Bernie Sanders has already won

[Thunderstorm]

http://www.wiu.edu/news/newsrelease.php?release_id=13059
WIU is known for holding mock elections that correctly prove the outcome of the outcome of the General Election. They accurately predicted elections from Jimmy Carter's 1975 win to Obama's 2008 win.

Time and time again it has been proven, Bernie does better in one to one match-ups with the Republicans. I'll always vote along party lines due to the backwards ideologies of the Republican party but I do believe if Bernie can bring out twice the amount of people to one of his rallies than Clinton can to hers, that he is more likely to get people to take five minutes out of their day to vote in a Democratic President.

Regardless of who gets the nomination, the Bernie has already won. He has forever shifted not only the ideology of the Democratic party but the nation. Our nation is generally becoming more liberal despite the fact that the left and right are becoming more polarized. More people are fleeing towards the left than towards the right. The Democrats, and even the Republicans, will have to orient their policies towards Sanders, even if he doesn't get the nomination due to the popularity of his policies. Trump is doing the same for the right. The people are angry and they will not just stop being angry if Clinton or Cruz or Rubio get the nominations.

[Vlerchan]

I had a look and the electorate has never correctly predicted a Republican victory and have in fact predicted Democrats every single turn [of which there's four]. It's important to note because the likelihood is that the college electorate lean left and there's a likilihood of them voting democrat. If we hold four votes and presume parties have an equal chance of winning the actual election - the chance that you'll get the current combination of actual outcomes is:
(4! / 3! * 1!) * (0.5^4) = 0.25

You don't have to be too lucky to emerge accurate if you call Democrats all four times.

Look further at the bizarrely disproportionate support for the libertarian-right: if those votes are added to Bush's we witness Bush coming to within four votes of Sanders. There's no state-by state breakdown so I'm not sure to what extent that translates into the electoral college vote. This is presuming we had a reasonable sample size - which 500 isn't.

tl;dr: Literally up there with tea-leaves.

---

The rest of the opening post is probably broadly correct.

[eric2001]

http://www.wiu.edu/news/newsrelease.php?release_id=13059
WIU is known for holding mock elections that correctly prove the outcome of the outcome of the General Election. They accurately predicted elections from Jimmy Carter's 1975 win to Obama's 2008 win.

Time and time again it has been proven, Bernie does better in one to one match-ups with the Republicans. I'll always vote along party lines due to the backwards ideologies of the Republican party but I do believe if Bernie can bring out twice the amount of people to one of his rallies than Clinton can to hers, that he is more likely to get people to take five minutes out of their day to vote in a Democratic President.

Regardless of who gets the nomination, the Bernie has already won. He has forever shifted not only the ideology of the Democratic party but the nation. Our nation is generally becoming more liberal despite the fact that the left and right are becoming more polarized. More people are fleeing towards the left than towards the right. The Democrats, and even the Republicans, will have to orient their policies towards Sanders, even if he doesn't get the nomination due to the popularity of his policies. Trump is doing the same for the right. The people are angry and they will not just stop being angry if Clinton or Cruz or Rubio get the nominations.

Redistricting has given conservative rural and burbs voters more power than they should have just by their numbers. Heyyyy, are you gonna be 18 and be able to vote in November? I can vote for President in 2020.

[Thunderstorm]

Redistricting has given conservative rural and burbs voters more power than they should have just by their numbers. Heyyyy, are you gonna be 18 and be able to vote in November? I can vote for President in 2020.

Yes, gerrymandering has given suburban and rural white districts more power than they should have but regardless, our country is becoming more liberal.

Yeah I already registered to vote in school.

[lyhom]

I do agree that the US is becoming more liberal, but honestly I'd shift that to changing cultural differences and the Republicans turning into an absolute shit show more than Sanders tbh.

[StoppingTom]

While I'd certainly like that to be true, don't jinx things D:

[Thunderstorm]

I do agree that the US is becoming more liberal, but honestly I'd shift that to changing cultural differences and the Republicans turning into an absolute shit show more than Sanders tbh.

