Tue Oct 13, 2015, 02:49 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

Why Bernie Sanders is going to be President, in two words

HE RULES!!!!!!!!!!

[IMG]

[/IMG]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(And there is nothing anyone can do to undermine how awesome he is!!!)

178 replies, 18206 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

178 replies	Author	Time	Post
Why Bernie Sanders is going to be President, in two words (Original post)	darkangel218	Oct 2015	OP
This graphic seems like a right wing parody of Bernie	Cali_Democrat	Oct 2015	#1
Sorry we kick ass!!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#2
You are not fooling anyone.	mhatrw	Oct 2015	#62
A quick Google found this	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#69
good catch!	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#73
I don't care what RW parties are using this meme to discredit Bernie	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#99
Isn't posting material from rightwing internet sites some sort of DU violation?	George II	Oct 2015	#169
^^^^^^^Here is the RW source of the OP's anti-Sanders graphic^^^^^^^^^^	FSogol	Oct 2015	#100
You attacked me without any credit for, earlier, saying I was calling you	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#102
Is it that hard to admit that the graphic is anti-Bernie and substitue a pro-Bernie one?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#104
It's not a RW graphic, I took it off DU, its been posted here before.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#105
Haven't I already responded to that 2 or 3 times? Why not delete your attacks on my gender?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#107
Delete your personal attacks against me!!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#108
Through the years?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#109
Since '13	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#112
I've never attacked you, except you consider disagreeing with you to be an attack.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#113
Go DU search it if you forgot.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#118
So, you got nothing, right?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#119
You started the meta shit.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#121
I did explain it in post 95 which you responded to.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#124
You had no gender specified in your profile years ago, and I apologized	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#129
I've always had a gender listed. You really don't read what people write. I'll explain it again:	FSogol	Oct 2015	#134
No you have not.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#150
As long as DU had genders, mine has been listed. You obviously don't look at	FSogol	Oct 2015	#170
I look at profiles ALL the time.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#174
No. Only Republicans seek to trivialise righteous indignation, and	Joe Chi Minh	Oct 2015	#154
It is, isn't it! Bernie will make an awesome President!	peacebird	Oct 2015	#46
Yes....telling the electorate that you want to subsidize poverty is brilliant. nt	Cali_Democrat	Oct 2015	#47
Because the electorate is consistently told....	daleanime	Oct 2015	#101
The electorate is also consistently told...	WHEN CRABS ROAR	Oct 2015	#131
That too.....	daleanime	Oct 2015	#136
I do want to subsidize poverty.	JDPriestly	Oct 2015	#133
"Trust Me - It's gonna be awesome" sounds like another candidate from the other side	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#50
Yep. nt	Cali_Democrat	Oct 2015	#57
12 suckers have already rec'd this post	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#60
12 Sanders' haters and people who don't read carefully. nt	mhatrw	Oct 2015	#65
Sanders haters???	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#142
It's a right wing meme that uses language meant to slur, not support. n/t	Gore1FL	Oct 2015	#152
The truth is not a "meme"	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#156
That's all good but let's not post right-wing memes meant to slur those things.	Gore1FL	Oct 2015	#165
Do you have a problem with the truth??	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#167
No problem with the truth.	Gore1FL	Oct 2015	#173
Subsidize Stupidity Next!	FSogol	Oct 2015	#89
"Subsidize Stupidity Next!"	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#161
Sad, really.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#171
"Subsidize poverty"?	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#3
Welcome to DU!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#4
I've been here since 2001, and I've actually met 2 of them in person	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#6
Then you should answer your own question.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#7
Bernie wants to "subsidize poverty"?	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#12
Why don't you tell us what it means to you? And if you agree with	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#11
Why don't you tell us what you think subsidizing means?	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#14
I agree the wording is sloppy. But you seem to want to discuss wording rather than the	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#18
That Bernie is awesome? No I do not.	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#22
How about the idea of taxing wealth to eliminate poverty? nm	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#31
I'm all for that	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#38
I don't. Sanders doesn't want to subsidize poverty.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#23
Distract, distract, distract. nm	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#28
Exactly.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#34
Clearing up a dishonest statement about Sanders....	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#39
You are using the sloppy wording to distract from the obvious message. A message that you obviously	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#48
The 'sloppy wording' comes from a Sanders-hater, if you'd care to look at the link upthread.	randome	Oct 2015	#80
This thread...	Bobbie Jo	Oct 2015	#168
Sanders does want to increase taxes on the rich and decrease taxes on the poor	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#30
They don't want to eliminate poverty at the expense of the wealthy. HRC will help maintain the	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#40
Your statement here is one hundred percent correct.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#41
See post 16.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#21
And he does so articulately	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#26
Raising the minumum wage is not taxing the rich, going after wall street, or subsidizing poverty.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#27
Finally, its is a Living Wage and Minumum Wage that Sanders is campaigning for not subsidy!	DhhD	Oct 2015	#147
Some people presume if your profile doesn't reflect a "proper attendance" that you're a nobody.	Bubzer	Oct 2015	#143
I had the same reaction	Brainstormy	Oct 2015	#5
Subsidies are used to encourage something.	philly_bob	Oct 2015	#9
I agree the language is sloppy but we know the intent. I understand the condescention.	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#15
It is not my responsibility to help the Sanders campaign hone it's message	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#29
I see. Lol	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#32
I feel like I've crossed into bizarro-land.	cheapdate	Oct 2015	#90
That's just what the conspiracy makers WANT you to believe!!!	randome	Oct 2015	#93
