That's not how he started though. He was the first to integrate social media and web based platforms for Presidential campaigns, which Bernie is now copying. The fact that investment banks contribute to political campaigns doesn't necessarily make a candidate more moral than one who doesn't get IB backing. See Trump.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
- Status
That's not how he started though. He was the first to integrate social media and web based platforms for Presidential campaigns, which Bernie is now copying. The fact that investment banks contribute to political campaigns doesn't necessarily make a candidate more moral than one who doesn't get IB backing. See Trump.
Bit hard to knock Obama when he's on a hiding to nothing in Congress. He's not as left as Sanders but he's done as well as could be expected.
Bernie's record and longevity in sticking to his guns on principle (and being vindicated most of the time), coupled with this fact, makes him a different political beast to Obama. And you DID say that Obama's funding wasn't too different from Bernie's, and you're demonstrably wrong on that point.
Incidentally, I do think Obama catches more flak than he deserves. But you can't just say that he failed to live up to promises as any politician would. He was fervent about closing Guantanamo, not sure what happened there. He's not launched any wars, but he's presided over an administration that's severely eroded the rights of the citizens. Outlawing demonstrations in front of government buildings, the NSA monitoring everbody wholesale, even to the point of tapping Merkel's phone, and drone assassinations as routine, even allowing it to be done to US citizens without a trial.
I like Obama, I like that he's done his best to raise the issues of guns, and that he tried to do something about healthcare. But it's clear that establishment politicians will only be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
I like Obama, I like that he's done his best to raise the issues of guns, and that he tried to do something about healthcare. But it's clear that establishment politicians will only be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
When is the "final" so to speak? Hope Bernie wins, the U.S could do with a good oul dose of equality and socialism.
@Raoul is correct, Obama was regularly getting over $30m a month (and over 60% of his total amount) from small donors of $200 or less once the primaries began. Sanders up to 31st of December was at 65%.
There's a difference between unions and major banks, though, in terms of the bigger donors.
This is individual donors, not groups. And the two links posted on the previous page aren't much help, for one they're career-based so not great for looking at what Obama was like in 2008, plus the overall amounts would be pretty slim even if they were the right amounts- Obama raised over $700m for his first Presidential campaign, so the figures wouldn't really make up much of it.
But in total fairness, Obama did get huge amount of large donations as well, immediately before the election as well as before his campaign really took fire after winning Iowa,. But let's not be in any doubt, if Bernie won the nomination he'd be getting massive donations as well - a lot of very rich people are Democrats and would be wanting the candidate, whoever that is, to succeed. And to succeed you need money.
Fecking hell, seriously? I knew there's big money involved but that's fecking ridiculous. For a campaign? Flyers, ads, travel expenses and staff salaries - what more is there to it? Am I missing something?
Edit: I assume "raised" = spent. Right?
Yup - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_for_the_2008_United_States_presidential_election - tis absurd. Ads are surprisingly expensive.
Both candidates got to about $1bn in 2012. Probably get to $1.5bn if it's Clinton this time around.
He does indeed catch more flak than he deserves. His entire Presidency has been hampered by the opposition taking cynically obstructionist positions to thwart his every policy move. And then when he attempts to reach out to the political center for compromise, he gets it from the leftists who cherry pick things that he promised during the campaign but couldn't implement. Its a thankless job, even for someone as capable as him.
do you think he could have played more hard ball with the Republicans? After all no law becomes law until he signs it into law.
Apart from trade deals last year (which turned out to be temporary since the centres of both parties eventually supported him), he has not been obstructed from the left in anything he has done. Not that I can remember, at least.
Obstructing by Congress' Dems for being leftist (carbon tax) =/ obstructing from the left. It is in fact just another strain of Republican obstruction.
My only criticism is he should've been far more aggressive in his first two years when the Dems controlled Congress. He could've gotten most of his policies passed then, but he opted to be more collaborative with the GOP, which gave them time to regroup, retake Congress, and then spend the remaining 6 years undermining virtually everything he has since tried.