Oh I do agree that the US has been becoming more liberal for decades. However, Bernie has brought certain ideas to light that will now have to be addressed. Policies will have to change (towards the left) regardless of the President.

[DriveAlive]

God help our country if Bernie manages to damage the Democratic Party

[Bull]

We do not need a socalist as president!!!! That would be tragic.

[Thunderstorm]

God help our country if Bernie manages to damage the Democratic Party

Says the person with "Trump" in their signature.

[DriveAlive]

Says the person with "Trump" in their signature.

Exactly!!! You also forgot Clinton and Kasich...regardless, Sanders supporters are ignorant of the real inequality that still faces women and many minorities and instead choose to attack the wealthy and even those with jobs. Once Sanders fans graduate college, they will real how misguided they were.

[phuckphace]

http://i.imgur.com/ETr8W3e.png

[West Coast Sheriff]

Don't forget that the people may like Bernie but, the Democratic Party wants Hillary.
I saw someone say on here that the Democratic Party has their own agenda different than Bernie's and progressives that works better with Hillary. She has super pacs and Wall Street on her side. I think that she has too much power but, I hope that Bernie can beat her.

[Kahn]

This is hubris, and frankly, a mindset like this can be detrimental to any campaign, if it's potent enough. Nothing is won until it is won. Bernie is entitled to nothing. Let's wait until the primaries and general election are over before declaring a victory for anyone.

[Thunderstorm]

Exactly!!! You also forgot Clinton and Kasich...regardless, Sanders supporters are ignorant of the real inequality that still faces women and many minorities and instead choose to attack the wealthy and even those with jobs. Once Sanders fans graduate college, they will real how misguided they were.

Young women are choosing Bernie over Hillary because Hillary is focusing her campaign around women, and that is the problem. Women desperately want a woman president. Hillary is wooing the older female demographic. (Many of whom want a woman president before they pass away) However, the younger generation of women are hopeful that there will be a female candidate for president in the future that will rally around other issues that are less gender-centric. Since gender has become more ambiguous throughout the decades, the younger generation especially sees it as a minor issue. Most young women, for now, support Bernie because of the issues he plans to confront rather than gender.

This is hubris, and frankly, a mindset like this can be detrimental to any campaign, if it's potent enough. Nothing is won until it is won. Bernie is entitled to nothing. Let's wait until the primaries and general election are over before declaring a victory for anyone.

It's not hubris. Bernie has the momentum, that's the fact of it. If he keeps it going, he can get the nomination. He does better in one-to-one matchups. If the Republicans don't pick Trump, and the Democrats pick Sanders then he will win. It's common sense; yeah, anything could happen, but you can hypothesize different scenarios of what will happen based on the framework of the American political establishment.

[Stronk Serb]

Bernie's plans to seal all the holes in the US sinking ship will open two more per sealed hole. His tax plan is a mess, he plans to expand budget spending (meaning more debt) and guess who will pay for it? The rich folk, and I talk about draconian taxes where, if I recall correctly, those with income over five million dollars pay an income tax of 62,5%. What does that do? Encourage tax evasion, de-stimulates businessmen from opening new workplaces because of a lack of funds. The current system isn't perfect, but this is far worse.

[Kahn]

It's not hubris.

If not hubris, arrogance.

Bernie has the momentum, that's the fact of it.

Same could be said for Donald Trump. Momentum swings. Circumstance is privy to change.

If he keeps it going, he can get the nomination.

He sure can.

He does better in one-to-one matchups. If the Republicans don't pick Trump, and the Democrats pick Sanders then he will win.

I'm not going to dispute this because I think you're correct. Come November, I'm of the opinion Sanders would win if he's up against anyone but Trump. The Democratic party would rally behind their candidate while the GOP remains fractured. Trump, like it or not, may have the pull to unite GOP voters were he to win the nomination.

It's common sense; yeah, anything could happen,

[Rydar8]

but you can hypothesize different scenarios of what will happen based on the framework of the American political establishment.

yes your right you can hypothesize, but you cant tell me Bernie is going to win until the election is over like the person above said.
Also Bernie is a socialist. Socialism will not work in America because we have a capitalist society. Why can I not have a dream to get rich but have it be crushed because its not "equal" to people who aren't trying.

[Thunderstorm]

I'm not going to dispute this because I think you're correct. Come November, I'm of the opinion Sanders would win if he's up against anyone but Trump. The Democratic party would rally behind their candidate while the GOP remains fractured. Trump, like it or not, may have the pull to unite GOP voters were he to win the nomination.

I do not think Trump has the pull. That's just me though.

I was trying to get at the fact that Bernie, ideally, has already won. He has won over the people with his policies, and even if he does not get the nomination, other candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike, will have to compromise and adopt some of his policies. Either way, he has opened the doors for future left-of-center candidates (Elizabeth warren, Jill Stein, etc.)


yes your right you can hypothesize, but you cant tell me Bernie is going to win until the election is over like the person above said.
Also Bernie is a socialist. Socialism will not work in America because we have a capitalist society. Why can I not have a dream to get rich but have it be crushed because its not "equal" to people who aren't trying.

We already had a financially Socialist President (FDR) as well as LBJ. It's just a matter of can we vote in a President who has a pre-determined label of 'socialist'.

[Uniquemind]

I do not think Trump has the pull. That's just me though.

I was trying to get at the fact that Bernie, ideally, has already won. He has won over the people with his policies, and even if he does not get the nomination, other candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike, will have to compromise and adopt some of his policies. Either way, he has opened the doors for future left-of-center candidates (Elizabeth warren, Jill Stein, etc.)




We already had a financially Socialist President (FDR) as well as LBJ. It's just a matter of can we vote in a President who has a pre-determined label of 'socialist'.

You underestimate the power of the dark side.

Never count your chickens before they hatch.

It is a naive characteristic trait to assume good news, take a leaf out of the old cynical person's play book, expect the worst, celebrate when it doesn't happen.


Bernie does not have the delegates.

[Thunderstorm]

You underestimate the power of the dark side.

Never count your chickens before they hatch.

It is a naive characteristic trait to assume good news, take a leaf out of the old cynical person's play book, expect the worst, celebrate when it doesn't happen.


Bernie does not have the delegates.

Trump could get the nomination. Although, if he gets the nomination, I think many of the Republicans will pick the Democratic candidate.

And you think just because Hillary has 300 more superdelegates means she is more likely to get the nomination? There are thousands of delegates and superdelegates left to be decided. Sanders has WON more delegates; Clinton has more superdelegates. Superdelegates alone can not win an election. And in Clinton's case, she can't rely on them. In 2008, dozens of superdelegates switched to Obama late in the race, starting with former DNC Chariman Joe Andrew.

[Kahn]

I was trying to get at the fact that Bernie, ideally, has already won.

Ideal if you're a Bernie Sanders supporter.

He has won over the people with his policies,

He's won over a lot of people with his policies, sure. Donald Trump has won over a lot of people with his policies as well.

"The people" will never unanimously agree on a single set of ideas, or a single candidate.

---

For those who want to take a look at a summary of the candidates different tax proposals, here is a link (http://taxfoundation.org/comparing-2016-presidential-tax-reform-proposals).

and even if he does not get the nomination, other candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike, will have to compromise and adopt some of his policies.

Why? Whoever takes office will have a hard enough time implenting their own policies, considering how combative Congress is. The ideas he's brought to the table have ignited national discussion but there's no reason a Sandersless administration has to (or really has the authority to) adopt a single one of his proposed or potential policies, unless, of course, it is in their own interests.

Just look at Canada and how hard a time Trudeau is having legislating marijuana legalization. That was a big part of his platform and he was elected, yet national marijuana legalization/decriminalization isn't likely to be passed in Canada for the forseeable future.