We subsidize things , to help the poor , before we eliminate poverty!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#94
Subsidizing poverty is what we are half ass doing today.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#8
No.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#16
"And Increasing the minimum wage to $15/hour, to fight poverty"	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#20
By taxing the super wealthy we can achieve that	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#25
By taxing the wealthy we can achieve subsidizing poverty. lol.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#33
Eliminate it, yes. You have to subsidize it FIRST!!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#36
You only subsidize things you want to keep, not things you want to eliminate	72DejaVu	Oct 2015	#42
Trying to work around your attempts at distraction, I'm guessing you don't agree with taxing	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#37
Second time you have said I am distracting by saying Sanders wants to eliminate poverty.	NCTraveler	Oct 2015	#45
So you agree with Sen Sanders' desire to eliminate poverty by taxing the wealthy? nm	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#51
Good point, damn good!	pinebox	Oct 2015	#67
Then the message is "Tax the wealthy and invest it in the people."	cheapdate	Oct 2015	#103
Oh good grief...	ohheckyeah	Oct 2015	#10
Jealous much??	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#17
Of what?	ohheckyeah	Oct 2015	#49
Read what you wrote. n/t	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#177
Let me guess your point. Since it bothers you that Sen Sanders wants to tax wealth to	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#24
LOL	ohheckyeah	Oct 2015	#52
"because if you wish hard enough, it will come true"	Sheepshank	Oct 2015	#13
The truth is not a "wish".	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#19
What will subsidizing property look like?	hrmjustin	Oct 2015	#35
Sen Sanders wants to eliminate poverty, while Goldman-Sachs and the billionaires don't give a crap.	rhett o rick	Oct 2015	#53
How can you not see that this is a RW "parody" meme?	mhatrw	Oct 2015	#56
Seriously?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#63
That was not my question. What will this look like?	hrmjustin	Oct 2015	#59
Subsidize poverty? I'm guessing this is a RW graphic intended to bash about Sanders and that	FSogol	Oct 2015	#43
Is that what you understand from it???	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#68
She? It is strange a Sanders supporter would promote what is obviously a RW hit graphic on Sanders.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#74
Are you calling me or Sanders "RW"??	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#148
Wouldn't "eliminate poverty" be a better goal?	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#44
You can't "eliminate" poverty without HELPING the poor first!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#55
are you serious?	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#58
It's not a RW meme.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#66
Try this - post it in the Bernie Sanders Group and see how his real supporters feel about it	Beaverhausen	Oct 2015	#106
+1 n/t	FSogol	Oct 2015	#110
Totally hopeless. Sometimes you just gotta laugh.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#79
Yes, like to your false accusations.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#120
Post removed	Post removed	Oct 2015	#54
There is nothing wrong with subsidizing poverty	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#61
Please learn what subsidize means. It is 180 degrees from Sander's message. n/t	FSogol	Oct 2015	#70
Uh huh!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#72
Why do you keep calling me ma'am?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#78
I only called you once that.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#85
You also refered to me a "she.' Why?	FSogol	Oct 2015	#87
Please provide proof as I have called you Ma'am before	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#92
She and ma'am are both female terms. Since I am male, I asked to why you refereed to me as	FSogol	Oct 2015	#95
I thought you were a female, my bad.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#96
The dictionary isn't "Hillary propaganda"	FSogol	Oct 2015	#97
Thanks.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#98
Poverty is bad. Sanders wants to win the War on Poverty.	mhatrw	Oct 2015	#75
I am not doing what you're accusing me of.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#83
This one is perhaps better	pinebox	Oct 2015	#64
Subsidize the poor,	wendylaroux	Oct 2015	#71
Both!!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#76
Are you related to Lazlo Toth? nt	mhatrw	Oct 2015	#77
DUzy!	FSogol	Oct 2015	#82
To you, maybe.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#86
I have read about this,	wendylaroux	Oct 2015	#81
How will he subsidize property? Can you please explain this?	hrmjustin	Oct 2015	#84
Right...I just posted something about that...that is the wrong motto	Perseus	Oct 2015	#125
Well i don't agree with eliminating it but definitely not subsidizing.	hrmjustin	Oct 2015	#126
I thought this was some kind of sarcastic post.	Ino	Oct 2015	#88
Why is it silly??	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#91
Trust and Honesty	SoapBox	Oct 2015	#111
+1	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#114
Good luck selling that to the majority of voters in the USA! Will never happen. Go Hillary!	beaglelover	Oct 2015	#115
Lmao!!! Go Hillary .. To nowhere lol.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#116
When are you coming back to DI?? We miss you.	beaglelover	Oct 2015	#127
Post removed	Post removed	Oct 2015	#117
They're desperate tonite. Nt	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#122
"Subsidize Poverty"????	Perseus	Oct 2015	#123
Wow, this is just....sad.	zappaman	Oct 2015	#128
31 recs and gowing.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#130
With "supporters" like these?	zappaman	Oct 2015	#137
HE'S ETHICAL!!!!!!!!!!	in_cog_ni_to	Oct 2015	#132
^*This!*^	SoapBox	Oct 2015	#145
Kicked and recommended!	Enthusiast	Oct 2015	#135
Gosh, angel, even I don't cite the NRA, then play bull-in-the-ring with it. nt	Eleanors38	Oct 2015	#138
Good luck to you, if that's what you think the quote means .	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#140
Sad is right. nt	Eleanors38	Oct 2015	#146
This thread is hilarious.	Brickbat	Oct 2015	#139
Bernie is actually quite serious about helping the poor.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#141
That's not what I find hilarious.	Brickbat	Oct 2015	#144
If the OP is meant to deride the Sanders campaign, well, it's free speech	Babel_17	Oct 2015	#149
It's not disruptive.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#151
OK. I edited my post above before seeing your reply.	Babel_17	Oct 2015	#155
Same here!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#157
He is awesome and nothing can change that, though they're trying really hard!	sabrina 1	Oct 2015	#153
And failing miserably!	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#158
...because he pisses off right wing barglemonkeys with a basic knowledge of photoshop?	Warren DeMontague	Oct 2015	#159
I just googled barglemonkey.... LOL n/t	humbled_opinion	Oct 2015	#166
I wonder if he will say he wants to "subsidize poverty" at the debate tonight?	zappaman	Oct 2015	#160
The truth.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#162
Is the truth that he wants to "subsidize poverty"?	zappaman	Oct 2015	#163
LOL.	FSogol	Oct 2015	#172
I don't know anybody that is	humbled_opinion	Oct 2015	#164
another classic!	Kali	Oct 2015	#175
No smile?	McCamy Taylor	Oct 2015	#176
You forgot the sarcasm tag.	darkangel218	Oct 2015	#178

