One reason to vote for Bernie Sanders....

[devil21]

What's even worse is that we have, otherwise, liberty advocates suggesting and supporting a socialist President. Pragmatism really blinds some people.

Ron Paul on ending US membership in the UN:


The UN is the method to enact global socialism.

 

[otherone]

Americans supporting a socialist President? What the fuck happened to this country??

If this fucker hadn't have died, he'd probably STILL be president.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

I've made the decision to vote for Sanders, myself. Painful choice, but Sanders is hated on the democratic side and the republican side. As someone else mentioned, with Sanders in office we will have nothing but gridlock. He will be a one term President due to his age, that will get absolutely nothing done, giving us a shot to get a liberty candidate in for 2020. There will be no 2020 if Hillary gets in, and the republicans will have us at war within six months.

If Sanders is elected, in 2020 the GOP nomination picture will most likely be overpacked again with 15+ candidates (unless the GOP and MSM limit the debates and poll tracking to contenders already in the double digits from the outset). The outcome of either the crowded field or exclusionary rules would be to freeze out the liberty candidate, not to make it easier for him to succeed.

 

[puppetmaster]

Yep, and I have always said that I preferred fascism to socialism.

yes me too. I don't want to though

 

[puppetmaster]

You guys are too hung up on the word "socialist". People making more than $250,000 year will see their taxes go up if congress supports him. Congress raise taxes on themselves and their buddies?

I have lived in a socialist country. Not good. His plan would devastate what's is left of our economy and prevent any new business I want to start so screw Bernie and his DUMBASS supporters.

 

[jkob]

The only reason to vote for Sanders is if WWIII would start otherwise, I am not voting for a communist to select 3-4 supreme court nominees. You are very shortsighted if you think that 2020 is some sort of plan, incumbent presidents very rarely lose and there is no reason why the GOP would nominate Rand. We need new names, new faces, different places. What is Rand going to do differently to win in 2020? Is there some other liberty candidate on the horizon?

 

[jmdrake]

What's even worse is that we have, otherwise, liberty advocates suggesting and supporting a socialist President. Pragmatism really blinds some people.

You want to talk pragmatism? Let's talk pragmatism.

Pragmatism is Rand Paul saying back in 2010 that we ought to keep Gitmo open and that the prisoners should be tried in military tribunals because testimony taken from torture would get thrown out in civilian court and "that would be a problem." (Note the testimony would also be thrown out of a military tribunal worth spit.)

Pragmatism is Rand Paul claiming he never said that Iran getting a nuclear bomb would not be a threat to the U.S. when there is video of him saying just that.

Pragmatism is changing from "I support the Civil Rights Act but have a problem with one section of it dealing with private businesses" to "I absolutely support the Civil Rights Act without any qualifications because it was needed to deal with previous discrimination." (He actually has a point on that particular flip flop but it's un-articulated.)

Pragmatism is Rand Paul on video telling Luke Rudowski that he had serious questions and concerns about the Bilderberg group, then after Bilderberg member Peter Thiel gave him a sizeable donation, all of a sudden avoiding questions about the Bilderberg. Rand Paul operative Jack "Southern Avenger" Hunter was dispatched to write an article basically calling anybody that talked about the Bilderberg group an idiot.

Pragmatism is that same Jack Hunter being asked to fall on his sword for the "crime" of in his younger years calling himself the Southern Avenger and wearing a confederate flag wrestling mask.

Pragmatism is endorsing Mitt Romney, whether or not his dad had really, really, really, dropped out of the race.

Pragmatism is endorsing Mitch McConnell for re-election.

Pragmatism is attacking Ted Cruz for calling McConnell a liar.

Pragmatism is signing the Tom Cotton letter, regardless of the explanation for signing it.

Pragmatism is voting for sanctions against Iran, regardless of the explanation for voting for it. I'll buy that it was a "symbolic gesture." But why was that symbolic gesture needed? Pragmatism.

Pragmatism is my continuing to support Rand Paul despite all of the above.

So....unless you were "smarter" than me and didn't support Rand....don't lecture me about pragmatism and the blindness it supposedly causes.

I do not want the likely pedophile Bill Clinton and his twisted wife anywhere near the oval office again. Bernie Sanders beating her in the primary assures that one happen. On the republican side, at this point, I really don't care who wins or loses. Everyone else left sucks. If Clinton is beaten in the primary, then I will be able to vote 3rd party in the general election with a clear conscience. If she wins the primary, than even though my vote likely won't matter because I'm in a "red state", I'll still have a strong temptation to vote for Trump/Cruz/ even (*gasp*) Rubio. Besides, being in a red state the primary is really the only time my vote counts in a presidential election anyway.

Lastly, I'm while angelatc favors fascism over socialism, and she's entitled to her opinion, I do not share it. I would rather live in socialist France or Canada than fascist era Spain, Italy or Argentina. Under democratic socialism I risk losing my money (the little I have.) Under fascism I risk losing my life.

 

[The Deacon]

I believe I read somewhere that Hillary and Bernie had a 93% similar voting record in the Senate (I can't find the exact site now). Bernie is not anti-war or anti-establishment. Other than gender, he is basically the same person as Hillary.

 

[jmdrake]

We already have socialist policies being passed in Congress. Just look at our tax code, for instance.

Then this country was socialist under George Washington and Alexander Hamilton when they decided to redistribute wealth from whiskey farmers living on the frontier with an excise tax directed only at them.

Now back to reality. Bernie Sanders will have one helluva time passing anything. Consider his flagship agenda item single payer healthcare. Many democrats won't vote for that at this point because that would be a tacit admission that Obamacare is a failure. And of course no republican will vote for it. Besides, neither the house nor the senate is expected to flip anytime soon.

