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

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
This race was over March 15 2016. Bernie is just being his old stubborn self in not conceding yet. Bernie never really hade a chance because Hillary killed him early. Bernie was still trying to figure out how this works whilst Hillary was grabbing Super-delegates. I hate seeeing you newbies not understanding how politics work.

Can I share a secret with you ? Trump and Bernie both did a big NO NO on their quest to become POTUS
You never ever talk about auditing the Fed Reserve whilst running for office. If you going to do it, keep it hush hush until in office. Bernie nor Trump will not get in office due to this.
upload_2016-5-9_20-39-55.png
By: Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C.

Facts: Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

Facts: No foreigners own any part of the Fed. Each Federal Reserve bank is owned exclusively by the participating commercial banks and S&Ls operating within the Federal Reserve bank's district. Individuals and non-bank firms, be they foreign or domestic, are not permitted by law to own any shares of a Federal Reserve bank. Moreover, monetary policy is controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors, not by the Federal Reserve banks.

Fact: Independent accounting firms conduct full financial audits of the Federal Reserve banks and the Board of Governors every year. The Fed is also subject to certain types of audits from the Government Accounting Office.

Facts: The Federal Reserve rebates its net earnings to the Treasury every year. Consequently, the interest the Treasury pays to the Fed is returned, so the money borrowed from the Fed has no net interest obligation for the Treasury. The government could print its own currency independent of the Fed, but there would be no effective safeguards against abuse of this power for political gain.

Facts: The Federal Reserve banks have only a small share of the total national debt (about 7%). Therefore, only a small share of the interest on the debt goes to the Fed. Regardless, the Fed rebates that interest to the Treasury every year, so the debt held by the Fed carries no net interest obligation for the government. In addition, it is Congress, not the Federal Reserve, who is responsible for the federal budget and the national debt.

Facts: Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Facts: McFadden was incorrect regarding the Fed costing the government money. However, later economic analysis agrees with him that Federal Reserve policy blunders had a substantial role in causing the Depression. However, his implication that this was done deliberately has no basis in fact. Moreover, for a dozen years prior to his rant, McFadden had been the chairman of the House subcommittee that oversaw the Federal Reserve. Why didn't he do anything to reform or abolish the Fed while he had the chance?

Facts: The banking system is indeed able to create money with a mere computer keystroke. However, a bank's ability to create money is tied directly to the amount of reserves customers have deposited there. A bank must pay a competitive interest rate on those deposits to keep them from leaving to other banks. This interest expense alone is a substantial portion of a bank's operating costs and is de facto proof a bank cannot costlessly create money.

Fact: The term 'lawful money' does not refer to gold or silver coin, but to types of money which the government would permit banks to use when tabulating their reserves. These types of money included, but were not limited to, gold and silver coin.

BY: Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
There is a reason for this.

Bernie has better numbers all around because he's the people's choice.

This is why his national numbers are higher..included in the polling, are those who didn't get to vote.

Hillary appears to be the winner based upon her 2M voter lead..but ask yourself what would it be, if those disenfranchised Independents got to vote? NY alone had 3.2M Independents who were not allowed to vote.

Her lead therefore is false, because the numbers are not representative of ALL voters.

Just like Mitt and his false numbers..boy did he learn a lesson.

THE GENERAL ELECTION WILL INCLUDE ALL VOTERS..Hillary is fooling herself moreover her supporters.
All these are strong arguments indeed.

The victories in closed primaries just aren't indicative of the mood of the average voter. They will certainly express themselves at the polls this November and I believe the closed caucus I personally witnessed and participated in March 1 here in Colorado showed the mood of the country more accurately than the current delegate score.
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
All these are strong arguments indeed.

The victories in closed primaries just aren't indicative of the mood of the average voter. They will certainly express themselves at the polls this November and I believe the closed caucus I personally witnessed and participated in March 1 here in Colorado showed the mood of the country more accurately than the current delegate score.
Ron Paul never lost a single online Poll
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
There's a very clear conflict of interest when Clinton says she will regulate Wall St. (the same thing you seem to believe is a fairy tale if Sanders tries it) then receives over $2 million for giving speeches to the same industry she says she's going to regulate..

If you have to ask "What's the big deal?", you're not the least bit informed about this issue
:clap: +rep.
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
There are a lot of strong arguments for Mr Sanders' candidacy in this analysis. Most of the reasons I think he's the right choice are listed plus a few new gems- cleanest record of any presidential candidate in the last century, vs a very possible indictment, anyone?

The groundswell of popular support for Bernie is undeniable, even the most biased 'news' outlets can't hide it.