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 02:50 PM

Cali_Democrat (30,439 posts)

1. This graphic seems like a right wing parody of Bernie

Last edited Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:10 PM - Edit history (2)

It's actually an attack against Bernie which was picked up from a right wing website.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=672129

Reply to this post

Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 02:51 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

2. Sorry we kick ass!!!

Cheers!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:51 PM

mhatrw (10,786 posts)

62. You are not fooling anyone.

The image is RW "parody" of Sanders' stance against wealth inequality and your OTT championing of the image is not fooling anyone with two working brain cells to rub together.

Reply to this post

Response to mhatrw (Reply #62)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:54 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

69. A quick Google found this

http://christophercantwell.com/2015/06/07/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #69)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:56 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

73. good catch!

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #69)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:25 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

99. I don't care what RW parties are using this meme to discredit Bernie

The truth stands, that we must help the poor before we eliminate poverty!!!!! It's fucking common sense!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #99)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 07:47 PM

George II (67,782 posts)

169. Isn't posting material from rightwing internet sites some sort of DU violation?

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #69)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:26 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

100. ^^^^^^^Here is the RW source of the OP's anti-Sanders graphic^^^^^^^^^^

Last edited Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

For those who didn't get it.

http://christophercantwell.com/2015/06/07/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #100)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:28 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

102. You attacked me without any credit for, earlier, saying I was calling you

Ma'am in the past. I have not. You are trying to discredit my OP now, by tying it to RW sites.

Shame on you.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #102)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:32 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

104. Is it that hard to admit that the graphic is anti-Bernie and substitue a pro-Bernie one?

The graphic came from a RW wing site. It doesn't agree with Sanders thoughts on poverty.
I have not attacked you, but you are mistaken about the word subsidize. Your graphic bashes Sanders, a candidate you claim to support. Don't you see the problem with it?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #104)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:35 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

105. It's not a RW graphic, I took it off DU, its been posted here before.

And what about your personal attack???give proof i have called you "Ma'am" before, or delete your post accusing me I have said that in the past!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #105)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:37 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

107. Haven't I already responded to that 2 or 3 times? Why not delete your attacks on my gender?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #107)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:38 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

108. Delete your personal attacks against me!!!

I haven't talked to you I years, and your profile never said your gender back then. You have been on ignore until the a few months back when I took everyone off.

Maybe you should mention your gender in your profile if you want others notbto guess!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #108)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:39 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

109. Through the years?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #109)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:41 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

112. Since '13

At least.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #112)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:43 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

113. I've never attacked you, except you consider disagreeing with you to be an attack.

Post all my "attacks."

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #113)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:48 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

118. Go DU search it if you forgot.

I had nothing but nasty posts from you , hence you were on ignore.

Now post proof I have called you Ma'am before. I have not.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #118)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:51 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

119. So, you got nothing, right?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #119)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:52 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

121. You started the meta shit.

Post proof or delete!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #121)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:55 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

124. I did explain it in post 95 which you responded to.

Try reading before responding.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #124)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:03 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

129. You had no gender specified in your profile years ago, and I apologized

if I ever refered to you in a wrong gender. I remember clearly though, I have never called you Ma'am before, so you should retract that.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #129)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:09 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

134. I've always had a gender listed. You really don't read what people write. I'll explain it again:

You called me "she" once and "ma'am" once. That is two times using the wrong gender. 1 time (she) + 1 time (ma'am) is 2 times calling me the wrong gender. That's why I said twice.

1+1 = 2. You apologized in this thread and I accepted that apology.

You keep calling me out for supposed attacks which never happened. Will you apologize?

