Vermont's Sanders kicks off 2016 bid from Clinton's left

Woot! There is a choice out there for a non-monied politician for those smart enough to realize it.

Good!

I do so seriously hope and prays he overtakes Hilary and becomes the nominee! That would be THE best gift EVER for the GOP.

It still wouldn't save the GOP. After the past 8 years of Obama amazingness, contrasted with republican anti-Americanism, the people will never vote in the GOP.

Obama - best president ever.

Good Bad StrangerlandMAY. 27, 2015 - 08:59AM JST It still wouldn't save the GOP. After the past 8 years of Obama amazingness, contrasted with republican anti-Americanism, the people will never vote in the GOP.

Obama - best president ever.

You mean Obama Trauma. Please elaborate on this amazingness please. Also feel free to elaborate on the anti-Americanism you refer to. FYI the GOP is the majority. You don't even live here and you spout partisan comments. Typical tactic for the weak, attack the opposition verbally.

As for Sanders, he has the best chance in the party so far. The Clintons have a very controvercial past and present. Hillary may have resigned the Clinton foundation but her fingerprints are throughout.

Please elaborate on this amazingness please.

It's self-evident. He's awesome.

feel free to elaborate on the anti-Americanism you refer to.

1) Shutting down the country.

2) Existing.

Typical tactic for the weak, attack the opposition verbally.

Typical tactic for those in the wrong - criticize the accusation rather than fixing the behavior. "The problem isn't racism, it's people pointing out the existence of racism".

It still wouldn't save the GOP.

You guys already lost two bets on this. Wanna try and fall on the sword once again with another embarrassment.

After the past 8 years of Obama amazingness, contrasted with republican anti-Americanism, the people will never vote in the GOP.

Please keep telling yourself that. That was said in 2010 and 2014 ROFL

Obama - best president ever.

You forgot to add, biggest fraud, liar, debt creator and Charlatan to that list.

And more hatred of Obama comes out, ignoring the fact that he is awesomeness embodied.

You know it, I know it, we all know it, some people just cannot handle the idea of a black president.

Back on topic please.

FYI Stranger...the democrats shut down the country. They intentionally at great expense caused pain. Spending $ to guard parks that are never guarded was quite obvious.

Seems your posts are the insulting ones. You're also implying racism is motivation in the above posts which are not yours. He may be a black man, you have no clue! Also, I have a problem with the statement of Obama hatred. If I oppose anyone certainly does not mean I hate them. Silly and stupid point of view to use the hate card when opposing opinions are presented.

History will clearly document the Obama Trauma USA endured with the following years of recovery from this catastrophe.

And more hatred of Obama comes out, ignoring the fact that he is awesomeness embodied. You know it, I know it, we all know it, some people just cannot handle the idea of a black president.

It's not hatred of Obama. It's hatred of his policies and his lack of care for the country and people and our military.

Him (Obama) being Black has absolutely nothing to do with it. I like Dr.Ben Carson, if he had a chance I'd vote for him without any hesitation if he were the nominee elect, so this playing the RACE card by the left has become a serious bore.

The gap between the very rich and everyone is wider than at any time since the 1920s. The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time and it is the great political issue of our time.

This great nation and its government belong to all of the people and not to a handful of billionaires, their super PACs and their lobbyists.

--Bernie Sanders

What other candidates are saying these things? Words of wisdom, and while I doubt Sanders will succeed in his campaign, I hope his ideas become a central part of the debate in the coming year.

FYI Stranger...the democrats shut down the country.

The GOP took a vast majority of the blame, and the leadership has said multiple times that they will never do that again because of the damaged it caused the party.

As for Bernie, I'm interested in what he has to say. He'll do some damage to Hillary. The important thing is that he brings his message to the table, and that it's going to come from the Democrats.

What is being accomplished pushing buttons Stranger. It's not in your favor.

The republicans are saying it Plasticmonkey the income gap is growing especially in the last several years. Look up Ben Carson, he'll impress as Bass suggests. He is on my wish list for VP. A long shot for POTUS. a smart well grounded self made man NOT politically groomed. USA needs new blood, not run of the mill groomed politician in control. Not much changes with them.

Good Bad SuperLibMAY. 27, 2015 - 10:38AM JST FYI Stranger...the democrats shut down the country.

The GOP took a vast majority of the blame, and the leadership has said multiple times that they will never do that again because of the damaged it caused the party.

As for Bernie, I'm interested in what he has to say. He'll do some damage to Hillary. The important thing is that he brings his message to the table, and that it's going to come from the Democrats.

