HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » liberal N proud » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... 103 Next »

liberal N proud

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Sun Aug 8, 2004, 01:54 PM
Number of posts: 53,834

Journal Archives

Bernie Sanders just proved he is no better than Republicans

As if all the unqualified comment wasn't enough and his attempts to claim the high road while attacking Hillary, he topped the week off by mixing religion with politics.

I left church and have not returned over this and I sure as hell will not support a candidate who dose this.

Posted by liberal N proud | Sat Apr 9, 2016, 02:42 PM (8 replies)

BSers go from praising the Vatican to cursing it in hours



Posted by liberal N proud | Fri Apr 8, 2016, 01:14 PM (27 replies)

Bernie Sanders says 'of course' Hillary Clinton is qualified to be president

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bernie-sanders-says-of-course-hillary-clinton-is-qualified-to-be-president-seeks-return-to-%e2%80%98real-issues%e2%80%99/ar-BBrwcRg?li=BBnb7Kz

Back peddle or just another way of claiming he doesn't want to go negative?

Posted by liberal N proud | Fri Apr 8, 2016, 12:57 PM (1 replies)

he isn't familiar with a particular case

Is anyone buying this attempt to explain why BS couldn't answer the question about breaking up banks?


The way the BSers are spinning, we are going to have a cyclone
Posted by liberal N proud | Fri Apr 8, 2016, 12:55 PM (0 replies)

Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim - Cross Post GDP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511678754

Sen. Bernie Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim that “Hillary Clinton received $4.5 million from the fossil fuel industry.”

The figure relies on a tortured definition of fossil fuel money. It includes contributions donated by lobbyists who represent many clients other than oil or gas companies. It also includes money those lobbyists raised from other donors who have nothing to do with the oil and gas industry.

And most of the $4.5 million total is tied to donations made to a super PAC supporting Clinton — which Clinton does not control — by two people who run investment funds that include investments in oil and gas companies. But those investments represent a fraction of the overall investment portfolio.

The issue of fossil fuel money going to the Clinton campaign reemerged when a Greenpeace activist questioned Clinton at a campaign rally in New York on March 31 about whether she would “act on your word to reject fossil fuel money in the future in your campaign?”

Clinton responded, “I do not have — I have money from people who work for fossil fuel companies. … I am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me! I’m sick of it!”

As we wrote back in December, Clinton has received relatively little in contributions from oil and gas company employees (and nothing from the companies themselves, as that would be illegal). That hasn’t changed. According to more recent data cited by Sanders, contributions from oil and gas industry employees accounts for 0.2 percent of the nearly $160 million raised by the Clinton campaign so far.


http://www.factcheck.org/2016/04/clintons-fossil-fuel-money-revisited/
Posted by liberal N proud | Fri Apr 8, 2016, 06:29 AM (9 replies)

Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim

Sen. Bernie Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim that “Hillary Clinton received $4.5 million from the fossil fuel industry.”

The figure relies on a tortured definition of fossil fuel money. It includes contributions donated by lobbyists who represent many clients other than oil or gas companies. It also includes money those lobbyists raised from other donors who have nothing to do with the oil and gas industry.

And most of the $4.5 million total is tied to donations made to a super PAC supporting Clinton — which Clinton does not control — by two people who run investment funds that include investments in oil and gas companies. But those investments represent a fraction of the overall investment portfolio.

The issue of fossil fuel money going to the Clinton campaign reemerged when a Greenpeace activist questioned Clinton at a campaign rally in New York on March 31 about whether she would “act on your word to reject fossil fuel money in the future in your campaign?”

Clinton responded, “I do not have — I have money from people who work for fossil fuel companies. … I am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me! I’m sick of it!”

As we wrote back in December, Clinton has received relatively little in contributions from oil and gas company employees (and nothing from the companies themselves, as that would be illegal). That hasn’t changed. According to more recent data cited by Sanders, contributions from oil and gas industry employees accounts for 0.2 percent of the nearly $160 million raised by the Clinton campaign so far.


http://www.factcheck.org/2016/04/clintons-fossil-fuel-money-revisited/
Posted by liberal N proud | Fri Apr 8, 2016, 06:27 AM (64 replies)

Truth has been Berned

The BSERS have foregone the truth for Bernie.
Posted by liberal N proud | Thu Apr 7, 2016, 06:54 PM (8 replies)

Has Sanders said why Hillary is not qualified to be President?

Or is it just like the breaking up the big banks thing?


..................He has not studied it.

Posted by liberal N proud | Thu Apr 7, 2016, 10:37 AM (21 replies)

BREAKING: Bernie Sanders Campaign Basically Admits Defeat

One day before the Wisconsin primary, the Bernie Sanders campaign has all but conceded that Hillary Clinton has clinched the nomination.

An eye-opening story in The New York Times reveals the Sanders campaign has been more effective than they hoped. But early missteps seem to have cost him the nomination:

“Mr. Sanders is now campaigning more effectively than many expected, exposing Mrs. Clinton’s weaknesses as a candidate, and is positioning himself to win contests like the Wisconsin primary on Tuesday. But allies and advisers of Mr. Sanders say they missed opportunities to run an aggressive political operation in 2015 that would have presented more of a challenge to Mrs. Clinton. She has now firmly built a big lead in delegates needed to clinch the nomination — a margin that would be smaller if Mr. Sanders had run differently last year, according to interviews with more than 15 people who are on his team or close to him.”

…All those decisions stemmed in part from Mr. Sanders’s outlook on the race. He was originally skeptical that he could beat Mrs. Clinton, and his mission in 2015 was to spread his political message about a rigged America rather than do whatever it took to win the nomination. By the time he caught fire with voters this winter and personally began to believe he could defeat Mrs. Clinton, she was already on her way to building an all but insurmountable delegate lead.”

Sanders is predicted to win the Wisconsin primary tomorrow but only by a few points. If he has any hope of winning the nomination, he has to win in Wisconsin, New York and California by much bigger margins.


http://www.liberalamerica.org/2016/04/04/breaking-bernie-sanders-campaign-basically-admits-defeat/
Posted by liberal N proud | Mon Apr 4, 2016, 04:47 PM (41 replies)

Early Missteps Seen as a Drag on Bernie Sanders’s Campaign

The morning after he lost the Nevada caucuses in February, Bernie Sanders held a painful conference call with his top advisers.

Mr. Sanders expressed deep frustration that he had not built a stronger political operation in the state, and then turned to the worrisome situation at hand.

His strategy for capturing the Democratic presidential nomination was based on sweeping all three early-voting states, and he had fallen short, winning only New Hampshire — to the consternation of his wife, Jane, who questioned whether he should have campaigned more in 2015.

Without that sweep, his aides thought at the time, Mr. Sanders had little hope of overcoming his vast problems with black voters in the Southern primaries. And he had no convincing evidence to challenge Hillary Clinton’s electability.

“If Clinton had lost Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, it would have been a devastating series of defeats that would have called into question her entire campaign,” said Tad Devine, one of several Sanders advisers who described the Feb. 21 conference call. “We had to shift our strategy. But no matter what, the nomination became tougher to win.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?emc=edit_th_20160404&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=45299538&_r=0


_________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Group
Posted by liberal N proud | Mon Apr 4, 2016, 06:32 AM (45 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... 103 Next »