You also posted an anti-Bernie graphic. If you are really a Sanders supporter you should change the graphic.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #134)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:33 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

150. No you have not.

Summon Skinner to vouch for that. I always look at posters profiles before addressing them.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #150)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 07:50 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

170. As long as DU had genders, mine has been listed. You obviously don't look at

profiles first because you got my wrong twice.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #170)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 09:35 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

174. I look at profiles ALL the time.

Ask Skinner when was last time you updated yours.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #104)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:42 PM

Joe Chi Minh (15,229 posts)

154. No. Only Republicans seek to trivialise righteous indignation, and

you seem to have been suckered as dark angel said.

Reply to this post

Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:39 PM

peacebird (14,195 posts)

46. It is, isn't it! Bernie will make an awesome President!

Reply to this post

Response to peacebird (Reply #46)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:41 PM

Cali_Democrat (30,439 posts)

47. Yes....telling the electorate that you want to subsidize poverty is brilliant. nt

Reply to this post

Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #47)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:26 PM

daleanime (17,796 posts)

101. Because the electorate is consistently told....

to not care about the poor? And we should let that go unchallenged?

Reply to this post

Response to daleanime (Reply #101)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:03 PM

WHEN CRABS ROAR (3,813 posts)

131. The electorate is also consistently told...

We haven't got the money, we haven't got the money

Reply to this post

Response to WHEN CRABS ROAR (Reply #131)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:10 PM

daleanime (17,796 posts)

136. That too.....

Reply to this post

Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #47)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:08 PM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

133. I do want to subsidize poverty.

Because the poor are making the rich wealthy.

and the rich get wealthy thanks to subsidies especially for gas and oil.

So I do want to "subsidize" that is share some of our wealth with the poor.

I'm all for that.

Conservatives think that helping (or subsidizing if you will) the poor is a bad thing. They think it makes people lazy.

Well I think that too much wealth makes people wealthy.

I'm for helping the poor.

Reply to this post

Response to peacebird (Reply #46)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:42 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

50. "Trust Me - It's gonna be awesome" sounds like another candidate from the other side

I think some here are being fooled by a RW meme. read it again. closely.

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #50)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:48 PM

Cali_Democrat (30,439 posts)

57. Yep. nt

Reply to this post

Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #57)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:50 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

60. 12 suckers have already rec'd this post

my god. this is nuts.

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #60)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:52 PM

mhatrw (10,786 posts)

65. 12 Sanders' haters and people who don't read carefully. nt

Reply to this post

Response to mhatrw (Reply #65)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:19 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

142. Sanders haters???

Wow..OK. So I guess you are against subsidising the needy??

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #142)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:38 PM

Gore1FL (19,769 posts)

152. It's a right wing meme that uses language meant to slur, not support. n/t

Reply to this post

Response to Gore1FL (Reply #152)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:43 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

156. The truth is not a "meme"

We need to help the poor, before they help themselves.

Rich assholes and wall Streeters hate it, obviously.

Sanders is only speaking the truth. We need to help our own people first and foremost.

Subsiding them, means only helping them until they can help themselves. And it has nada to do with the joke welfare system present today.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #156)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 06:11 PM

Gore1FL (19,769 posts)

165. That's all good but let's not post right-wing memes meant to slur those things.

Let's especially not send such slurs to the greatest page.

Reply to this post

Response to Gore1FL (Reply #165)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 06:51 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

167. Do you have a problem with the truth??

RWs can make any meme anytime. This is not one of them .

Do you not support "subsidising the poor"?? Till they get back on their feet??? I'm trying to understand what is the problem.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #167)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 08:42 PM

Gore1FL (19,769 posts)

173. No problem with the truth.

The presentation in a way that makes the truth look like a lie is what I have a problem with.

If you can't see how the phrasing spins it negatively, there is really nothing further I can add.

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #60)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:09 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

89. Subsidize Stupidity Next!

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #89)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:57 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

161. "Subsidize Stupidity Next!"

Disgusting..

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #161)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 07:52 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

171. Sad, really.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 02:58 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

3. "Subsidize poverty"?

What the hell does that mean?

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #3)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:04 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

4. Welcome to DU!

( stick around, you will learn a lot about the Democratic candidates!)

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #4)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:14 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

6. I've been here since 2001, and I've actually met 2 of them in person

But thanks for the only slightly condescending welcome.

(And no, I didn't change my name because I was banned or some such nonsense. I had an unrelated privacy issue)

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:15 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

7. Then you should answer your own question.

Bernie's goals have been vastly discussed here for quite a while now.

Welcome back!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #7)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:19 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

12. Bernie wants to "subsidize poverty"?

I don't think so. I think he'd prefer to eliminate it.

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:18 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

11. Why don't you tell us what it means to you? And if you agree with

the sentiment.

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:21 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

14. Why don't you tell us what you think subsidizing means?

To subsidize something is to support it's continuation.

Subsidize affordable housing? Yes.

Subsidize fuel assistance? Yes

Subsidize transportation infrastructure? Yes.

Subsidize poverty? Uh, no thanks. I'd rather do away with it.

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:23 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

18. I agree the wording is sloppy. But you seem to want to discuss wording rather than the

intent. Do you agree with the intent of the OP?

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #18)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:26 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

22. That Bernie is awesome? No I do not.

I feel no sense of awe when I contemplate Bernie Sanders.