Super, it was the biased mainstream media placing the blame on the refusal to accept the budget. It was the democrats who actually spent more money than the supposed shutdown to inflict pain on the people. As it is today Hillary can do now wrong it seems. She is resilient I have to say. Will Warren throw her hat in? Will any others? Sanders has a chance like any other candidates. This will be an exciting presidential election to be certain.

The GOP took a vast majority of the blame, and the leadership has said multiple times that they will never do that again because of the damaged it caused the party.

And now the Dems are exactly where the GOP was in 2007 and the result, they lost the House and Senate, did they learn, NO. And they MAY possibly make the same mistake with the presidency as well.

As for Bernie, I'm interested in what he has to say. He'll do some damage to Hillary. The important thing is that he brings his message to the table, and that it's going to come from the Democrats.

the reality is, there is NO way, Saunders will get the nomination or ever be president and his words of income distribution is the very last thing that people want to hear now.

his words of income distribution is the very last thing that people want to hear now.

They is? Actually, a healthy majority of Americans think that wealth inequality is serious or fairly serious issue and a clear majority also favor raising taxes on the uber rich.

The irony is that the republicans are talking income distribution and inequality, but when push comes to shove, there is no way they will ever actually do anything about it, because that would upset the donors. So it's just a talking point, to make it appear as if they actually care.

In 2012, the GOP won 49% of the popular vote for the House against 50% for the Republicans yet ended up with a majority; in 2014, that election of so-called sweeping GOP triumph, the GOP won 52 percent of the popular vote yet ended up with 57% of the House. The Senate makeup makes this travesty of democracy even worse.

I'm glad Sanders is in. I like the guy, and I think he will have a very positive influence on Hillary, pulling her further left. As for the sudden GOP "concern" regarding the poor and income inequality, there has never been a better example of crocodile tears. Not one of their presidential candidates' proposals would alleviate the situation; all would aggravate it.

They is? Actually, a healthy majority of Americans think that wealth inequality is serious or fairly serious issue and a clear majority also favor raising taxes on the uber rich.

The affluent already pay 68% of all the taxes and add to that the majority of Americans that do want the affluent to pay even more taxes are the people that mostly vote democratic and why do so many people want it is because of the presidents failed social policies to create enough high paying jobs, as a result the outcome of that is failure when you have to raise taxes to compensate for not creating a strong economy. So the only answer is the "Robin Hood method." And it has never helped and NEVER will help in the long run.

The irony is that the republicans are talking income distribution and inequality, but when push comes to shove, there is no way they will ever actually do anything about it, because that would upset the donors. So it's just a talking point, to make it appear as if they actually care.

As with the powerful liberal base as well, they want others to pay more including the middle class, but whoa when it comes to touching their money. So the libs care less. Don't believe me, look at our public schools, it's a cesspool of liberal theocracy and what is coming out of them? Don't give me this, libs are a caring bunch, pure nonsense!

In 2012, the GOP won 49% of the popular vote for the House against 50% for the Republicans yet ended up with a majority; in 2014, that election of so-called sweeping GOP triumph, the GOP won 52 percent of the popular vote yet ended up with 57% of the House. The Senate makeup makes this travesty of democracy even worse.

But they won and as the anointed one himself said, "elections have consequences." They sure do, they sure do.

I'm glad Sanders is in.

Me too!!!

I like the guy, and I think he will have a very positive influence on Hillary, pulling her further left. As for the sudden GOP "concern" regarding the poor and income inequality, there has never been a better example of crocodile tears. Not one of their presidential candidates' proposals would alleviate the situation; all would aggravate it.

This is the Achilles heel for the Democrats, keep talking about the environment, income redistribution and the trumped. Up war on women BS, I sincerely pray they do because as long as they don't talk about JOBS, National Security, fixing the healthcare that Obama and the Dems screwed up, they will have a very difficult time winning anything.

The affluent already pay 68% of all the taxes

The most affluent 10% of Americans own over 84% of US financial assets, so if they're only paying 68% of the taxes maybe they need to pull their weight a bit more?

http://inequality.org/wealth-inequality/

http://www.ntu.org/foundation/page/who-pays-income-taxes. -carefull when you provide skewed reports.

Don't overlook the Earned Income Tax Credit for those making about $50k and under. They have nice refunds from the IRS.

The hipocracy is in NY state an business growth initiative is driven by tax breaks. Yet the fed want higher taxes on businesses. Seems like the tax breaks attract and the increases send them out of the country.

bass

The affluent already pay 68% of all the taxes

Oh yeah. As cleo has pointed out, ust look at the proportion of wealth they own. Do you sense injustice?

the presidents failed social policies to create enough high paying jobs,

We've been here before. You want the government to provide high paying jobs? I thought you Reaganites wanted to leave that up to the private sector. And what has the billionaire private sector been doing? Using its tax breaks to create high paying jobs?

