Politics Democratic Debate: Viewers say Sanders won, editors say Clinton won

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
VanillaGorilla

VanillaGorilla

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
12,073
Likes
4,750
Points
113
kwUIpTJ.jpg
 
Bernie Sanders scores $1.3 million post-debate haul



By S.A. Miller - The Washington Times - Wednesday, October 14, 2015

LAS VEGAS — Sen. Bernard Sanders raked in more than $1.3 million in contributions in the first four hours after his performance in the first Democratic presidential debate, according to the campaign.

The haul that the Sanders campaign described as a “fundraising bonanza” followed a debate at the Wynn Las Vegas hotel and casino in which Mr. Sanders managed to hold his own sparing with veteran debater Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the nomination.

After the debate, more than 37,600 individual contributions poured into the Sanders campaign website. The average donation during that four-hour stretch was $34.58, the campaign said.

There was about $100,000 in contributions during the first five minutes after the debate ended. At the peak, there were 10.25 contributions per second, the campaign said.

In the debate, Mrs. Clinton jabbed Mr. Sanders from the right on his socialist views and from the left on his past opposition to gun-control laws.

But Mr. Sanders fought back, challenging Mrs. Clinton about reining in the financial industry and breaking up Wall Street’s big banks, an issue dear to the the party’s liberal wing.

In one of the standout moments of the debate, Mr. Sanders gave Mrs. Clinton a pass on the email scandal dogging her campaign.

“The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails,” he said to cheers from the crowd at the debate, which was hosted by CNN and Facebook.
 
What a surprise. This is just further proof that elections are manipulated and bought....and so is the media. As bought and paid for by their corporate masters, the media is trying to maneuver us into voting for who they want in office. And we have another year of this type of surreal garbage......
 
This country is so corrupt.... the media is supposed to check the politicians and keep them honest..... I sure wish that was how it worked.
 
HAAK72 said:
...how so? The biggest campaign donors are not imaginary (follow the money)!
Click to expand...
Those donors' money isn't keeping Sanders from running or raising money, or doing as well as can be expected.
 
Denny Crane said:
Those donors' money isn't keeping Sanders from running or raising money, or doing as well as can be expected.
Click to expand...

I think people are tired of the Hillary caliber politician. They want to shake things up.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I think people are tired of the Hillary caliber politician. They want to shake things up.
Click to expand...
The corporate money and big donors aren't hurting democracy. Sanders is raising money and competing just fine.

But he is selling the lie that democracy is hurt somehow.

Irony.
 
What is hurting democracy is the democratic party.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-28/clinton-s-superdelegate-tipping-point

Clinton's Superdelegate Tipping Point

Mark Halperin and Jennifer Epstein, at Bloomberg Politics, report that Hillary Clinton’s campaign is claiming commitments from as many as 440 superdelegates, perhaps giving her an insurmountable lead in the race for the approximately 2,250 delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination.

There is both more and less to this story.

For starters, superdelegates are formally unpledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are chosen by position, not through votes in primaries and caucuses. The two big groups are elected officials (members of Congress, governors) and party officials.

Superdelegates were added in the 1980s for two reasons. One was practical: It was the only way to ensure that those party leaders could get to the convention, at least as delegates. The other was political: Democrats were concerned that their new system didn’t place enough weight on electability, and believed a larger voice for politicians and formal party leaders would tilt the nomination in that direction.
 
Denny Crane said:
The corporate money and big donors aren't hurting democracy. Sanders is raising money and competing just fine.

But he is selling the lie that democracy is hurt somehow.

Irony.
Click to expand...

I think democracy is hurting.... how else does legislation that is clearly NOT beneficial to the American public get passed?

The Presidency is one race. How about every single Senate or Congressional race?
 
You know, I distinctly remember people making a big deal out of Reagan's age when he ran for president. He was 69, almost 70, on the day of his first inauguration. He was 73, a few days short of 74, at the time of the inauguration for his second term. Based on a lot of reports, he was having memory issues before the end of his second term. Bernie's 74 now and would be 75 at the time of his inauguration, but as far as I know we're hearing zilch about how age could be an issue in the unlikely event he gets elected.

I didn't realize that Trump is 69 and Hillary is 67. This seems to be the year for geriatric candidates.
 
Denny Crane said:
Those donors' money isn't keeping Sanders from running or raising money, or doing as well as can be expected.
Click to expand...

...but it is clearly keeping the media from fair and accurate reporting, I think that was the original point -- there is no doubt that corporations are influencing democracy -- get your head out of the sand Denny!
 
HAAK72 said:
...but it is clearly keeping the media from fair and accurate reporting, I think that was the original point -- there is no doubt that corporations are influencing democracy -- get your head out of the sand Denny!
Click to expand...

Look at the polls. A crackpot has managed to make a real race out of the Democratic Party nomination, and without the "benefit" of the big donors and PACs. Or so you might believe.

The media doesn't cast anyone's vote but their own, and there just isn't that many in the media.

Mitt Romney had plenty of money and donors and lost. The media chose to focus on 47% and binders of women instead of the entire middle east in flames.

Where have you been?
 
Natebishop3 said:
I think democracy is hurting.... how else does legislation that is clearly NOT beneficial to the American public get passed?

The Presidency is one race. How about every single Senate or Congressional race?
Click to expand...
Congressional races are gerrymandered. It has little to do with rich donors or corporations.

Russ Feingold won his senate seat in Wisconsin without taking big donations. It obviously can be done.
 
There is more than one kind of winning.

Bern kool aid, he wins no matter what.

On actual debate scoring, he clearly lost.

What the candidates want to achieve. Such as no gaffes, prevent defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top