[Uniquemind]

Trump could get the nomination. Although, if he gets the nomination, I think many of the Republicans will pick the Democratic candidate.

And you think just because Hillary has 300 more superdelegates means she is more likely to get the nomination? There are thousands of delegates and superdelegates left to be decided. Sanders has WON more delegates; Clinton has more superdelegates. Superdelegates alone can not win an election. And in Clinton's case, she can't rely on them. In 2008, dozens of superdelegates switched to Obama late in the race, starting with former DNC Chariman Joe Andrew.

What is gonna happen is that it's more likely they WON'T pick the Democratic candidate, and that they just will feel disenfranchised and not represented and then just NOT VOTE at all.

[Thunderstorm]

Ideal if you're a Bernie Sanders supporter.



He's won over a lot of people with his policies, sure. Donald Trump has won over a lot of people with his policies as well.

"The people" will never unanimously agree on a single set of ideas, or a single candidate.


Why? Whoever takes office will have a hard enough time implenting their own policies, considering how combative Congress is. The ideas he's brought to the table have ignited national discussion but there's no reason a Sandersless administration has to (or really has the authority to) adopt a single one of his proposed or potential policies, unless, of course, it is in their own interests.

Just look at Canada and how hard a time Trudeau is having legislating marijuana legalization. That was a big part of his platform and he was elected, yet national marijuana legalization/decriminalization isn't likely to be passed in Canada for the forseeable future.

Donald Trump does not HAVE any policies. He is just igniting the people. Building a wall and forcing Mexico to pay for it is not a policy.

The thing is, our nation is generally becoming more progressive and Bernie is fueling that. Any Republican will have a hard time adopting conservative policies. They will have to lean left a little in office to parallel our nation's left-leaning ideology.

What is gonna happen is that it's more likely they WON'T pick the Democratic candidate, and that they just will feel disenfranchised and not represented and then just NOT VOTE at all.

I don't think so. If Trump gets the nomination, there will be a lot of Republicans who vote Democrat because they don't want an unqualified putz in office. Then you may also have Bloomberg who would garner some voters. We will have to see.

[lyhom]

Donald Trump does not HAVE any policies. He is just igniting the people. Building a wall and forcing Mexico to pay for it is not a policy.

as shitty as the implementation of it is, it's still technically a policy.

[Judean Zealot]

as shitty as the implementation of it is, it's still technically a policy.

It is pretty remarkable how far Trump's gotten without laying out a single programme of action.

[Kahn]

It is pretty remarkable how far Trump's gotten without laying out a single programme of action.

It's a show, after all.

Donald Trump does not HAVE any policies.

I'm going to pretend as though you didn't ignore my tax reform proposal (or policies, alternatively) link (http://taxfoundation.org/comparing-2016-presidential-tax-reform-proposals) which summarizes a number of Donald Trump's (and others) proposed tax policies.

Just Googling the phrase "Donald Trump's policies" will give you a brief summary of some of his positions, from abortion to civil liberties.

the thing is, our nation is generally becoming more progressive and Bernie is fueling that.

The political pendulum will always swing back and forth.

Any Republican will have a hard time adopting conservative policies. They will have to lean left a little in office to parallel our nation's left-leaning ideology.

Anybody entering office will have a hard time adopting their desired policies unless they are advantageous to the present establishment. Just because an individual is elected President, doesn't mean he and his administration will get everything, or anything, they desire to, done. See Obama's administration and many of his broken promises.

The nation might lean left now, but where we stand collectively on the political spectrum is privy to change just as much as anything else. The nation is more polarized than any time in living memory. Trump supporter's grievances deserve to be heard too- they aren't all bigots and racists.

If Trump gets the nomination, there will be a lot of Republicans who vote Democrat because they don't want an unqualified putz in office.

This, like many of your other points, is subjective, and pure speculation.