No.

the "Robin Hood method." And it has never helped and NEVER will help in the long run.

Obama is no Robin Hood. He differs only marginally from his forebears. Tax breaks for the rich. Deregulation. Big favors for Wall Street. None of this has helped the real America to prosper. You live in a fantasy world. Obama is as much a socialist as Reagan.

a cesspool of liberal theocracy

Say what?

fixing the healthcare that Obama and the Dems screwed up

Pray tell, give an alternative.

The most affluent 10% of Americans own over 84% of US financial assets, so if they're only paying 68% of the taxes maybe they need to pull their weight a bit more?

Or better yet, Obama could do something really good for a change and do something that would ensure his legacy as decent president, at least if he would concentrate on building a stronger economy and creating higher wage jobs that would be long overdue. Stealing taxes from the affluent won't do squat but to perpetuate the cycle of dependency of big government.

Oh yeah. As cleo has pointed out, ust look at the proportion of wealth they own. Do you sense injustice?

For the most part, NO. When I was growing up and during my parents time, taking anything from the government was seen as shameful. My dad in his early life didn't make a lot of money, had a 6th grade education but he worked hard, prospered and became very, very successful. Nowadays, no one wants to put in ANY effort, just quick solution, take from the affluent, essentially putting a bandaid on the problem and hope the wound doesn't fester.

We've been here before.

Yes, we have.

You want the government to provide high paying jobs? I thought you Reaganites wanted to leave that up to the private sector.

Sorry, let me clarify myself, I want Obama to stay out of the private sector, stop throwing in monkey wrenches and let the private sector take care of itself. Funny, Go to Southern California and drive through L.A. County and then drive 45 min. South to Orange County and you will see two counties, One Conservative and one liberal. OC prosperous, vibrant, clean, affluent people, beautiful homes. L.A. County, high crime, poverty everywhere, closed shops, dirty, out of control liberal policies. Same state 2 counties, Night and Day. The proof is there.

And what has the billionaire private sector been doing? Using its tax breaks to create high paying jobs?

OC, San Diego, Silicon Valley, Texas and a lot more city and conservative county areas, Yes.

Obama is no Robin Hood. He differs only marginally from his forebears.

Yeah, he differs, right about that, but I'm not allowed to use that kind of language. So, I will stick with "Robin Hood."

None of this has helped the real America to prosper.

Obama hasn't either.

You live in a fantasy world. Obama is as much a socialist as Reagan.

No, absolutely not. My father made his fortune during the Reagan years mostly and there is a huge gap of what Reagan was and what Obama is.

Pray tell, give an alternative.

Something that is more affordable and won't further bankrupt the working class.

He still has 531 days left to do something good.

MarkG: Super, it was the biased mainstream media placing the blame on the refusal to accept the budget.

Oh, OK. I didn't realize that. I suppose now we can't really talk about anything anymore because of the liberal bias.

bass: Sorry, let me clarify myself

No need. You're a right wing guy who believes in free market economics, including no minimum wage, but on the other hand you look to the President to create high paying jobs. It's just a bassism.

The wealth gap has been increasing for decades regardless of who is President. It's a structural part of our economy and it will continue to gather pace, especially with the use of technology and globalization. I don't think the GOP has the stomach to talk about it because they don't want to be honest about an economic system that has taken care of so many people for so long suddenly producing skewed results.

Instead, the GOP has to find something to blame, and that would be the President and the lower class. Right wingers exclusively, and I mean that literally, exclusively paint social safety nets as people who are lazy. The thought of a teacher 4 years on the job getting let go because of budget cuts caused by the financial crisis is a story they do not want to talk about, so instead we get surfers who eat lobster.

In fact, talking about the teacher would be an open admission by the GOP that sometimes people can work hard and get thrown under the economic bus through no fault of their own. They are desperate to pretend that the market would never do anything like that...it's all about working hard. In 2015 it's really about working hard and hoping some financial wizards don't destroy demand overnight, but let's not talk about that. Let's ban steak purchases from welfare recipients and that will help to get American on the right track again.

You get other tricks, like when market dumps 3,000,000 workers before Obama takes office, the social safety nets kick in, and now Obama is to blame for the increased spending. It's not about an out-of-control financial market destroying jobs, it's strictly about a Democrat President spending like a drunken sailor. More disconnect.

So what's happening now is the GOP trying to get blood from a stone. The working class hasn't had a wage increase in decades and they really have nothing left to give at this point. All the new income is going to the top 1%. And, of course, it's their own fault. Theirs and a Democratic President.