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:29 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

31. How about the idea of taxing wealth to eliminate poverty? nm

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #31)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:33 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

38. I'm all for that

Of course, that would be the opposite of "subsidizing poverty".

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #18)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:27 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

23. I don't. Sanders doesn't want to subsidize poverty.

The intent of the op is patently false with respect to Sanders beliefs. He isn't a trickle downer. He wants to end poverty.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #23)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:29 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

28. Distract, distract, distract. nm

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #28)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:31 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

34. Exactly.

Too bad they fail so quickly

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #28)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:34 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

39. Clearing up a dishonest statement about Sanders....

and saying he wants to eliminate poverty is a distraction? This place keeps getting better and better. Someone brings a very poorly worded graphic here, I correct them and let them know that Sanders wants to eliminate poverty, not subsidize it; and you call it a distraction.

Have it your way. I will change my tune to agree with you. Sanders wants to continue to subsidize poverty in this country to ensure we have a whole group without a voice. I personally don't believe that but you seem to want to argue for exactly that.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #39)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:41 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

48. You are using the sloppy wording to distract from the obvious message. A message that you obviously

disagree with. There are two sides to this class war and it looks like you aren't on the side that wants the wealth gap to be reduced. 16,000,000 American children live in poverty and another 16,000,000 live in low income homes. Goldman-Sachs and the billionaires are ok with that. Sen Sanders is not.

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #48)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:02 PM

randome (34,845 posts)

80. The 'sloppy wording' comes from a Sanders-hater, if you'd care to look at the link upthread.

'Subsidize poverty'. Good God.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Response to randome (Reply #80)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 07:44 PM

Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)

168. This thread...

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #23)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:29 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

30. Sanders does want to increase taxes on the rich and decrease taxes on the poor

Facts are facts, no matter how much you twist them.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #30)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:36 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

40. They don't want to eliminate poverty at the expense of the wealthy. HRC will help maintain the

status quo of the wealth gap growing even wider. I think those here that disparage Sen Sanders' message think the 1% were given their wealth by God to take care of the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #30)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:36 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

41. Your statement here is one hundred percent correct.

The graphic you brought here is patently false. As I have said, Sanders has brought a lot of new people into the process. They can even put graphics together. They should just understand a candidates position before they do. The graphic you brought here is patently false with respect to Sanders position.

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #14)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:25 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

21. See post 16.

He is referring to taxing the rich and going after Wall Street.

Nice try though.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #21)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:27 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

26. And he does so articulately

This meme, less so.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #21)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:28 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

27. Raising the minumum wage is not taxing the rich, going after wall street, or subsidizing poverty.

Of all posts you could point to I wouldn't point to that one. lol.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #27)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:28 PM

DhhD (4,695 posts)

147. Finally, its is a Living Wage and Minumum Wage that Sanders is campaigning for not subsidy!

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:22 PM

Bubzer (4,211 posts)

143. Some people presume if your profile doesn't reflect a "proper attendance" that you're a nobody.

Your profile reads "Member since: Fri Oct 9, 2015, 05:32 PM"... that's probably the reason for the reaction.

Kinda odd behavior for Dems if you ask me. We're supposed to be the inclusive group (trolls aside of course).

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #3)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:13 PM

Brainstormy (2,330 posts)

5. I had the same reaction

sloppy language.

Reply to this post

Response to Brainstormy (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:16 PM

philly_bob (2,388 posts)

9. Subsidies are used to encourage something.

The language is sloppy -- and the condescending welcome was unfriendly.

Reply to this post

Response to philly_bob (Reply #9)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:22 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

15. I agree the language is sloppy but we know the intent. I understand the condescention.

In lieu of the poster recommending better wording, asking the question appears to be aimed at disparaging the message.

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:29 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

29. It is not my responsibility to help the Sanders campaign hone it's message

They ought to hire some professionals to help with that.

Reply to this post

Response to 72DejaVu (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:30 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

32. I see. Lol

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:11 PM

cheapdate (3,811 posts)

90. I feel like I've crossed into bizarro-land.

I have no idea what is genuine, what is parody, or what is intentionally subversive.

That meme screams parody. There is no other way that my brain can process it. It's almost like a parody of a parody -- that is, a DU parody of what a right-wing parody of Bernie Sanders might look like.

If the language was merely "sloppy", then they coincidentally nailed it, and by "nailed it" I mean they coincidentally captured in one word every right-wing or conservative's cartoonish conception of Bernie Sanders the "socialist".

We "subsidize" the things we want to encourage. There isn't any other way to use the word.

I'm truly stumped.

Reply to this post

Response to cheapdate (Reply #90)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:14 PM

randome (34,845 posts)

93. That's just what the conspiracy makers WANT you to believe!!!

They are rife with triple and quadruple agents! Trust no one!!!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Response to cheapdate (Reply #90)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:15 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

94. We subsidize things , to help the poor , before we eliminate poverty!!

You are thinking in the current state of mind. Which is much different from what Bernie stands for.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:16 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

8. Subsidizing poverty is what we are half ass doing today.

It is a failed proposition and not one Sanders believes in. Might want to change the graphic.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #8)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:22 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

16. No.

Do you not believe that universal healthcare belongs to that??? And Increasing the minimum wage to $15/hour, to fight poverty?? We are going to subsidize it by taxing the rich what they deserve go be taxed, and giving a break to the working poor, so they may see a light on the end of the tunnel. We are not going to start unnecessary wars. We are not going to invest what we don't need in the military. We are going to invest it into OUR OWN PEOPLE!! A concept so strange to so many other presidential aspirants.

