Offline
TheLagerLad wrote:
Goose wrote:
TheLagerLad wrote:
Sanders is making some strategy mistakes. What has made him so good through Iowa and New Hampshire is that he is stayed on his message. He's made the message more important than the messenger which is the exact opposite of the Clinton campaign. Pay attention to their campaign speeches. With Sanders, you hear a lot of "we". With Hillary, you hear a lot of "I".
So focusing on Bill Clinton, or Hillary Clinton's gender, or anything outside of his core message will end up hurting him in the short and long run. Because Bernie isn't smooth enough to work through any gaffes or mistakes.I think that Sanders also is making a mistake in criticizing the last two democratic presidents while running for the democratic nomination. How does that work?
Well, Bernie's only been a democrat for about a half hour now.I'm not a fan of the whole "Bernie's not a Democrat" argument because it just shows the limits of the two party system.
I mean Bernie was mainstream enough to become a US Senator, but just because he doesn't suck at the teat of one of the two national parties, that makes him somehow unqualified to attempt a run for president?
And with the parties making it damn near impossible to get on a ballot as an independent or third party candidate in many states, someone like Bernie is forced to align himself with one of the two national parties. In this case, he's just closer to the Democrats.
Never stated that. I merely stated that it's a rather odd strategy to run for the Democratic party's nomination by criticizing democratic presidents. I guess Bernie is going all in on the "anti-establishment" strategy. Maybe it will work.
But, I think he's making a tactical error.
And,,,, he has been a democrat since 2015. That in no way disqualifies him, but it's fair to note.
Offline
This article from Politico pretty well explains Bernie's connection (or rather disconnection if you will) to/from the Democratic Party that he is now running under the tent of.
Can Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
Last edited by tennyson (2/19/2016 5:46 pm)
Offline
I think there are two main reasons he is calling out Bill Clinton on "welfare reform and NAFTA". First reason is because as Common pointed out, Bill Clinton has been campaigning against him.
Second, since Bill is campaigning against Bernie, Bernie decided to point out the issues he disagrees with Bill Clinton on. Since Bill and Hillary are strongly connected, this is a way for him to differentiate himself with the "establishment" of the party.
I don't think Bernie is attacking Clinton and Obama, just pointing out what he would do differently. While many Dems like both Bill and Obama, Bernie is mentioning their "shortcomings" that many progressives (like Fred) think they could have done better and what Bernie would do in office
Offline
Just a little insight and history into NAFTA since it was just mentioned above
What Is Its History?
The impetus for NAFTA actually began with President Ronald Reagan, who campaigned on a North American common market. In 1984, Congress passed the Trade and Tariff Act.
This is important because it gave the President "fast-track" authority to negotiate free trade agreements, while only allowing Congress the ability to approve or disapprove, not change negotiating points. Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney agreed with Reagan to begin negotiations for the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which was signed in 1988, went into effect in 1989 and is now suspended since it's no longer neeeded.
Meanwhile, Mexican President Salinas and President Bush began negotiations for a liberalized trade between the two countries. Prior to NAFTA, Mexican tariffs on U.S. imports were 250% higher than U.S. tariffs on Mexican imports. In 1991, Canada requested a trilateral agreement, which then led to NAFTA. In 1993, concerns about liberalization of labor and environmental regulations led to the adoption of two addendums.
NAFTA was signed by President George H.W. Bush, Mexican President Salinas, and Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in 1992. It was ratified by the legislatures of the three countries in 1993. The U.S. House of Representatives approved it by 234 to 200 on November 17, 1993.
The U.S. Senate approved it by 60 to 38 on November 20, three days later.
It was finally signed into law by President Bill Clinton on December 8, 1993 and entered force January 1, 1994. Although it was signed by President Bush, it was a priority of President Clinton's, and its passage is considered one of his first successes.
Last edited by tennyson (2/19/2016 7:24 pm)
Offline
Common Sense wrote:
TheLagerLad wrote:
Common Sense wrote:
He had harsh thing to say about Bill Clinton because Bill was trashing Sanders.
If Sanders gets a big turn out in Nevada he will beat Hillery. Sanders has closed in and my bet passed Clinton now. If Hillary loses the nastiness is just starting.Nah, I think Hillary wins Nevada. Something close. Probably 52-48 or something like that.
It will be fun to watch. You are probably right but lets see?
Good call Lager! I owe you a cup of coffee.
Clinton 52.6%
Sanders 47.3%
Offline
Check out my SC GOP primary prediction. I think I nailed the top three.