What Sanders will do is bring these issues to the table, and both parties will be better for it. Personally, I want to hear Bernie ask Carly Fiorina just how she felt she was owed a $40 million severance package after being forced out at HP for poor performance. She literally cut the stock price in half and laid off 1,800 workers. And she got $40 million as an exit bonus. $40 million.

If that doesn't tell you the system is skewed towards the top, then I don't know what does.

Do you deny the liberal bias in mainstream media Super? It is crystal clear.

Oh, OK. I didn't realize that. I suppose now we can't really talk about anything anymore because of the liberal bias. bass: Sorry, let me clarify myself

No need. You're a right wing guy who believes in free market economics, including no minimum wage, but on the other hand you look to the President to create high paying jobs. It's just a bassism.

First of all, I am NOT a right wing guy, I'm more of a libertarian conservative. I wouldn't even pass the conservative test, because I don't fit their mold of what a true conservative should be. As for increasing the minimum wage, I'm for a small increase, but I don't think a huge increase let's say for example you get paid $15 to flip a burger is necessary because in the long run, you would stifle growth, not to mention, you would see an increase on your food prices.

The wealth gap has been increasing for decades regardless of who is President. It's a structural part of our economy and it will continue to gather pace, especially with the use of technology and globalization.

I agree, but robbing the rich to give to the poor will never work, has never worked, it's just a short term solution.

I don't think the GOP has the stomach to talk about it because they don't want to be honest about an economic system that has taken care of so many people for so long suddenly producing skewed results.

The Dems are the absolute last party to talk about honesty when it involves anything having to do with money, let's start with inflating numbers, lying about the economy,cage growth or lack of... Give me a break!!

Instead, the GOP has to find something to blame,

You mean the way the left love to use the blame game, so now that the GOP is turning it around, you libs are getting upset??? Ahh, the smell of hypocrisy.

and that would be the President and the lower class. Right wingers exclusively, and I mean that literally, exclusively paint social safety nets as people who are lazy.

If it's necessarily needed, of course not, but that's what's not happening, millions of Americans are using social services like a crutch and the longer the president pushes to extend these benefits, the longer the people will depend on them and are less likely to go back into the job market.

The thought of a teacher 4 years on the job getting let go because of budget cuts caused by the financial crisis is a story they do not want to talk about, so instead we get surfers who eat lobster.

So you think like in my home state of California a public High school teacher should be making over $65K a year??? And have tenure and receive 90% of their income pension? This is the reason CA. Is going bankrupt! We have become an entitlement driven country! How long do you think it's going to last? The higher the unemployment, the less there is in the well to hand out these crazy entitlements. When I was a kid and we didn't have this system, CA. Had the fifth largest economy in the world. People worked, NEVER took anything from the government.

In fact, talking about the teacher would be an open admission by the GOP that sometimes people can work hard and get thrown under the economic bus through no fault of their own.

And we used to have 6 weeks of unemployment and the Dems want it to go as long as 180 days, so who's going to pay for that? Oh, let's take it from the affluent, I forgot. It's much easier than creating high paying skilled jobs.

They are desperate to pretend that the market would never do anything like that...it's all about working hard.

Worked for me and all of my friends and none of use were spoiled rich brats. I was never, out of a job for more than two weeks. I did whatever I had to in order to survive. I didn't live at home, I was on my own. The problem nowadays is that NO one wants to work. How many Americans work in Strawberry or grape fields, cleaning restrooms or doing really disgusting jobs, there are enough jobs out there where you can make SOMETHING, may not be much, but better than nothing.

In 2015 it's really about working hard and hoping some financial wizards don't destroy demand overnight, but let's not talk about that. Let's ban steak purchases from welfare recipients and that will help to get American on the right track again.

Whatever it takes. Whatever happened to living within your means, if you can't afford it, then you need to be patient.

You get other tricks, like when market dumps 3,000,000 workers before Obama takes office, the social safety nets kick in, and now Obama is to blame for the increased spending.

Uh-huh, right. So what about now over the last 6 years? Why was he incognito virtually the entire time?

It's not about an out-of-control financial market destroying jobs,

Out of control? What jobs?

it's strictly about a Democrat President spending like a drunken sailor.

Pretty much.

So what's happening now is the GOP trying to get blood from a stone.

No, they are just counting the rest of the 530 days before this president is gone, they don't need to do much. Stay out of it and let Obama hang himself and his fellow Dems.

The working class hasn't had a wage increase in decades and they really have nothing left to give at this point. All the new income is going to the top 1%. And, of course, it's their own fault. Theirs and a Democratic President.