[phuckphace]

Trump has already spearheaded a revolution of sorts without even getting elected. I wouldn't be surprised if, win or lose, his campaign leads indirectly to a GOP split and realignment. think two new "conservative" parties: one for the establishment hacks and a new nationalist/populist party.

when you hear a Trumplet such as myself say "cuck", it's referring to a member of the establishment who was considered really serious and erudite until Trump came along and called them out for what they are. the GOP has been the party of endless war and corporate oligarchy for longer than any of us have been alive, and if it hadn't been for Trump we'd be presented with Mr. Pocket Turtles (¡Jeb!) and staying home for yet another election cycle. that definitely would've been me, and this is the first election I'll be old enough to vote in.

so with all that in mind, it's really not "remarkable" how popular Trump is given that he's captured most of the folks who wouldn't have otherwise voted due to disgust with the GOP and their bullshit. Cruz and ¡Jeb! supporters represent the only portion of the GOP that still voted, except that they only voted on useless fake issues like abortion. Trump is probably the closest that Murika will ever get to having an actual nationalist party like a lot of European countries have.

[Judean Zealot]

phuckphace

People may hear what they wish, but to vote for a man who has yet to inform the world how he plans to get anything done is just plain irresponsible. Especially when his proposals are as audacious as they are. I don't see how anybody who cares about their country can possibly vote for a person who is completely unwilling to give governance and policy the true gravity it deserves.

[Thunderstorm]

I'm going to pretend as though you didn't ignore my tax reform proposal (or policies, alternatively) link (http://taxfoundation.org/comparing-2016-presidential-tax-reform-proposals) which summarizes a number of Donald Trump's (and others) proposed tax policies.

Just Googling the phrase "Donald Trump's policies" will give you a brief summary of some of his positions, from abortion to civil liberties.

No, he doesn't have policies. They aren't there. His so called "tax reform proposals" only reform taxes for the rich, in a positive context. They will negatively hurt us. He's really a liberal, so his economic policies are going to be liberal, just remember that.



The political pendulum will always swing back and forth.

It has been known to in the past...but we are becoming more liberal and that is a fact. Since the 90s, the national consensus has been towards more liberal stances on things (Gay marriage, environmental issues, gun control, social security). These are things that, on a national level, have become to be controlled liberally, and many other things (abortion, tax reform) are moving that way as well.

Anybody entering office will have a hard time adopting their desired policies unless they are advantageous to the present establishment. Just because an individual is elected President, doesn't mean he and his administration will get everything, or anything, they desire to, done. See Obama's administration and many of his broken promises.

This is because Republicans can't get over their personal beliefs and lose their dignity to Obama. Congress has a high disapproval rating.

The nation might lean left now, but where we stand collectively on the political spectrum is privy to change just as much as anything else. The nation is more polarized than any time in living memory. Trump supporter's grievances deserve to be heard too- they aren't all bigots and racists.



Yes, we are more polarized than ever. What I am saying though is that on a national level, in terms of the summation of everything political, we are much more liberal than in the past.

[Kahn]

People may hear what they wish, but to vote for a man who has yet to inform the world how he plans to get anything done is just plain irresponsible. Especially when his proposals are as audacious as they are. I don't see how anybody who cares about their country can possibly vote for a person who is completely unwilling to give governance and policy the true gravity it deserves.

I don't disagree with this.

Can you direct me to where I can find a thorough review of each candidate's potential modus operandi?

Thunderstorm I'll address your post later or tomorrow. I'm at work. Could you provide me with several of Sander's "policies?" I'd like to know what you consider to constituent a single policy.

[phuckphace]

I don't see how anybody who cares about their country can possibly vote for a person who is completely unwilling to give governance and policy the true gravity it deserves.

