HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Bernie Sanders: Wrong!

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:46 PM

 

Bernie Sanders: Wrong!




77 replies, 7391 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 77 replies Author Time Post
Reply Bernie Sanders: Wrong! (Original post)
Playinghardball Apr 2015 OP
postulater Apr 2015 #1
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #22
daleanime Apr 2015 #45
Plucketeer Apr 2015 #51
daleanime Apr 2015 #52
merrily Apr 2015 #69
merrily Apr 2015 #61
BeyondGeography Apr 2015 #2
merrily Apr 2015 #65
BeyondGeography Apr 2015 #67
merrily Apr 2015 #68
Zorra Apr 2015 #3
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #23
merrily Apr 2015 #70
hifiguy Apr 2015 #4
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #34
Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2015 #57
merrily Apr 2015 #62
aikoaiko Apr 2015 #5
Curmudgeoness Apr 2015 #8
erronis Apr 2015 #18
Curmudgeoness Apr 2015 #19
aikoaiko Apr 2015 #29
Curmudgeoness Apr 2015 #43
merrily Apr 2015 #71
merrily Apr 2015 #66
arcane1 Apr 2015 #31
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #37
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #54
merrily Apr 2015 #63
tularetom Apr 2015 #6
appalachiablue Apr 2015 #10
aggiesal Apr 2015 #36
appalachiablue Apr 2015 #38
Maedhros Apr 2015 #7
gregcrawford Apr 2015 #9
gordianot Apr 2015 #11
Maedhros Apr 2015 #30
gordianot Apr 2015 #41
Maedhros Apr 2015 #42
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #17
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #24
merrily Apr 2015 #64
Maedhros Apr 2015 #76
merrily Apr 2015 #77
nationalize the fed Apr 2015 #12
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #16
nationalize the fed Apr 2015 #20
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #26
zeemike Apr 2015 #13
Enthusiast Apr 2015 #14
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #15
Fred Sanders Apr 2015 #25
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #27
L0oniX Apr 2015 #21
chknltl Apr 2015 #28
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #32
jtuck004 Apr 2015 #33
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #75
AuntPatsy Apr 2015 #35
bigwillq Apr 2015 #39
WillyT Apr 2015 #40
blkmusclmachine Apr 2015 #44
Dont call me Shirley Apr 2015 #46
PosterChild Apr 2015 #47
YOHABLO Apr 2015 #48
redruddyred Apr 2015 #53
mother earth Apr 2015 #49
SoLeftIAmRight Apr 2015 #50
midnight Apr 2015 #55
greyl Apr 2015 #56
AzDar Apr 2015 #58
Motown_Johnny Apr 2015 #59
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #60
progree Apr 2015 #73
Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #74
Hiraeth Apr 2015 #72

Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:50 PM

1. Wow.

And it sucked the jobs right along with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to postulater (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:51 PM

22. Not just jobs but TAX REVENUE.

That is why China can afford fast trains, but we can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #22)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 06:16 PM

45. It's also because China will to build fast trains....

and we, for several stupid reasons, are not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #45)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 09:33 PM

51. Yeah - reasons like....

 

Who would keep the oil and rubber companies fat???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #51)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 09:52 PM

52. Definitely one of the reasons...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #52)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 08:28 AM

69. You can't have guns and butter and not raise taxes, so we borrow to fund wars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:03 AM

61. So many reasons why "we can't have nice things."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:50 PM

2. This is supposed to be decision week for Bernie, right?

I think he promised an answer on running by the end of April.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:30 AM

65. Meh. There's wiggle room.

Originally, Hillary promised one around in January 2015, then July 2015, then April 2015.

