that he has polled higher than and outraised. He has been omitted from infographics dozens of times, and replaced by those who are far far below him in polls. And despite that, his campaign has been growing faster than any other.

There is a very clear bias against not just him, but any outsider to the status quo politicians. Klobuchar is being pushed way way harder than her numbers would justify. So was Pete, who is very much a media and DNC created success story (he actually is now polling high enough to warrant the attention; yet oddly the media won't criticize him or ask him tough questions; like about his faked black support).

Bernie has been facing this since 2016, but he is too big now for them to totally omit him as they have Yang this cycle. Yang may be turning that corner now too as seen above (the Daily Show has now featured him).

Downplay Bernie, smear Tulsi, ignore Yang, push the milk toast "mainstream" corporate candidates with no vision.... It's almost like they want to lose to Trump again.
 
I think he played that perfectly. It has drawn in a ton of other media seeking to distinguish themselves and compete with MSNBC. He has played them off of each other and their sense of competition with each other. And it's about time he said something about what they have been doing to him since day one. It's really quite remarkable, and Bernie has faced similar shenanigans.

For anyone who is curious about how extensive this has been:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/news/2019/11/andrew-yang-msnbc/amp/
Outside candidate with no political experience upset over lack of coverage of his 2 to 4% polling results, since July. Complains that current US Senators, US House Representatives, and former Governors getting more exposure from media.

You clearly haven't followed the story. He has consistently been given less time than anyone else, including many that he has polled higher than and outraised. He has been omitted from infographics dozens of times, and replaced by those who are far far below him in polls. And despite that, his campaign has been growing faster than any other.
His campaign? What about his polling? Averaging about 3% in the polls.

There is a very clear bias against not just him, but any outsider to the status quo politicians.
Bias or professional experience indicating guy with no political experience polling 3% for several months = isn't getting traction.

Klobuchar is being pushed way way harder than her numbers would justify.
Klobuchar is a Senator, correct?
So was Pete, who is very much a media and DNC created success story (he actually is now polling high enough to warrant the attention; yet oddly the media won't criticize him or ask him tough questions; like about his faked black support).
You mean like this article on Buttigieg's Douglass plan?

Bernie has been facing this since 2016, but he is too big now for them to totally omit him as they have Yang this cycle. Yang may be turning that corner now too as seen above (the Daily Show has now featured him).

Downplay Bernie, smear Tulsi, ignore Yang, push the milk toast "mainstream" corporate candidates with no vision.... It's almost like they want to lose to Trump again.
Bernie is too old, Gabbard too inexperienced, Yang no experience.
 
Bernie is too old, Gabbard too inexperienced, Yang no experience.

Biden and Warren not too old? Pete has only been a mayor of a small town. Does he have sufficient experience for you? For that matter, did Obama? I bet you were saying he didn't and Hillary should have gotten that nomination. Am I right? If not, why not?

Warren and Bernie are the exceptions of the top four who actually wants to get something substantial done, and even Warren wavers on it a lot. Where is your positive message with Biden or Pete? They are standard insider politicians pushing the status quo and pushing against change like universal single payer health care.
 
Where is your positive message with Biden or Pete?

They each have the most powerful possible message: "I am not Trump."
I will vote for any major party nominee who can truthfully say that.

I don't expect Warren to be the next president. I'd like it if she was, but I'd like it if Bloomberg was, too.
 
Back
Top Bottom