That, NC.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:25 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

20. "And Increasing the minimum wage to $15/hour, to fight poverty"

That is not subsidizing poverty. Subsidizing poverty is what we do today and Sanders doesn't support todays economy. He wants to eliminate poverty. Not sure why you are making his position sound like trickle down. It isn't and the graphic is very poorly worded at best. Really it's just flat out wrong.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:27 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

25. By taxing the super wealthy we can achieve that

We are not subsidizing poverty today. How much money does a family get in food stamps?? They most likely go to bed hungry, since that is not nearly enough! And don't even get me started on healthcare and housing!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #25)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:30 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

33. By taxing the wealthy we can achieve subsidizing poverty. lol.

I'm glad Sanders doesn't agree with that. He is a little ahead of the curve on that one and wants to eliminate poverty, not subsidize it.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #33)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:32 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

36. Eliminate it, yes. You have to subsidize it FIRST!!!

How the fuck is anyone going to get out of the hole without help first????

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #36)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:36 PM

72DejaVu (1,545 posts)

42. You only subsidize things you want to keep, not things you want to eliminate

Helping people out of poverty is, by no definition of the term "subsidizing poverty."

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #33)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:33 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

37. Trying to work around your attempts at distraction, I'm guessing you don't agree with taxing

the wealthy and eliminating poverty. Goldman-Sachs would be a good choice for your candidate.

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #37)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:38 PM

NCTraveler (30,481 posts)

45. Second time you have said I am distracting by saying Sanders wants to eliminate poverty.

Very strange. I guess we disagree. I think Sanders wants to eliminate poverty. You keep calling that a distraction. I think the poorly put together graphic showing Sanders in a dishonest light is the distraction.

Reply to this post

Response to NCTraveler (Reply #45)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:43 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

51. So you agree with Sen Sanders' desire to eliminate poverty by taxing the wealthy? nm

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #25)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:53 PM

pinebox (5,761 posts)

67. Good point, damn good!

Really good points there.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:30 PM

cheapdate (3,811 posts)

103. Then the message is "Tax the wealthy and invest it in the people."

Not "subsidize poverty". Holy cow!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:18 PM

ohheckyeah (9,314 posts)

10. Oh good grief...

do you have pom poms to wave, too?

Reply to this post

Response to ohheckyeah (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:23 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

17. Jealous much??

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #17)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:41 PM

ohheckyeah (9,314 posts)

49. Of what?

Grownups acting like 12 year old girls at a Justin Bieber concert?

Reply to this post

Response to ohheckyeah (Reply #49)

Wed Oct 14, 2015, 03:11 AM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

177. Read what you wrote. n/t

Reply to this post

Response to ohheckyeah (Reply #10)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:27 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

24. Let me guess your point. Since it bothers you that Sen Sanders wants to tax wealth to

eliminate poverty, and you are critical of the OP, do you believe in supply side economics?

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #24)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:43 PM

ohheckyeah (9,314 posts)

52. LOL

See my post above if you want to see my point.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:19 PM

Sheepshank (12,504 posts)

13. "because if you wish hard enough, it will come true"

is more than 2 words.

But it sounds adorable.

Reply to this post

Response to Sheepshank (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:23 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

19. The truth is not a "wish".

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:31 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

35. What will subsidizing property look like?

Reply to this post

Response to hrmjustin (Reply #35)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:44 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

53. Sen Sanders wants to eliminate poverty, while Goldman-Sachs and the billionaires don't give a crap.

Which side are you on?

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #53)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:47 PM

mhatrw (10,786 posts)

56. How can you not see that this is a RW "parody" meme?

Reply to this post

Response to mhatrw (Reply #56)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:51 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

63. Seriously?

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #53)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:49 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

59. That was not my question. What will this look like?

How will he do it?

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:37 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

43. Subsidize poverty? I'm guessing this is a RW graphic intended to bash about Sanders and that

the poster might have missed its true meaning.

It would be better to delete it than to argue that subsidizing poverty is something Sanders talks about.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #43)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:54 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

68. Is that what you understand from it???

Wow!!

Good luck to your candor in the debate, she's gonna need it!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #68)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:58 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

74. She? It is strange a Sanders supporter would promote what is obviously a RW hit graphic on Sanders.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #74)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:30 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

148. Are you calling me or Sanders "RW"??

I'm trying to understand your repetitive attacks. I have already explained you that they are not RW meme. So are you called us RW?? Why are you repeating the same thing over and over again????

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:38 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

44. Wouldn't "eliminate poverty" be a better goal?

WTF?

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #44)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:46 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

55. You can't "eliminate" poverty without HELPING the poor first!!

No one can do that. Right back at you re "WTF"!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #55)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:48 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

58. are you serious?

What was posted is a RW meme meant to criticize Sanders. Why can't you figure that out?

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #58)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:52 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

66. It's not a RW meme.

Those who are seeing /imagining that first, before understanding that is WHAT WE NEED IN THIS COUNTRY, fail miserably!