He hasn't been obstructed by the left but there is plenty of moaning about one off things he didn't do for them, which is understandable given the obstruction from the right.
Thought somewhat ironically, one of his campaign pledges was to work across the aisle and attempt to unify things. As you said, thankless.
Spotted a poster named @Ubik over at The Atlantic comment section... not related by any chance? 
Yeap, just look at that speech posted earlier. If he disregarded the GOP during his first two years then charges of him lying on his campaign promises would fly even earlier. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I hope Sanders really know what he's doing, otherwise the world can get fecked pretty badly for the next 4-8 years. President Marco 'make the military greater than it has ever been' Rubio or Ted 'bomb them until the desert glow' Cruz is a terrifying prodpect.
Genuinely not! Are they feeling the Bern?Spotted a poster named @Ubik over at The Atlantic comment section... not related by any chance?
Obama gets so much shit from both sides, although the calls that he is somehow intentionally operating against the country's interests are the lowest imo. But I have a feeling that most Presidents will suffer this for as long as politics are this polarized and the narratives conspiracy-driven.
The Atlantic Ubik is arguing the merits of direct subsidies to colleges vs. student loan subsidies. I can't tell if he's a full Bern supporter or not, only 3 posts.
For a second I thought you're talking about Putin
Highlights the absurdity of doesn't it.
TLW said:
Yup. Sadly, there also seems to be a strong tone of racism to the way he's been demonised as well.
And speaking of thankless jobs, getting stuck with Bush's tab his first few years wasn't going to help him get his policies through either, and he doesn't even get any credit from Republicans for cleaning it up really well.
LL Trump (and I do mean all the ladies)
Would potentially have also damaged him more going into 2012, and we could be looking at President Romney's re-election in November.
I'm genuinely not sure what Bernie'll end up doing, should he fail to win the nomination, in terms of campaigning for Hillary. She gets some pretty hefty abuse levelled at her, and Bernie doesn't exactly see eye to eye with her on many things. Would he encourage his movement to support the one they've come to hate? He's not even a member of the Democrats so it's all a bit odd.
Yeah, actual policy considerations are far too high-brow for me
My screen name clearly isn't as original and groundbreaking as I thought.Jeb Bush has a lot to answer for. Another shite showing in NH and SC, and he may be under pressure to bow out.
He campaigned for Obama, and said when he announced that a 3rd party run is out of the question and he will support the party's nominee whoever it is.
Also, this is just 19th century hilariousness. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...cratic-precinct-results-unaccounted/79682184/
Agreed. I wonder if he was slow rolling hoping to get the house/Senate for longer?
Need more polls. Wonder then they'll expand beyond SC?
pretty much agree with that.
Of the (few) other states that have been polled, California showed a drastic improvement for Sanders (he went up to within 10 pts in December, a little behind his Iowa numbers of the time), while NY was a bloodbath against him. Can't remember any others.
TBF Trump has a point. Not many expected him to get this far and the number of votes he got last night was significant.
It's just that when you build your entire campaign around showing off and telling everyone how easily you are going to win, an unexpected 2nd place and a situation where he barely held on and didn't slide down to 3rd is actually a crushing defeat.
It's just that when you build your entire campaign around showing off and telling everyone how easily you are going to win, an unexpected 2nd place and a situation where he barely held on and didn't slide down to 3rd is actually a crushing defeat.
pretty much. Still Rubio sounds like a numpty shooting off his mouth. Coming 3rd is winning
Cruz is already in South Carolina trying to outflank Trump, who is leading there. Hope Trump gets a clue and smashes Cruz back down a few notches.
Not a Cruz fan?
I'm a conservative because I've taken handouts all my life...brilliant, just brilliant.
I think he might be holding out for Florida. Which is pointless because there's absolutely no way his campaign is getting anywhere, and that should be crystal clear to him by now.
- Status