Originally posted by Cowpoker
You could try defending the hypocrisy or excusing it away, you can't, so you try to reframe the conversation.

I'm not doing either, because the argument is stupid. Do you really think anyone left of center is upset with left of center politicians receiving campaign funding? It's a smear campaign cooked up by the billionaire owner of outlets like the Washington Post.

People in power demonizing people trying to change the dynamics of power isn't exactly breaking news. This attack itself isn't even veiled, straight up saying it's hypocritical to try gaining power in order to change the power dynamics. Because as we all know, the only real way to change power dynamics is with no power.

If he isn't lighting himself on fire in the middle of Wall Street, does he even care about the working class?

Originally posted by Corndog
I'm not doing either, because the argument is stupid. Do you really think anyone left of center is upset with left of center politicians receiving campaign funding? It's a smear campaign cooked up by the billionaire owner of outlets like the Washington Post.

People in power demonizing people trying to change the dynamics of power isn't exactly breaking news. This attack itself isn't even veiled, straight up saying it's hypocritical to try gaining power in order to change the power dynamics. Because as we all know, the only real way to change power dynamics is with no power.

Of course not, anyone left of center wouldn't care about someone being fraudulent or hypocritical as long as that fraud was closer to them on the political scale. It's the same reason why Sooner can't bring himself to admit how much of lying douchebag Trump is, because Trump can be a POS but as long as he says he's against abortion, the character of the message is less important.

It's not a veiled attack, it is direct and specific. You can't claim to be against something to gain attention and then use the very thing you are against when it benefits you or people will call you a fraud. Sorry.

Originally posted by Corndog
If he isn't lighting himself on fire in the middle of Wall Street, does he even care about the working class?

We won't know unless he tries now will we?

Originally posted by Cowpoker
Of course not, anyone left of center wouldn't care about someone being fraudulent or hypocritical as long as that fraud was closer to them on the political scale. It's the same reason why Sooner can't bring himself to admit how much of lying douchebag Trump is, because Trump can be a POS but as long as he says he's against abortion, the character of the message is less important.

It's not a veiled attack, it is direct and specific. You can't claim to be against something to gain attention and then use the very thing you are against when it benefits you or people will call you a fraud. Sorry.

k

What do you call an independent that votes with the democratic party 100% of the time?

Originally posted by cyberninja
What do you call an independent that votes with the democratic party 100% of the time?

Does that exist?
https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/S000033/votes-against-party/116
Originally posted by
Sen. Sanders voted against a majority of Senate Democrats 60 times (19.6%)

Are you making the argument that Sanders isn't radical enough? I might be open to that argument if that's where you're going.

Originally posted by Corndog
Are you making the argument that Sanders isn't radical enough? I might be open to that argument if that's where you're going.

He ranks 9th among all senators in voting against his party


The linked website called him a democrat...... point proven

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/S000033-bernard-sanders

So he missed more votes then voted against his party interesting. It's almost like he'd rather not vote, then to vote against.......

Which progressive bills did he vote against that you'd have preferred he voted for?

Originally posted by cyberninja
He ranks 9th among all senators in voting against his party


The linked website called him a democrat...... point proven

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/S000033-bernard-sanders

So he missed more votes then voted against his party interesting. It's almost like he'd rather not vote, then to vote against.......

He's trying to balance being an outlier because of the attention it gives him while also not doing too much to alienate the Democrats because he desperately needs them. He made the pledge in the 2020 campaign that "I am a Democrat", lost filed for the election in Vermont as an Independent in 2024 because it helps him win, not because his political views changed.

Personally, I don't agree with his politics but they are popular enough to warrant representation in congress but you can't help but criticize his hypocrisy.

I'd respect the "grass roots/no dark money, no special interest" approach to a campaign if he ran as an Independent and didn't create his own dark money source.

Originally posted by Corndog
Which progressive bills did he vote against that you'd have preferred he voted for?

I guess they'd also have to be progressive bills that he voted for but the majority of Democrats didn't vote for.

Honestly, I'm not sure what kind of nonsense point you're trying to make. Should he be siding more with Republicans? Why would you expect an independent to the left of Democrats to vote with the party to the right of Democrats?

Originally posted by Corndog
Are you making the argument that Sanders isn't radical enough? I might be open to that argument if that's where you're going.

He's as radical as he needs to be to attract attention.

Historically, he voted against the Brady bill, he supported additional police funding for more officers, voted against a measure that would have prevented police from having armored vehicles and tanks and military equipment, supported mandatory minimum sentences. There was a time when he supported tighter and stricter border security.

Recently he was screaming at Democrats that they should oppose the infrastructure bill and then he voted for it.

He's a fraud.

I'm doing him a favor, the reason for these little hypocritical outbursts is simply media exposure to keep his name out there and in the headlines and remind people that he is still there shaking things up.

Originally posted by Cowpoker
Historically, he voted against the Brady bill, he supported additional police funding for more officers, voted against a measure that would have prevented police from having armored vehicles and tanks and military equipment, supported mandatory minimum sentences. There was a time when he supported tighter and stricter border security.

I'm pretty sure none of that has much to do with socialism. Gun control doesn't have anything to do with empowering workers against their capitalist overlords.

But don't let that get in the way of a person having some different views today than he did 30 years ago. I don't think anyone would question your undying belief that changing your opinion is a sign of weakness.

I mean, don't let the Washington Post talking points get in the way of Biden voting for shit like this around the same time
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/20/18677998/joe-biden-1994-crime-bill-law-mass-incarceration

Things change over 30 years. Sanders has changed his opinions with new info. Democrats like Biden are still living in the 90s. That's why they are repeating some nonsense triangulation angle where if they just compromise enough then Republicans are going to be amicable to anything like passing abortion rights legislation.

Originally posted by Corndog
I'm pretty sure none of that has much to do with socialism. Gun control doesn't have anything to do with empowering workers against their capitalist overlords.

But don't let that get in the way of a person having some different views today than he did 30 years ago. I don't think anyone would question your undying belief that changing your opinion is a sign of weakness.

You: Give examples

Me: Examples

You: