dagblog - Comments for "Bernie, Hillary,Eric and Sync"

Did he really bring many new

ocean-kat — Sun, 03 Jul 2016 12:00:52 +0000

Did he really bring many new voters into the party? Where's the evidence of that? In 08 both Hillary and Obama got 18 million votes. This year Hillary got almost 16 million to Sanders 12 million. Once again I'll ask some Sanders supporter to explain that to me.

Where are those 8 million lost votes? If just half of them had come out to vote for Sanders he would have easily won without bringing any new voters into the system. We've heard for years that if only the democrats would campaign on a far left liberal policy the poor and the workers would rush to us. We had a far left liberal candidate and he lost in a landslide. The people didn't seem to care. Why?

Hillary did almost as well this year as in 08 in a non competitive race. She got 89% as many votes as 08. Despite her email scandal. Obama was unknown to the majority of the voters when he started. He had to contend with the Rev Wright scandal in the middle of the primary. Yet he was able to fight Hillary to a dead heat in the popular vote.Again they both got 18 million votes. Sanders had no scandal to bog down his campaign. Yet he could not get people to go to the polls to vote for him. While it's possible those who voted for him voted enthusiastically people weren't enthusiastic to vote for him. Why?

How is it possible that Sanders brought so many new voters into the system when he got 6 million less votes than both Obama and Hillary got in 08?

Do you realize that the

trkingmomoe — Sun, 03 Jul 2016 10:30:45 +0000

In reply to Synch, from a practical point

Do you realize that the Democratic party has shrunk? Sanders brought many new voters into the party with him.

Me I find it exciting because the country is finally demanding a new coarse away from austerity and corporate rule. People are now voting for ideas not for a team. It isn't a sport. It is the ideas that matter not the party.

I am not going to argue over fraud because that involves statistical analysis and probability. You will learn more about it as these court cases expose how it is being done and how the machines and tabulators are coded. They are 10 years old and junk.

Fine.

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 18:20:12 +0000

In reply to I always knew you were a

Fine.

FDR had his connections with

NCD — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 17:57:26 +0000

In reply to FDR was of the generation

FDR was by no means such a unblemished progressive.

He had strong connections with Wall Street. His top man for the Soviet Union before and during the war was a money grubbing investor, Joseph Davies.

Davies was a scion of Wall Street and saw collaboration with Stalin as a money maker for the 1%.

So much so that Davies went to the Stalin show trials of the late 1930's and approved the purge and executions by Stalin, from Davies book Mission to Moscow, an FDR whitewash of Stalin:

In view of the character of the accused, their long terms of service, their recognized distinction in their profession, their long-continued loyalty to the Communist cause, it is scarcely credible that their brother officers…should have acquiesced in their execution, unless they were convinced that these men had been guilty of some offense.* It is generally accepted by members of the Diplomatic Corps that the accused must have been guilty of an offense which in the Soviet Union would merit the death penalty

Joseph Davies. FDR Wall Street favorite, he received the Order of Lenin from Stalin, and as US ambassador to the Soviet Union. During the late 1930's Davies spent so much buying up boatloads of Russian art, furniture etc that it was said he altered the currency exchange values.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

FDR Vice-President from 1933-1945, Henry Wallace. Wallace was a naive communist admiring Progressive from Iowa.

In touring Stalin's gold camps for FDR late in the war, the Kolyma death camps in Siberia, he was completely duped when the slave workers were hidden and replaced by guards.

See Three Days in “Auschwitz without Gas Chambers”: Henry A. Wallace's Visit to Magadan in 1944.

Henry A. Wallace (1952), "Where I Was Wrong", The Week Magazine (September 7):

...as I now know, this impression was not the complete one. Elinor Lippor, who was a slave laborer in the Magadan area for many years, has subsequently described the great effort put forth by the Soviet authorities to pull the wool over our eyes and make Magadan into a Potemkin village for my inspection. Watch towers were torn down. Prisoners were herded away out of sight.

Ernest Hemingway on FDR and the 1935 Hurricane that hit Key Largo and killed 488, more than half poverty stricken veterans sent there by the FDR administration to prevent them from another Bonus March on Wash, DC.

Hemingway on the hurricane and FDR:

...wealthy people, yachtsmen, fishermen such as President Hoover and President Roosevelt, do not come to the Florida Keys in hurricane months.... There is a known danger to property. But veterans, especially the bonus-marching variety of veterans, are not property. They are only human beings; unsuccessful human beings, and all they have to lose is their lives. They are doing coolie labor for a top wage of $45 a month and they have been put down on the Florida Keys where they can't make trouble. It is hurricane months, sure, but if anything comes up, you can always evacuate them, can't you?...It is not necessary to go into the deaths of the civilians and their families since they were on the Keys of their own free will; they made their living there, had property and knew the hazards involved. But the veterans had been sent there; they had no opportunity to leave, nor any protection against hurricanes; and they never had a chance for their lives. Who sent nearly a thousand war veterans, many of them husky, hard-working and simply out of luck, but many of them close to the border of pathological cases, to live in frame shacks on the Florida Keys in hurricane months?

FDR accomplished a lot, but he was not by any means perfect in his actions or disassociation from his class.

I always knew you were a

Peter — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 17:56:11 +0000

In reply to So passive aggressive is

I always knew you were a follower, PP and you don't seem to ever be passive, also you don't have to follow me to get your anti-democratic ideas into your comments.

So passive aggressive is

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 17:32:52 +0000

In reply to It apparently doesn't take

So passive aggressive is worse than your "openly hostile combined with know-it all scold" technique. Fine, I'll try it your way.

It apparently doesn't take

Peter — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:55:56 +0000

In reply to Maybe it's time for some

It apparently doesn't take much confrontation for Clintonites to revert to the lower forms of passive aggressive flaming and not so passive flaming. This tactic worked many times in the past but the #Bernie or Bust activists seem to be immune and because there are millions of them communicating through social media they have the group support they need. I think we are nearing the point where small blog's influence is waning and a real insurgency is growing even among democrats.

FDR was of the generation

Peter — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:36:23 +0000

In reply to I won´t try to debate FDR

FDR was of the generation that thought public service was a duty and responsibility of their class because of the high social positions they inherited, noblesse oblige, while these new democrats led by the Clintons are grifters and power seekers who reject most of FDR's attempts to tame capitalism and make life for most everyone more equitable.. FDR was of the ruling class while these parasites only want to serve that class as junior partners and enablers to increase their personal power and influence.

Using FDR's management of his cabinet as an example to apply to whipping voters in line is still authoritarian and elitist.

Maybe it's time for some

Austin Train — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:38:00 +0000

In reply to This morning is the first

Comment removed. Please refrain from personal analysis.

Ramona

I won´t try to debate FDR

Flavius — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 04:25:15 +0000

In reply to Flav, you seem to represent

I won´t try to debate FDR except to say I´ve always liked Brandeis' assessment : a second rate intelligence and a first rate temperament.

Compared to such peers as Fr. Coughlin and Lindberg FDR looked pretty good.