I'm all for a wage increase, but at the same time, I'm also ready for unemployment to raise as well. Washington is a prime example where they laid off thousands of people after they initiated a pay increase.

What Sanders will do is bring these issues to the table, and both parties will be better for it. IF they can come to a reasonable understanding.

Personally, I want to hear Bernie ask Carly Fiorina just how she felt she was owed a $40 million severance package after being forced out at HP for poor performance.

So what's wrong with that, she worked, she earned it, if that was part of her contract to get that amount of money in her severance package, good for her, as a CEO she was paid a high salary for a reason. Just like a boxer that loses a fight, they still will walk away with millions, I have no problem with that. That's why I love the free capitalist market, it's competitive for a reason.

She literally cut the stock price in half and laid off 1,800 workers. And she got $40 million as an exit bonus. $40 million.

Yup, if that helps, we had to lay off about 45 workers a few years ago, in order to stay afloat, we didn't want to, we had a lot of good people working for us, but we explained the situation to them, they were all paid a very good competitive salary. But the cuts we made were necessary. We informed them ahead of time, the majority understood. In business that happens a lot.

If that doesn't tell you the system is skewed towards the top, then I don't know what does.

And as long as we have a free market capitalist system, it will hopefully stay that way, but I want to know, are you ok with the huge salary and quirks Saunders makes? You might not have a problem with that, but whoa if it's a conservative. Bernie lives very well and I abhor liberal socialist hypocrites that dump on the capitalist system, but make out as bandits themselves!

The irony is that the republicans are talking income distribution and inequality, but when push comes to shove, there is no way they will ever actually do anything about it, because that would upset the donors.

And Democrats are going to do something when poor people don't vote? Like Sanders making speeches with lines like "We don’t need 23 deodorant choices when children are hungry." So these companies are supposed to be making food instead ? The logic of a socialist is lost on me.

bass, we have two different views of the people who need help. You and others mostly talk about waste and lazy people. They exist. But I want a system that takes care of the out of work school teacher, and I'm not willing to stiff her because "other people are lazy." Let's make a system that cuts down on the waste and helps people in temporary situations that would have otherwise contributed. By cutting programs altogether those people become collateral damage in a political war and that upsets me.

Also, I think you don't quite get what the market is like today. In the past, when you and I needed a job, we send out our resume and go on interviews. After millions of people were put out of work, you now have multiple people going for the same job, much more so than before. There aren't enough jobs to fill the demand.

The notion of "work any job" sounds good, but it's a pipe dream. A teacher doesn't lose her job and start looking for toilets to clean. You send your your resume and apply for other teaching jobs. That takes time. Maybe you get the job, but with so many others just like you being laid off, the odds are against it, especially if you've only been in the market for 5 years or less.

So after a couple of months of that, you start to widen your scope. No teaching jobs, but maybe you can get on at a school as a special assistant, or administrator, or anything. So you start to include those jobs. Quickly you'll find that all of the teachers not hired for a teaching job are all going after those jobs, too. The dance continues for another couple of months.

Now it's been 4 months since you lost your job. Depending on your level of savings, that's when you start to look at jobs like cleaning floors. Ever tried to get a job cleaning floors or flipping burgers with a college degree, especially a masters? Yeah, good luck with that. They are looking for someone young, poor, and dumb. Anyone who tells someone else to flip burgers is grossly out of touch.

Or how about this headline: "D.C. Walmart stores get 11,000 applicants for 1,800 jobs." Sure, just get a job anywhere, don't be so damn lazy. The jobs just aren't there anymore, bass. Some people are lazy and don't work, but 10,200 people didn't get hired for the Walmart job obviously wanted to work at wages close to unemployment anyway.

So does extending benefits from 6 weeks to 6 months really sound that insane for people like her? Or construction workers who simply had no jobs to work on? Or any person that has a specialized skill only to find there are no available jobs for it at the moment?

I was lucky to find my job as a real estate analyst. The guy I interviewed with spent a couple of years in Japan and with that we built amazing rapport during the interview process. He mentioned a name to me, someone I used to work with back in real estate sales about 15 years ago, before I moved to Japan. Turns out he was going after the same job I was. He left sales and started his own investment firm during the boom, then went BK. And he was literally interviewing for the same job I was and I hadn't worked in the market for 11 years.

The fact is that they didn't want a guy who used to run his own company suddenly working under the partners. They didn't say that to me, but they hired me, so it was pretty obvious. The other guy isn't lazy. He's a great guy, Mormon, 4 kids, and just oozes integrity. But he couldn't get an analyst job in a city 100 miles away from home.

Welcome to the new economy.