Contrast that with Donald Trump. He knows how to make "deals." Let him become president and we have another Sandy Hook and he might just wheel and deal your gun rights away. He said you shouldn't have an assault rifle in his book "The America You Deserve."

Besides, what's the point of voting in the GOP primary now anyway? To stop Ted Cruz? To stop Donald Trump? To stop Marco Rubio? They're all bad in their own way. Yeah, Rubio is arguably worse than the other two, but for the life of me I have no idea who's worse between Cruz and Trump. I do know who's worse between Bernie and Hillary and that's Hillary.

 

[jmdrake]

The only reason to vote for Sanders is if WWIII would start otherwise, I am not voting for a communist to select 3-4 supreme court nominees. You are very shortsighted if you think that 2020 is some sort of plan, incumbent presidents very rarely lose and there is no reason why the GOP would nominate Rand. We need new names, new faces, different places. What is Rand going to do differently to win in 2020? Is there some other liberty candidate on the horizon?

Shortsighted is believing that there is any reason to participate in the GOP primary this election season. Unless you have a liberty house or senate member on the line "What difference does it make?" There is a reason to participate in the democratic primary and that is to stop Hillary. Edit: And Hillary is the candidate most likely to start WWIII.

 

[fedupinmo]

I prefer Trump over Sanders but definitely want Sanders to win the Dem nomination so there is no chance we get Hillary. Trust Trump more on foreign policy and immigration.

Hillary could inspire a helluva revolution... and sell guns like the Kenyan could only have nightmares about...

 

[Cabal]

Secondary Real reason. It would make my political airhead girlfriend happy. She loves Bernie Sanders.

FTFY

 

[angelatc]

Lastly, I'm while angelatc favors fascism over socialism, and she's entitled to her opinion, I do not share it. I would rather live in socialist France or Canada than fascist era Spain, Italy or Argentina. Under democratic socialism I risk losing my money (the little I have.) Under fascism I risk losing my life.

Major history fail:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/socialisms-death-count/

The unspeakable acts of Adolf Hitler’s Nazis pale in comparison with the horrors committed by the communists in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People’s Republic of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, China’s communists, led by Mao Zedong and his successors, murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese. The most authoritative tally of history’s most murderous regimes is documented on University of Hawaii professor Rudolph J. Rummel’s website and in his book “Death by Government.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/socialisms-death-count/#SJUP65XHZ4F2cDec.99

 

[jmdrake]

Secondary Real reason. It would make my political airhead girlfriend happy. She loves Bernie Sanders.

FTFY

LOL. Touche'.

 

[jmdrake]

Major history fail:

Wrong. Double history fail on your part. First Hitler wasn't fascist. He was national socialist. Second the WND "socialism death count" is really talking about communism rather than democratic socialism. Communism is socialism under a dictatorship. Sometimes nations become totally socialists without being dictatorships. (France. Greece. Canada.) Fascist countries always end up dictatorships.

 

[devil21]

If this fucker hadn't have died, he'd probably STILL be president.

No doubt that socialist policies have been here a lot longer than just recently and the incrementalism is ramping up, however the availability of information is light years beyond where it was back then. I doubt Roosevelt openly campaigned as a socialist, especially while as President allegedly fighting a war against socialists and fascists.

 

[PierzStyx]

Sanders is a National Socialist which is Fascism. The difference between Trump and Sanders is the difference between Hitler and Mussolini, nothing.

 

[PierzStyx]

Wrong. Double history fail on your part. First Hitler wasn't fascist. He was national socialist. Second the WND "socialism death count" is really talking about communism rather than democratic socialism. Communism is socialism under a dictatorship. Sometimes nations become totally socialists without being dictatorships. (France. Greece. Canada.) Fascist countries always end up dictatorships.

The democratic socialist countries of Europe have helped us kill at least a million people in the Middle East over the last ten years. Just because you get to change your dictator doesn't mean you don't live in a dictatorship. The power of dictatorship lies with the state, not the figurehead.

National Socialism=Fascism. That is literally the difference. Socialism is an international belief. National Socialism is socialism contained within the country, and what Mussolini, and ardent socialist, called his government. The term fascism was adopted because Mussolini adopted Roman faces imagery.

 

[LibertyRevolution]

Since my state has an open primary and none of the republicans are worth voting for.. I too will be using my vote against Hillary by voting for Sanders.
I know, it sounds crazy.. libertarian, Ron Paul supporter, going to vote for the self proclaimed socialist.. Its a wacky crazy world out there, what can I say..

 

[jmdrake]

The democratic socialist countries of Europe have helped us kill at least a million people in the Middle East over the last ten years. Just because you get to change your dictator doesn't mean you don't live in a dictatorship. The power of dictatorship lies with the state, not the figurehead.

Well hell. If that's your measuring stick then nothing matters at all. The supposedly non-socialist United States was leading the charge. And before that we killed a bunch of native Americans. And we dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagisaki. And our clusterfuck intervention in World War I helped usher in the Soviet Union in the first place and set the state for the rise of Hitler.

Seriously, I thought we were talking about internal deaths. (Well the Native Americans count as internal, but you know what I mean.) In places like Argentina, Spain, Italy, people were routinely snatched and never heard from again.

National Socialism=Fascism. That is literally the difference. Socialism is an international belief. National Socialism is socialism contained within the country, and what Mussolini, and ardent socialist, called his government. The term fascism was adopted because Mussolini adopted Roman faces imagery.

No. Hitler called his government national socialism. Mussolini called his government corporatism.