A lot of factors affect the date of announcement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #65)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:44 AM

67. Sounds like he's (pretty much) sticking to the schedule

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #67)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 08:26 AM

68. Thank you very much!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:52 PM

3. I guess there must be a Third Way to interpret the word "compete". nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:51 PM

23. +1000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 08:30 AM

70. It's "Would you like fries with that?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:54 PM

4. Your country needs you, Senator.

 

RUN!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:19 PM

34. Our country needs at least 99 more like him

 

Bare minimum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 11:51 PM

57. 534 just like him - Teabag heads explode and Nirvana is attained

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #34)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:14 AM

62. 536 mas or menos, si, podemos!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:56 PM

5. Are we selling more to China regardless if they are selling more to us?


The trade deficit could go up, but we could still be selling more to China, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 01:48 PM

8. Of course we are selling more to China,

since before the trade deals, we were not selling anything to them. But that is not the point. The point is that we were told that if we opened up the market to a country the size of China, we would open up a vast untapped market for our goods. That is not what happened.

Here is the export and import info on China by year:

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:41 PM

18. Stop it with the facts, damn it!

It would have been nice to see pretty graphics on a year-by-year basis but it doesn't take more than a few scrolls down the page to see that the "Giant Sucking Sound" is getting louder every year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erronis (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:43 PM

19. Yep, that deficit column is ominous. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:00 PM

29. Isnt that two different things, is my point.


Clinton promised more exports to China and that happened.

He didn't promise a trade gap reduction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #29)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 05:11 PM

43. That would have been a devious promise

if we are going to focus on the exact wording without including the rest of what we were told about the benefits to the US.

"I promise that I will not punch you." "I didn't say that I wouldn't kick you or bite you or shoot you." Doesn't matter much if you make me feel safer, but are just playing word games.

From what I see of our production and exports, we are exporting raw materials to China, and they are refining them and shipping them back to us as finished products. So increasing exports to China is a sleazy way to sell us something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 08:35 AM

71. I'm glad you could explain it. I was at a loss for words.

"Good grief" was all I managed.

As if Americans hearing "we'll sell more of out things" are not intended to have visions of a booming economy in the USA and all that comes with that.

Now, we're supposed to parse every word and phrase six ways to Sunday like Frank Luntz meets Newt Gingrich.

New Democrats need to hand out Politician to English dictionaries at every campaign stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:33 AM

66. Good grief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:01 PM

31. Wow, it jumps up (or, rather, down) like crazy after 2001!

 

It's really clear when presented that way. Thanks for the link!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:24 PM

37. We sell very little to China, in way of goods

 

We sell them capital. That is, we give them our money for their stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #37)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 10:56 PM

54. We are being treated like a colony. We revolted from Great Britain because they wanted

 

to take our resources and manufacture goods that they sold back to us. They wanted to tax goods that we made so their goods would be cheaper. It's time for another revolution not another "Frackin Free Trade Agreement."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:17 AM

63. I heard on Charlie Rose--didn't verify--one new millionaire in China EVERY WEEK.

Las Vegas casino owner, building casinos in China or wanting to. I did not pay close attention.

So, yeah, they are getting the money to buy, like the USA did after the Depression, and then some.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:56 PM

6. And because that was wrong, we have to do this TPP to offset China's influence in the region

See how it all works? We make a stupid decision, and a few years later when everybody has forgotten we did it, we attempt to repair it by making yet another stupid decision. And we blame the first stupid decision.

Sen. Sanders in spot on in his observation, but a trade agreement that excludes China is not the solution to a spiraling trade deficit with China.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 01:51 PM

10. Exactly, one bad deal leads to another, works perfectly for those who benefit. TPP=NAFTA Part 2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appalachiablue (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:22 PM

36. TPP = SHAFTA

[font color=red size=10]S[/font]outhern
[font color=red size=10]H[/font]emisphere
[font color=red size=10]A[/font]sian
[font color=red size=10]F[/font]ree
[font color=red size=10]T[/font]rade
[font color=red size=10]A[/font]greement

As heard on the Thom Hartmann show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aggiesal (Reply #36)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:24 PM

38. Yep Thom got that one exactly, hear him say it fairly often. A classic!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 01:23 PM

7. Maybe Obama is just following Vortigern's lead.

 

The Picts had proven a thorn in the side of the burgeoning Romano-Celt kingdom by raiding the British coast from their homeland in what is now Scotland. The 5th century warlord known as Vortigern ("Great King" sought help against the Picts, and in AD 449 invited the Germanic twins Hengist and Horsa to come to Britain and rid the land of the pernicious Picts. The twins had other plans, however, and usurped the throne from Vortigern and established their own kingdoms.