Sorry I'm not worshipping Hillary.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #66)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:36 PM

Beaverhausen (24,150 posts)

106. Try this - post it in the Bernie Sanders Group and see how his real supporters feel about it

I'm guessing they won't like it.

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #106)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:41 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

110. +1 n/t

Reply to this post

Response to Beaverhausen (Reply #58)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:01 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

79. Totally hopeless. Sometimes you just gotta laugh.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #79)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:51 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

120. Yes, like to your false accusations.

No kidding.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Post removed

Response to Post removed (Reply #54)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:50 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

61. There is nothing wrong with subsidizing poverty

So people can get a chance to get off the ground and shine again!! Go look at Bernie's agenda!!! You will find your answers.

And please refrain from unwarranted attacks. It's childish.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #61)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:54 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

70. Please learn what subsidize means. It is 180 degrees from Sander's message. n/t

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #70)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:56 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

72. Uh huh!!

Keep your personal attacks to yourself, Ma'am.Sorry your candidate is losing.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #72)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:00 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

78. Why do you keep calling me ma'am?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #78)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:04 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

85. I only called you once that.

Out of respect

Please post any other time I have addressed you as Ma"am.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #85)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:07 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

87. You also refered to me a "she.' Why?

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #87)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:12 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

92. Please provide proof as I have called you Ma'am before

I have not. You should delete your flamefest.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #92)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:15 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

95. She and ma'am are both female terms. Since I am male, I asked to why you refereed to me as

female (once as ma'am and once as she). You said out of respect which also makes no sense.

As for the flamefest, you are the one posting RW anti-Bernie graphics, not me. Several people tried to explain your misunderstanding of the word subsidize, but you ignored them. You should delete the anti-Sanders crap.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #95)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:20 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

96. I thought you were a female, my bad.

As far as the "subsidies", I do not care for Hillary propaganda. If she has the magical wand and make the poverty disappear without subsiding for it first, then so be it. Let's hear her magical plan tonite.

(Don't hold your breath, obviously).

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #96)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:22 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

97. The dictionary isn't "Hillary propaganda"

Good luck, I guess.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #97)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:23 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

98. Thanks.

And same to you.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #61)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:58 PM

mhatrw (10,786 posts)

75. Poverty is bad. Sanders wants to win the War on Poverty.

The reason you tax wealth is to distribute that wealth more fairly and compassionately. That goal is to reduce and finally eliminate poverty. You are championing a moronic wingnut attempt at lampooning Sanders' platform on wealth inequality. If you cannot see that, I'd advise you to look up the word "subsidize" in the dictionary and consider who would want to apply that verb to anything he or she desperately wants to eliminate.

Reply to this post

Response to mhatrw (Reply #75)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:02 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

83. I am not doing what you're accusing me of.

The welfare system is a joke, at this point and time. The federal minimum wage is a joke. Sanders is asking for major changes in the tax system and in minimum wage ( he proposes $15 minimum federally)

One cannot get out if the whole when one has no food to eat.

I know it, because I've been there. I dont need a book to teach me what it means.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:52 PM

pinebox (5,761 posts)

64. This one is perhaps better

Catch!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:56 PM

wendylaroux (2,925 posts)

71. Subsidize the poor,

to lift them out of poverty?

Reply to this post

Response to wendylaroux (Reply #71)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:58 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

76. Both!!

Subsidize them first, and give them a chance. Not the joke that the welfare and minimum wage is today.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #76)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:00 PM

mhatrw (10,786 posts)

77. Are you related to Lazlo Toth? nt

Reply to this post

Response to mhatrw (Reply #77)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:02 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

82. DUzy!

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #82)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:06 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

86. To you, maybe.

I am still waiting to see your response to the accusations that I "keep calling you Ma'am'. You must have me confused with another poster.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #76)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:02 PM

wendylaroux (2,925 posts)

81. I have read about this,

it is in Denmark? Other places,can't remember right now.What do they call that?

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:02 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

84. How will he subsidize property? Can you please explain this?

Reply to this post

Response to hrmjustin (Reply #84)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:55 PM

Perseus (4,341 posts)

125. Right...I just posted something about that...that is the wrong motto

You don't subsidize poverty, you eliminate it.

Reply to this post

Response to Perseus (Reply #125)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:57 PM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

126. Well i don't agree with eliminating it but definitely not subsidizing.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:08 PM

Ino (3,366 posts)

88. I thought this was some kind of sarcastic post.

I'm flabbergasted you think this is a good graphic. Childish & silly.

Reply to this post

Response to Ino (Reply #88)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:11 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

91. Why is it silly??

Do you think we can use magical powers and eliminate poverty without HELPING the poor first???

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:41 PM

SoapBox (18,791 posts)

111. Trust and Honesty

That's the two words I use.

Reply to this post

Response to SoapBox (Reply #111)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:43 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

114. +1

Truth, honesty, having a heart, wishing the best for the people, hating wars, loving peace, feeling compassion

This is why HE RULES!!!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:45 PM

beaglelover (2,691 posts)

115. Good luck selling that to the majority of voters in the USA! Will never happen. Go Hillary!

Reply to this post

Response to beaglelover (Reply #115)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:47 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

116. Lmao!!! Go Hillary .. To nowhere lol.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #116)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:58 PM

beaglelover (2,691 posts)

127. When are you coming back to DI?? We miss you.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Name removed Message auto-removed

Response to Post removed (Reply #117)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:54 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

122. They're desperate tonite. Nt

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:54 PM

Perseus (4,341 posts)

123. "Subsidize Poverty"????