I just told you why. Trump's vulgarity isn't the main factor here or even secondary, it's who he's targeting and why. his list of enemies is extensive, and as it so happens, they all happen to be the same people who have wrecked our country and are currently gumming its mangled corpse. the establishment hinges on maintaining the illusion that they represent popular opinion - once this erodes, realignment is next. it's bigger than Trump, much bigger, even if he drops dead tomorrow.

let's say instead of Trump it was someone else less flashy and obnoxious, but saying more or less the same things, and calling out the same people without a care for his reputation. I'm willing to bet he'd enjoy a similar amount of popularity for the same reason - a lot of voters are disaffected and disgusted by what's become of our country. what else are we supposed to do, vote for Jeb? stop voting until the Hispanic electorate breeds us into a permanent Democratic supermajority?

No, he doesn't have policies. They aren't there. His so called "tax reform proposals" only reform taxes for the rich, in a positive context. They will negatively hurt us. He's really a liberal, so his economic policies are going to be liberal, just remember that.

I don't think you or most people actually believe the "Trump is a crypto-progressive" narrative. of course, if he gets elected and rolls out Vlerchan-style free trade and a radfem clause to the Constitution I'll eat my Make America Great Again hat, but I think if this were true to any degree the Left wouldn't lean so hard on Godwin whenever he's mentioned. they're terrified of him for a reason.

[Judean Zealot]

I don't disagree with this.

Can you direct me to where I can find a thorough review of each candidate's potential modus operandi?

Thunderstorm I'll address your post later or tomorrow. I'm at work.

Hillary (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/)
Sanders (https://berniesanders.com/issues/)
Jeb (https://jeb2016.com/jebs-plan-for-america/?lang=en)
Rubio (https://marcorubio.com/issues/)
Cruz (https://www.tedcruz.org/issues/) (granted, Cruz's is more shifty and sound byte based than the others, but hey, that makes sense - after all, he's the other demagogue).

All of these platforms address the issues, stats, and numbers and lay out actual concrete proposals. Compare them with Trump's (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/issues) pathetically vacuous platform, in which he literally promises the world and follows up with absolutely no indication of how he's going to go about doing it.

phuckphace

When did I mention vulgarity? Although I dislike that as well, that's far from the main issue. The issue is that he apparently has no intention of laying out any sort of concrete plan - which is understandable, when we consider that he has no experience in government and his plans are the most logistically challenged (deport 11,000,000 people anybody?)

[Kahn]

Hillary (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/)
Sanders (https://berniesanders.com/issues/)
Jeb (https://jeb2016.com/jebs-plan-for-america/?lang=en)
Rubio (https://marcorubio.com/issues/)
Cruz (https://www.tedcruz.org/issues/) (granted, Cruz's is more shifty and sound byte based than the others, but hey, that makes sense - after all, he's the other demagogue).

All of these platforms address the issues, stats, and numbers and lay out actual concrete proposals. Compare them with Trump's (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/issues) pathetically vacuous platform, in which he literally promises the world and follows up with absolutely no indication of how he's going to go about doing it.

Thank you.

[Vlerchan]

Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/184586/special-report-proposals-fix-american-economy.aspx?g_source=economic%20policy&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles):

I feel I should add that the inconvenient truth is that whilst people in the U.S. more funding in education and infrastructure a larger number hold that federal spending should fall. Large numbers support a simplification of the tax code and lower taxation burden for all people in the U.S.: more support this proposals than increasing rates of taxation. There seems to be significant overlap between those that want to reduce taxation for middle- and lower-class people - and for people overall.

In other words whilst people in the U.S. support the introduction of new programmes they don't want to pay for them. This seems to match an older poll [2013] I can remember reading that indicated that the largest proportion of people in the U.S. would prefer lower taxation and less government intervention.

This might be because people in the U.S. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/176102/americans-say-federal-gov-wastes-cents-dollar.aspx?g_source=government%20waste&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles) find the federal government incredibly wasteful or outright fear (http://www.gallup.com/poll/185720/half-continue-say-gov-immediate-threat.aspx?g_source=). The latter poll is probably redundant though considering the massive influence that the ruling party plays with respect to Republicans and Democrats.

---

Trump also does produce some numbers here (https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform).

