Quote:

---

Sanders posits — against all evidence — that changing the occupant of the White House will suddenly alter dynamics in Congress and allow for the passage of sweeping legislation that is currently frustrated.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Second

In the words of John Lennon - or was it Vlad Lenin - imagine.

Imagine a phenomenal turnout and a vote that says MANDATE. A country mobilized and alert, ready for real change. Do you think Congress would drag their feet and make themselves sitting ducks? Or would they give way to political self-preservation and align themselves with the forces of history?

I've always thought that a single election cycle was never going to be the key.

But (while I don't think Sanders is even close) I've been reconsidering that idea. I think it would depend on how dynamic did the situation seem, how large and mobilized was the population, ... etc. So I'm edging toward the idea it could, under specific conditions, be possible.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Sanders won every poll and focus group by wide margins. Americans said Bernie won.

The media spins it for Hillary, anyway.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Sanders made it even clearer than ever that he doesn't really want to be president. He just wants to move the race to the left.

Martin O'Malley and Hillary Clinton argued about the 1999 repeal of a 1933 bank regulation. Offering an appealing dose of clarity, Bernie Sanders burst in with his take: "Congress does not regulate Wall Street; Wall Street regulates Congress."

To Clinton, policy problems require policy solutions, and the more nuanced and narrowly tailored the solution, the better. To Sanders, policy problems stem from a fundamental imbalance of political power. The issue with finance isn't so much the presence or the absence of any specific rule; it's that the system is rigged, and the fat cats are running the show.

Sanders posits — against all evidence — that changing the occupant of the White House will suddenly alter dynamics in Congress and allow for the passage of sweeping legislation that is currently frustrated.

There's just no reason to believe this is true. To really, truly get Democratic policies passed would require the banal work of recruiting dozens of talented House and Senate candidates and getting them to win elections in GOP-held districts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
The only one who won the debate was CNN - badda boom

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
He made no such claim. There will have to be a more progressive congress, too.

Clinton is a neocon, barely different from Romney, bought and sold by big money. If elected, she will do NOTHING about Citizens United. Her fake progressivism is appalling and a demonstrable lie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
"All the Bernie Sanders lib-lovers/neocon-haters will make a Republican the next President."

If he was running as an independent he might have pulled a Ross Perot and split a party's vote, resulting in that party's loss. But he's running in a primary as a democrat which I think results in a different dynamic. Only one democrat can emerge as winner. And that person will be facing only one other serious contender.

---