Not sure if this has to be reworded...I can see the wrong side taking on that and running with it...

Correct me if I am wrong, but you don't "subsidize poverty" you "eliminate", subsidizing sounds like perpetuating...

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:01 PM

zappaman (20,576 posts)

128. Wow, this is just....sad.

Reply to this post

Response to zappaman (Reply #128)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:03 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

130. 31 recs and gowing.

Reply to this post

Response to FSogol (Reply #130)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:12 PM

zappaman (20,576 posts)

137. With "supporters" like these?

who needs detractors?

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:07 PM

in_cog_ni_to (41,600 posts)

132. HE'S ETHICAL!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Response to in_cog_ni_to (Reply #132)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:26 PM

SoapBox (18,791 posts)

145. ^This!^

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:09 PM

Enthusiast (50,983 posts)

135. Kicked and recommended!

Yay, Bernie!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:13 PM

Eleanors38 (18,318 posts)

138. Gosh, angel, even I don't cite the NRA, then play bull-in-the-ring with it. nt

Reply to this post

Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #138)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:17 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

140. Good luck to you, if that's what you think the quote means .

Sad..

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #140)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:27 PM

Eleanors38 (18,318 posts)

146. Sad is right. nt

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:14 PM

Brickbat (19,339 posts)

139. This thread is hilarious.

Reply to this post

Response to Brickbat (Reply #139)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:18 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

141. Bernie is actually quite serious about helping the poor.

I wonder why do you find it hilarious...

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #141)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:24 PM

Brickbat (19,339 posts)

144. That's not what I find hilarious.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:31 PM

Babel_17 (5,400 posts)

149. If the OP is meant to deride the Sanders campaign, well, it's free speech

But I'm going to wonder if it's OK to post such while presumably using extreme irony. Lines blur and the term "false flag" comes to mind. It's distracting, in other words.

That's my 2 cents, YMMV. As a graphic for deriding the Sanders campaign, it's OK of its sort and doesn't offend me. I suppose it's interesting to see what will be used against Senator Sanders as our nominee so I'm OK with seeing it at Democratic Underground.

But like I imply, the graphic is what it is and it's a bit disruptive to deny how it is used.

Cheers!

Edit: If that graphic was originally posted as being pro-Sanders, and not to mock his campaign, I was wrong in assuming otherwise, obviously. And following from that I would withdraw my issue with it here. Though even then it's controversial approach to sending its message should be recognized.

Reply to this post

Response to Babel_17 (Reply #149)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:38 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

151. It's not disruptive.

The Wall Street lovers find it unsettling nevertheless.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #151)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:42 PM

Babel_17 (5,400 posts)

155. OK. I edited my post above before seeing your reply.

Have a good night, I'm getting ready for the debate.

Reply to this post

Response to Babel_17 (Reply #155)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:44 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

157. Same here!

Cheers!!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:40 PM

sabrina 1 (62,325 posts)

153. He is awesome and nothing can change that, though they're trying really hard!

Reply to this post

Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #153)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:44 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

158. And failing miserably!

Go Bernie!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:45 PM

Warren DeMontague (80,708 posts)

159. ...because he pisses off right wing barglemonkeys with a basic knowledge of photoshop?

Reply to this post

Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #159)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 06:12 PM

humbled_opinion (4,423 posts)

166. I just googled barglemonkey.... LOL n/t

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:45 PM

zappaman (20,576 posts)

160. I wonder if he will say he wants to "subsidize poverty" at the debate tonight?

Reply to this post

Response to zappaman (Reply #160)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:58 PM

darkangel218 (13,985 posts)

162. The truth.

I assume you won't have a problem with that.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Reply #162)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 05:59 PM

zappaman (20,576 posts)

163. Is the truth that he wants to "subsidize poverty"?

Take your time...

Reply to this post

Response to zappaman (Reply #160)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 07:54 PM

FSogol (43,065 posts)

172. LOL.

Stop, please stop....

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 06:06 PM

humbled_opinion (4,423 posts)

164. I don't know anybody that is

advocating for taxing the rich in order to subsidize poverty, that is just rightwing nonsense. What I believe in is everyone paying their fair share so that everyone advances equally in society and certainly not gaming the system so it only helps those who are very wealthy. If you give the poor a fair wage and a fair shot at a good job then that in itself would end poverty.

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Wed Oct 14, 2015, 12:35 AM

Kali (53,343 posts)

175. another classic!

darkangel218 (11,961 posts)

Why Bernie Sanders is going to be President, in two words
HE RULES!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(And there is nothing anyone can do to undermine how awesome he is!!!)

and in case your image or post dissapears, one can find it here on this nutty blog blog - http://christophercantwell.com/2015/06/07/bernie-sanders-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america/

Reply to this post

Response to darkangel218 (Original post)

Wed Oct 14, 2015, 12:48 AM

McCamy Taylor (19,240 posts)

176. No smile?

If he is really running, he will learn to smile. If he does not start smiling, he is not really running. If he wants to win, he will hire a coach to teach him how to criticize while smiling. He can not win if he is channeling Mike Gravel.