But his campaign is built on catering to reducing exposure in the U.S. to foreign labour and goods-production. They're some major policy initiatives even if a debate surrounds there effectiveness or desirability.

I actually imagine what Trump will do if made president is draft a number of industry-based policy-wonks into cabinet to produce a lot of the legislation and take on a more managerial role.

[Porpoise101]

This I believe may be the climax of the political separatism gripping our nation. phuckphace mentioned two new parties on the right. I believe that there will be something like that on the left too... Not now necessarily, but personally I feel that there is a dissonance between people of Hillary's ideology, Old Progressive, and the multicultural/millennial crew. The new and old progs have merged under Sanders now.

[Judean Zealot]

Apparently, the rise of Trump has been prophesied 2,000 years ago. Checkmate, atheists.

In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last Trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
(1 Corinthians 15:52)

[Reghan]

Personally I'm for Bernie.

He'd be better than any of the other canidates...

[Kahn]

No, he doesn't have policies. They aren't there. His so called "tax reform proposals" only reform taxes for the rich, in a positive context.

His "so-called tax reform proposals" are still considered future potential policy, even if you scoff at or disagree with them. They might just be ideas but as another poster said above he'll take on more of a managerial role rather than writing any legislation himself.

they will negatively hurt us. He's really a liberal, so his economic policies are going to be liberal, just remember that.

Pray tell, what makes Donald Trump a liberal?

It has been known to in the past...

A nation's politcial preference has been known to change throughout history, from Babylon's revolt against the Assyrian Empire, to our own Revolution, to the more recent Arab Spring. This is fact. Leading to my next point.

but we are becoming more liberal and that is a fact.

You've repeated this point several times now, and I keep agreeing with you. We're becoming a more liberal nation, in social and economic affairs alike. However, you seem to believe these changes in attitude and operation will persist for eternity.

I guarantee you they will not. One way or the other everything is subject to change. I'm not a soothsayer or a fortune teller, I can't predict when or how our attitudes will be changed, or if a drastic change in mindset happens in our lifetime; but nothing lasts forever.

This is because Republicans can't get over their personal beliefs and lose their dignity to Obama. Congress has a high disapproval rating.

"This is because the current Democratic administration can't get over their personal beliefs and lose their dignity to Congress. Obama has a high disapproval rating."

Same tune, different song.

we are much more liberal than in the past.

Repeating yourself, again. I agree, the nation as a whole is leaning to the left.

---

I am by no means a Trump supporter, by the way. I'm actually leaning towards voting for Sanders. However, given the fact that Trump has received so much recognition and people feel he represents their interests, I feel as though many of us need to step back and actually give what he has to say it's due diligence, even if only to respect the political process, maligned as a few of his views may be.

[Porpoise101]

Also Sanders lost Nevada today

Additionally:
Jeb! Withdraws
Trump wins SC
Cruz and Rubio are deadlocked

[BenF-22]

Aren't we the country that put the Japanese in protection camps because we were worried they might still be communists? So why are we trying to vote in a borderline-communist president?

[Porpoise101]

Aren't we the country that put the Japanese in protection camps because we were worried they might still be communists? So why are we trying to vote in a borderline-communist president?
No we put them in there because we decided that they posed a threat to society during the second world war. Wrongly, I might add. As for the other statement, we aren't. Sanders will probably lose.

[Uniquemind]

See I made the correct analysis. Sanders has in no way got this in the bag. Hillary is defeating him so far and I am posting this on the aforementioned "Super Tuesday" as they call it in the media and by political pundits (political commentators and analysts).


Aren't we the country that put the Japanese in protection camps because we were worried they might still be communists? So why are we trying to vote in a borderline-communist president?


He's a "Democratic-socialist", not a "socialist", that little difference in the label, actually makes a big difference, but most Americans aren't really investigative by nature and they think they're one-in-the-same which they are not.

But Americans don't like doing research on stuff and learning anyway. They tend to want things spelled out for them, and things delivered at their door instantaneously.