you use them in your daily life when you deal with your family, but somehow when you want to apply them to the entire country, they fail.
whut?
you use them in your daily life when you deal with your family, but somehow when you want to apply them to the entire country, they fail.
I did not say what you seem to think I said. Prior to Bernie saying he was tired of the "damn emails," he was merely another also-ran. Up until that point, he really didn't have any momentum - he was just the old white-haired guy from the granola state with a bunch of kumbaya ideas. Few were really listening to him. But, when he said that we were all sick of hearing about the damn emails, he was speaking mostly for the Democrats - yes, I know, there's still some froth on the side of your mouth, but it'll be all okay. Just clip your little ruby red shoes together and repeat the magic word - Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. Bernie may have gained ground with the Republicans by attacking Hilary in that manner, but he didn't have much to gain from Democrats, many of whom were starting to realize that the email thing was probably just another Republican smear campaign.Addressing widespread criminal conspiracy re: classified info is being kookie and slinging mud?
Unless you ever lived in a so called "social democracy", aka. in Europe...and can compare the systems, this INCLUDES your ridiculous election system, you're not qualified to form an opinion
Otherwise you're just spouting an opinion based on something you don't know. Aka..the definition of ignorance.
Do you think your current oligarchy (which is so obvious it borders the ridiculous) is the best you can have? If so, pretty lame.
"Anyone who doesn't agree with me, is ignorant and unqualified to hold opinions."
Par for the course with Bernie Bros. Sounds more like a certain someone just wants to throw a pissy fit after learning his man-love will not become President.
In that same vein, one of the things that disappointed me about Bernie's campaign was the harping about the Goldman Sachs speech transcripts.I did not say what you seem to think I said. Prior to Bernie saying he was tired of the "damn emails," he was merely another also-ran. Up until that point, he really didn't have any momentum - he was just the old white-haired guy from the granola state with a bunch of kumbaya ideas. Few were really listening to him. But, when he said that we were all sick of hearing about the damn emails, he was speaking mostly for the Democrats - yes, I know, there's still some froth on the side of your mouth, but it'll be all okay. Just clip your little ruby red shoes together and repeat the magic word - Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. Bernie may have gained ground with the Republicans by attacking Hilary in that manner, but he didn't have much to gain from Democrats, many of whom were starting to realize that the email thing was probably just another Republican smear campaign.
The moment he spoke those words during the debate (last October, wasn't it?) he instantly turned people's heads and got a ton of attention. He didn't behave like establishment candidates - he wanted to discuss the issues. He immediately gained credibility as being an honest politician. You think he'd have that credibility if he were attacking Hilary over the emails? Over Benghazi? So, a man who would have otherwise been dismissed as some kook who thought he could match up with Hilary, suddenly became a person whom people sick of the bullshit coming out of Washington could turn to.
I don't think he made any mistakes. I think the Voters are just not ready for what he offers.
I agree, it wasn't explained in detail, but from what was released, at least 1/3 of the funding would come from state governments and I doubt some states would be willing to expand higher education funding when many are in the throws of cutting funding to state schools. (On a related note, I also don't agree with totally "free" higher education funding - public schools should be affordable, but students should have some skin in the game.)Also, he never really explained the whole free education thing.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/03/politics/bernie-sanders-free-college-costs/The Vermont senator hasn't released many details on his proposal. However, his campaign pointed to legislation he introduced last year that called for the federal government to cover two-thirds of the bill for undergraduate students, with the states handling the rest. This would cost the feds $47 billion a year, while states would be left with a $23 billion tab, he estimated.
His mistake was being 70+ years old and looking like Dr. Emmet Brown on the national stage. He was always going to be resigned to "Kookie Bernie" status by nature of his appearance and some of the more outlandish policy positions he advocated.
I'm really flabbergasted that the Dems couldn't/didn't run another young, likable governor or congressman. I guess it's Hilary's turn and that would have been too big a threat...
I agree, it wasn't explained in detail, but from what was released, at least 1/3 of the funding would come from state governments and I doubt some states would be willing to expand higher education funding when many are in the throws of cutting funding to state schools. (On a related note, I also don't agree with totally "free" higher education funding - public schools should be affordable, but students should have some skin in the game.)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/03/politics/bernie-sanders-free-college-costs/