Maybe Obama is trying the same gambit: the Chinese economy is threatening America, so he is inviting international corporations to come deal with the Chinese and provide economic security to the U.S.. However, like Hengist and Horsa, I imagine the corporations have a different end-game in mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 01:49 PM

9. Excellent historical Parallel! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:07 PM

11. Interesting historical citation but have questions?

China has expressed interest in joining TPP as a financial reform. If that happens what is the outcome? Since this is all being negotiated in secret how does China know? At this juncture I do not think anyone knows for certain what is on the table including Bernie Sanders. Anyone's guess?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gordianot (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:01 PM

30. Here is a good start:

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 04:59 PM

41. Yes I have seen that the more I research the more confusing.

Maybe on purpose? I see no positive scenarios or good spin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gordianot (Reply #41)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 05:07 PM

42. That's the big red flag, IMHO.

 

If the benefits to ordinary Americans are real, then there should be some detailed explanations available as to why.

But there aren't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:35 PM

17. And maybe this has no relevance.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:54 PM

24. Yes!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 07:28 AM

64. Hengist and Horsa? You sure it wasn't Hans and Franz?

Look at you, getting all first millennium.

I loved the story, but I missed a significant part of the point. How does inviting corporations to deal with the Chinese make the USA more economically secure?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #64)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 11:54 AM

76. The claimed rationale behind the TPP is that it is needed to compete with the Chinese.

 

I think Obama believes that the TPP provisions that grant so many benefits to international corporations will give them what they need to keep the Chinese at bay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 11:56 AM

77. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:24 PM

12. Look up in the sky- It's a bird! It's a plane! nope it's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:34 PM

16. And under the bus goes Bill Clinton.

 

Do you people understand exactly how much you are acting like the Tea Party?

"Not pure enough! Get the fuck out!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:46 PM

20. Bubba drove the NAFTA bus

right over the middle class

Not pure enough!


Here's some "Party" Purity for ya



"The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican."- President Barack Obama

During an interview with Noticias Univision 23, the network's Miami affiliate newscast, Obama pushed back against the accusation made in some corners of south Florida's Cuban-American and Venezuelan communities that he wants to instill a socialist economic system in the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:56 PM

26. Oh NOES! Is this where I apologize for campaigning for Obama?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:27 PM

13. The reasons given for the TPP remind me of a nursery rhyme.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:30 PM

14. Kicked

and recommended a whole bunch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:33 PM

15. When and where and under what circumstances did Sanders say that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:55 PM

25. Sanders should also give links and context when called for to support a bold conclusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #25)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:57 PM

27. WTF is that supposed to mean? That Sanders really did not say it?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:50 PM

21. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 02:57 PM

28. Until shown otherwise, Sen. Sanders is correct.

This shows me that Bill Clinton was wrong. I see nowhere in this OP that Senator Sanders is in agreement with Bill Clinton regarding Clinton's statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:02 PM

32. The irony is delicious. We condemned China for being communist. Now we condemn China for

 

being better capitalists than we are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #32)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:17 PM

33. +1 yup. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #32)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 11:16 AM

75. China is still governed by the Communist Party.

China is a one-party state, with real power lying with the Chinese Communist party. The country is governed under the constitution of 1982 as amended, the fifth constitution since the accession of the Communists in 1949. The unicameral legislature is the National People's Congress (NPC), consisting of deputies who are indirectly elected to terms of five years. The NPC decides on national economic strategy, elects or removes high officeholders, and can change China's constitution; it normally follows the directives of the Communist party's politburo. The executive branch consists of the president, who is head of state, and the premier, who is head of government. The president is elected by the NPC for a five-year term and and is eligible for reelection. The premier is nominated by the president and approved by the NPC. Administratively, the country is divided into 22 provinces, five autonomous regions, and four municipalities. Despite the concentration of power in the Communist party, the central government's control over the provinces and local governments is limited, and they are often able to act with relative impunity in many areas.