I think that if the democratic party fucks up somehow and DOESN'T nominate him, it will be a career ending mistake for a lot of 'liberal' apparatchiks... while they watch the Chump cruise to victory.
:clap: +rep.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
There's no conflict of interest when the industry being regulated bribes the politicians responsible for setting the regulations?
I'm amazed you have to explain the conflict of interest.

I mean, the notion that corporations would spend millions on political campaigns and NOT expect anything in return is laughable!

It turns out the ROI on campaign bribery is extremely attractive from the corporate perspective. The only losers in the bargain? The average American taxpaying citizen, but why should anyone care about THEM?

(cuz them is us)
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
The only place I hear about people writing Bernie in is on RIU. Thank god its only 5 people, well 2 and socks.
 
Last edited:

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
I'm amazed you have to explain the conflict of interest.
I thought that was pretty amazing myself.. It's fine if you support Clinton, but to stick your head in the sand about these issues and act like they don't exist just because she's the presumptive democratic nominee is incredibly disingenuous. That's the kind of behavior we see from conservatives on this board all the time
I mean, the notion that corporations would spend millions on political campaigns and NOT expect anything in return is laughable!

It turns out the ROI on campaign bribery is extremely attractive from the corporate perspective. The only losers in the bargain? The average American taxpaying citizen, but why should anyone care about THEM?

(cuz them is us)


 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
I thought that was pretty amazing myself.. It's fine if you support Clinton, but to stick your head in the sand about these issues and act like they don't exist just because she's the presumptive democratic nominee is incredibly disingenuous. That's the kind of behavior we see from conservatives on this board all the time



Did Clinton ever return the Money Trump gave her?
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Thousands of contributions to Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ campaign in January violated federal campaign finance laws, election regulators said on Thursday.

The Federal Election Commission sent a letter to the Democratic presidential candidate’s campaign committee on Thursday with a 90-page spreadsheet listing 3,457 “excessive, prohibited, and impermissible contributions.”

The campaign’s January financial disclosure filing listed contributions from foreign nationals and unregistered political committees, the FEC said. Other contributions came from donors who exceeded the $2,700 per-election limit.

“Although the Commission may take further legal action concerning the acceptance of [excessive or prohibited] contributions, your prompt action to refund the prohibited amount will be taken into consideration,” the FEC told the campaign.
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Alphabet Inc $255,814 $255,814 $0
University of California $158,783 $158,783 $0
Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $105,000 $0 $105,000
Microsoft Corp $96,446 $96,446 $0
Teamsters Union $96,393 $3,393 $93,000
National Education Assn $94,861 $13,861 $81,000
Apple Inc $85,576 $85,576 $0
United Auto Workers $81,125 $2,225 $78,900
United Food & Commercial Workers Union $73,635 $1,135 $72,500
Communications Workers of America $72,428 $5,928 $66,500
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $68,519 $15,519 $53,000
US Postal Service $64,728 $64,728 $0
Laborers Union $64,412 $412 $64,000
Carpenters & Joiners Union $63,600 $1,600 $62,000
Amazon.com $63,385 $63,385 $0
American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $62,674 $5,676 $56,998
US Navy $61,046 $61,046 $0
National Assn of Letter Carriers $61,000 $0 $61,000
American Assn for Justice $60,530 $530 $60,000
Kaiser Permanente $58,313 $58,313 $0
OMG Sanders is owned by Amazon and Unions
 

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Where the fuck does the US Navy get off donating to a political campaign? Isnt that tax money????
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Huntsman, daughter of one-time GOP presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman, had gigs as political commentators on MSNBC.Nellie Bly. "Given her vast experiences, it's as though Chelsea has been preparing for this opportunity her entire life," he said.

Clinton's hiring only underscored the stunting of network news. Talented and experienced journalists have been laid off by the cartload. Precious airtime, especially on the morning shows, has been turned over to celebrity reporting and in-house promotions thinly disguised as news. Original reporting is turned over to freelancers (no benefits necessary, don't you know) or to local affiliates. What's happened to the money saved? It's gone to fatten the bottom line and to finance stunt hiring like Clinton's
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
I thought that was pretty amazing myself.. It's fine if you support Clinton, but to stick your head in the sand about these issues and act like they don't exist just because she's the presumptive democratic nominee is incredibly disingenuous. That's the kind of behavior we see from conservatives on this board all the time



Whoa, I didn't know it was THAT bad.

Think of all the wars we could fund with that cash! o_O

The idea that America can't afford to take care of its own makes me want to :spew::spew::spew:
 
Top