Read more: China: Government http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/world/china-government.html#ixzz3YcZkIuOk

China has experienced tremendous economic growth since the late 1970s. In large part as a result of economic liberalization policies, the gross domestic product (GDP) increased tenfold between 1978 and 2006, and foreign investment soared during the 1990s. In 2007 China passed Germany to become the world's third-largest economy, and in 2010 it passed Japan to become the second-largest. These gains obscure, however, the fact that per capita wealth is still significantly less than that of many smaller economies. China's challenge in the early 21st cent. will be to balance its largely centralized political system with an increasingly decentralized economic system and increase domestic consumption to diminish its economy's great dependence on exports for growth.

Agriculture is by far the leading occupation, involving almost 50% of the population, although extensive rough, high terrain and large arid areas—especially in the west and north—limit cultivation to only about 15% of the land surface. Since the late 1970s, China has decollectivized agriculture, yielding tremendous gains in production. Even with these improvements, agriculture accounts for only 12% of the nation's GDP. Despite initial gains in farmers' incomes in the early 1980s, taxes and fees have increasingly made farming an unprofitable occupation, and because the state owns all land, farmers have at times been easily evicted when croplands are sought by developers. Additional land reforms adopted in 2008 allow farmers to transfer land use rights.



Read more: China: Economy http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/world/china-economy.html#ixzz3Yca2WCVO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:20 PM

35. N/T needed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:35 PM

39. K and R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 03:40 PM

40. K & R !!!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 06:04 PM

44. OP, poor thread title.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 06:24 PM

46. How did Bill get it sooo wrong?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 07:41 PM

47. So, how do they get away with it...

Since the dollars have to come back to the US to be worth anything? Well, basically , they GIVE us the dollars back, for nothing in return.

What they do is peg the yuan to just below the exchange rate that would prevail if trade were balanced. To keep the control the exchange rate they buy US Treasury bonds. For about next to nothing in interset, at times negative interest. In other words, they ship us a whole lot of stuff, then give us our money back.

Ultimately this won't work out good for them. The danger here is that when things unwind, their economy could crash and, given the interdependent global economy it could cause a lot of collateral damage.

Wouldn't be a bad idea to enter into some sort of a regional trade deal with them and to start putting some pressure on them to move away from this gambit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 08:05 PM

48. Bill Clinton, nor Barack Obama are Social Democrats .. they're Corporate Demorcats.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YOHABLO (Reply #48)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 10:16 PM

53. I think jeb bush was quoted a week back claiming obama was the most liberal prez EVAR

 

what alternate reality is he living in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 08:14 PM

49. We need you, Bernie! Run!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 08:39 PM

50. Selling our food is selling our future.

 

It is crazy to put food on the world market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 10:57 PM

55. Good info. thanks... I remember the notion that the jobs that were being shipped out of this

country would be replaced with jobs that were not even aware of. We some how were going to magically create jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 11:13 PM

56. But the trade deficit is not a measure of the quantity or quality of opportunities.

Did Bill say Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China would reduce the trade deficit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 12:49 AM

58. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 05:39 AM

59. Any idea if Sec. Clinton has a comment on this?

 


I'm kinda betting she doesn't.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 06:52 AM

60. Did we ever find out when and where Sanders said this?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #60)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 10:25 AM

73. Well, there's this from his twitter feed

Well, there is this twitter from https://twitter.com/SenSanders

https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/591982757808484352

You can also see it on the twitter feed on the left side of Sander's senate website, and scroll down to April 25.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #73)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 10:31 AM

74. Thanks.

 

(not a Twitter fan)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Playinghardball (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2015, 10:02 AM

72. and ... whoomp!! There it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread