Election 2016

Bernie Sanders is Running for President

Contain yourselves.

|

Senate

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is going to announce his run for the Democratic presidential nomination on Thursday, according to a report from the Associate Press based on two unnamed sources in the Sanders campaign.

Bernie Sanders has been heavy on the cable news circuit recently, doing things like calling for the "mass mobilization of millions of people" to tell the Koch brothers (David H. Koch is a trustee of the Reason Foundation, which publishes Reason magazine and Reason.com) and other "billionaires" that they "can't have it all."

For now, Sanders is the second candidate for the Democratic nomination, following Hillary Clinton into the race. He's expected to apply pressure on Clinton to move to the left economically. Perhaps it's already working. In any case, Sanders will give voice to the faction of the Democratic Party that's all about naked class envy. How much support he gets could indicate how popular that faction's become among the Democratic base.

NEXT: GWU Student Suspended, Investigated for Anti-Jewish Hate Crime. Wait, What?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Well he’s definitely got the coveted “Tales From the Crypt fanbase” vote all sewn up.

    1. The crypt keeper is a better speaker. Also Tales from the crypt is more prone to happy endings than a Sanders presidency would be.

  2. Sanders will give voice to the faction of the Democratic Party that’s all about naked class envy.

    I thought Warren already had that covered. Who am I kidding, there’s always extra room for class envy and warfare on TEAM BLUE.

    1. That’s really all that either of them have to offer: hatred for those who pay taxes.

      1. True, but Warren also offers nostalgic appeal to all the 100% pale-eye kids who used to dress up as Native Americans during the 1960s.

    2. Is there any faction of the Democratic Party that ISN’T all about naked class envy?

      1. The faction that is all about naked race baiting?

    3. How does an Independent run for the nomination of a political party to which they do not belong?

    4. “Naked Class Envy”. What a great name for a band.

      Maybe they’d team up with “Bare Naked Ladies” and things could really get interesting

  3. Serious question, who is more Marxist:

    Warren or Sanders?

    1. Difficult choice indeed.
      I can’t decide if Warren is just too stupid to understand that she’s a socialist, or if she’s too smart to admit it.

      At least Bernie Sanders knows what he is and states it openly. Warren is some sort of witches brew of propaganda and delusional fantasy.

      1. Warren is just evil. Sanders is a well intentioned idiot.

        1. Warren will prevent me from being sodomized. Ergo, she can’t be all bad.

          1. Go ahead believe the campaign promises.

            1. bwahahaha!

        2. Warren is evil. Sanders is what Warren will look like 20 years from now.

      2. Warren is indeed stupid, but crazy like a fox. She has to know that she uses complete heart-string tugging victim cards when she rails on about the 1%, and always has a straw man argument ready to return when anyone calls her out.

        Sanders on the other hand is unapologetically Marxist, in that he really believes that capitalism is the root of all evil and if “only the right people were in charge” -like him of course- socialism would finally work. Like in Norway! They have it down perfect!

        1. All we need to do is create a vast supply of oil underground that can be split 300 million ways, then our socialism will work too.

      3. I vote for pure delusional fantasy, although she did display a cunning level of hypocrisy pretending to be an Indian (feather- not dot.)

        1. feather-not dot ?

          are you referring to casino not call center type Indian ?

          1. This is too good. I’m going to start distiniguishing “indian” with “Casino” vs “Call center” I laughed out loud.

    2. Sanders, clearly. Crazy bastard would nationalize entire industries if he could.

    3. Sanders. Warren appears to be a fair-weather Marxist who’ll ditch it in a second if there’s a steady paycheck in it.

      1. Like the Ex-Im bank.

        1. What’s not Marxist about the Ex-Im bank?

    4. This is why primaries are important – we might get an answer to your question!

    5. I don’t think Warren is Marxist in action. She seems more than willing to profit from her transactions like a good capitalist. Warren is Marxist in rhetoric as far as I can tell.

      So. I reckon Sanders is more socialist.

    6. Quien es mas macho? Fernando Lamas o Ricardo Montalban?

      Obviously, Hillary is the correct answer.

      1. Yurk…this was in reply to Tman’s post waaay up thread. Squirrels. Why did it have to be squirrels.

    7. Yes.
      The answer is really that all Marxists/socialists/democrats, et al are all mentally retarded. They have no ability to understand basic market economics.
      That is why they always end up playing to the lowest common denominator – class warfare and nationalism. In their case, the new nationalism is global warming because their pansy base does not like mean soldiers.
      The same contingent on the right has reserved the military as their rally base.

      And the sheep rejoice.

    8. Tomayto, tomahto

  4. Well this is scary. Hitlary is the ‘voice of reason’ in the Dem race. Could we get some more sanity over there? Maybe a Cory Brooker run?

    1. Obama has poisoned the well for black male candidates for at least 8 years.

  5. Yay! At long last, an honest candidate.
    Capitalism is baaaaad, chilrun, mmmmkay?

  6. Do you know who else called for the mass mobilisation of millions of people?

    1. The pope?

      mass mobilisation

      1. +1 pope-mobile

    2. Tsar Alexander I?

    3. T Mobile?

    4. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot?

    5. J. K. Rowling?

    6. The GEICO gecko?

    7. Genghis?

    8. The creator of the Rascal?

      1. Winner

    9. The Beatles?

    10. Hitl— too easy…

    11. Hoveround?

    12. Richard Simmons with his Sweatin to the Oldies?

    13. Andrew Jackson?

      1. LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

        not really, but still funny

    14. George Bush?

    15. Based on your spelling of “mobilization”, there can only be one culprit: “George the Third, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith and so forth”.

      Am I right or am I right? Right, right?

  7. I wonder if his handlers will bother making him run a comb through his hair.

    1. He did!

  8. He reneged on auditing the fed. Fuck him.

    -jcr

    1. The Fed is a Marxist tool.

      1. Just like Sanders.

  9. Bernie Sanders has been . . . calling for the “mass mobilization of millions of people” to tell the Koch brothers . . . and other “billionaires” that they “can’t have it all.”

    Incidentally, there was an interesting article about the Koch brothers in USA Today.

    “WICHITA ? Koch Industries, one of the nation’s largest private companies, has removed questions about prior criminal convictions from its job applications, becoming the latest corporation to join a burgeoning movement trying to make it easier for ex-offenders to find work.

    The company’s CEO, Charles Koch, a billionaire known for his support of Republican candidates and libertarian causes, has made overhauling the criminal-justice system a priority. Mark Holden, Koch’s general counsel and senior vice president, said it made common sense for the company to take this step.

    “Do we want to be judged for the rest of our life for something that happened on our worst day?” Holden said during an interview with USA TODAY at the company’s headquarters.”

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/…../26325929/

    Heartless bastards won’t let a stupid drug conviction ruin someone’s chances of ever getting a decent job?

    Someone tell these evil Koch brothers they can’t have it all!

    1. Well, you must know that they only do things that appear good to distract the public from *how* evil they really are. The amount they give to charity every year just proves it!

      1. What about the amount of Koch money charities turn down every year? I’m interested in seeing that figure. Talk about evil, ideologically puerile pricks.

    2. Lol, when Sanders says they Koch brothers and other billionaires can’t have it all, he is saying the state can …. no doubt.
      Who else is going to to take possession to re-distribute …. assuming they actually do.

    3. Those wicked Koch fools helped to defeat the green promise of windmills as far as the eye can see off the shores of Cape Cod. Damn them! Now we can’t have unreliable, expensive power!

      1. +1000’s of dead seagulls

    4. It’s not good, though, because someone in the private sector is doing it. They can’t have good intentions because they make a profit, which is evil. Only good things can be done in the public sector.

  10. Ok, Reason Parlour game time.

    Hillary is the mainstream candidate. O’Malley the Howard Dean? Bernie Sanders the Ralph Nader or Ned Lamont?

    1. Elizabeth Warren is the Steve Urkel of the 2016 D primary.

    2. Actually, maybe he trends Kucinich.

  11. I cant. The lefties at my school will go wild for him. I really cant stand how self-righteous my peers are

    1. I had a lengthy conversation about income inequality with a friend of a friend this past weekend. It was a le sigh moment if ever there was one.

    2. How can they be your peers if you aren’t a lefty or self-righteous?

  12. How can he be an “I” if he’s going for the “D” nomination? Why not just be an “S” and quit camouflaging his true beliefs?

    1. Sturmabteilung?

      1. He has advocated two planks of the Nazi Party platform…

    2. C’mon man. He is crazy but not stupid. He’s smart enough to admit Americans won’t knowingly vote for a socialist. So, he changes his party’s name and BOOM- he’s ELECTABLE.

      It’s called ‘marketing’

  13. Bernie Sanders is the guy who will look around for his glasses until someone tells him that they’re propped up on his forehead.

    I trust him on foreign policy as much as I trust my 12 year old Sheltie Bichon mix dog.

  14. Tony, Shriek and Socialist suddenly got very excited.

    1. Nah. Tony’s more than likely a Hillary man. Shrike is also a Hillary man. Lassie on the other hand…

      1. The kid posting as amsoc still won’t be old enough to vote for Sanders in 2016.

      2. Tony is a Warren man. But could dig Sanders if Warren doesn’t run.

        Shrike is a Hillary man.

    2. Well, I’m getting very excited too: Sanders is such a clown that he doesn’t stand a chance in an election.

  15. Like I said a few days ago, I’d infinitely prefer seeing Sanders run as opposed to Hillary, because at least his motivations are something other than his own self-aggrandizement and sense of entitlement. He’s an honest socialist/communist and it’s going to be interesting to see if he’s given a shot to nail Hillary to the wall on how corrupt she is, because clearly very few on the left will give a shit about it if it comes out of the mouths of people who aren’t on their TEAM.

    That said, because he’s a socialist/communist, there’s no way in hell he should come within a country mile of the oval office for anything other than afternoon tea.

    1. In a race between two apocalyptic futures, I’d rather have Sanders than Hillary. He’s open about his socialism, so when it all comes crashing down maybe people will finally start to place the blame where it belongs.

      1. I dunno if that hope is well placed. In times of economic crisis people seem to embrace the myths of socialism even more tightly than in normal times.

        1. Never let a crisis go to waste.

      2. On market failure. No matter how badly progs fail, they always blame it on whatever tiny peice of the market they didn’t destroy.

      3. when it all comes crashing down maybe people will finally start to place the blame where it belongs.

        Explain Detroit then.

        1. If you implemented Detroit-like policies nationally, then no one could leave, and everyone would have to make the best of it. And, you could print money. Then, it would turn out awesome. Therefore, it’s the rest of the country’s fault.

          I think it would go something like that.

      4. He’s open about his socialism, so when it all comes crashing down maybe people will finally start to place the blame where it belongs.

        Firmly on the shoulders of George W. Bush?

    2. I’d infinitely prefer seeing Sanders run as opposed to Hillary, because at least his motivations are something other than his own self-aggrandizement and sense of entitlement.

      If that were the only factor, I’d have to go with Ms. Clinton. At least entitlement and self-aggrandizement can be bargained with, if not reasoned with. Clinton will avoid batshit crazy policies because, if nothing else, she’ll be bribed to avoid them. Sanders on the other hand, is socialist true believer. He’d happily drag the country into hell, even if it meant he’d spend his retirement eating catfood.

      Now, the fact that Sanders is less likely to actually win than Clinton…

  16. mass mobilization

    Creepy. These fucks love military metaphors, don’t they.

    1. Anything related to violence, dude. They fucking love it.

    2. Yeah, pretty much. It’s actually pretty funny (okay more disturbing) if you go back in history. A lot of the progressives out-and-out said they liked World War I’s regimentation of society and only wished they could find a way to do it in the context of peacetime.

      1. Absolutely. He’s speaking the language of a 1930s New Deal fascist scumbag.

      2. “Moral equivalent of war”

      3. Woodrow Wilson is largely responsible for the left abandoning the term “progressive” and stealing the term “liberal” from limited-government types (in the US, at least). His policies were so hated that the term became an epithet. Of course the 1960s and early ’70s then discredited the term “liberal,” and so the left went back to “progressive.”

    3. What, are you not an “ally”? Because if not, that makes you an enemy, and you’d better be wearing your gold star.

  17. Related, sort of:
    “The NFL opts to end its tax-exempt status”
    “[…]the change in filing status will make no material difference to our business.”
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/money…..loomberg11

    Yes, they’ll have to file showing they made no money, BUT they will no longer have to explain to the brain-dead Bernie Sanders of the world that the NFL never was profitable, it’s the DAMN TEAMS THAT MAKE MONEY, YOU IDIOTS!

    1. But will the Nick Gillespies of the world understand that?

  18. Oh Joy…

  19. The Rand Paul of the left.

    *runs away*

    1. Unelectable?

      *runs away*

  20. It will make for good entertainment. He’s a regular on Thom Hartmann’s radio show and I will definitely be listening to now for the LULZ.

    Hartmann told us today that FDR fixed capitalism…and that unions fought for a minimum wage to protect minorities.

    Laugh riot.

    1. unions fought for a minimum wage to protect minorities

      Talk about revisionist history. The minimum wage was an intentionally racist and eugenic policy. The left is trying to rewrite history (again).

      1. Anybody with a passing familiarity with the history of the unions would laugh their asses off at the notion that the unions were fans of minorities. Part of the reason unions were created was to keep the blacks out.

  21. God bless him.

    Here’s hoping he splits the Progressive vote.

    1. So he’s actually a hero?

      1. Not the hero we deserve, but the one we need right now. Or, maybe he’s the one we deserve, but not the one we need right now? What the fuck do either of those mean anyway?

  22. Is he going to tell Soros the same?

    That said, better an honest socialist than Hillary or Jeb.

  23. 2nd candidate? What about Lincoln Chaffee?

    1. Yeah. Ouch.

  24. So, who’s more Marxist – Bernie Sanders or….y;know…..Karl Marx….??

  25. To Bernie’s credit, he is the real deal and the original product. He’s not wasting his time talking about “microaggression” or “War on Women”; he’s 100% about the stuff leftism is made of: getting a mob together and stealing other peoples’ money and labor for their benefit. It is refreshing to see: a campaign uncluttered by side nonsense that not even SJWs can truly be arsed with. Elegant in its minimalism, really.

    1. Oh, you can bet he’ll go full SJW soon enough. He’s running against a woman, propping up the glass ceiling, so he’ll have to do plenty of apologizing for his whitemaleness.

    2. Yes, exactly, leavened with demands to destroy the First Amendment.

      Sanders is just an American Chavista.

      1. NSDAP party program point #23

          1. Oh, if you go down the list, Bernie Sanders hits about half the NSDAP party platform points. It’s just fun to point them out as they come up.

  26. I’ll give Bernie credit for one thing.

    as dumb as his ideas are he honestly believes them.

    On the whole I don’t think as President his Marxism will cause all that much damage (especially since he’ll likely face a Republican controlled congress) and I can definitely see some good coming out of a Sanders Presidency in areas of criminal justice reform and paring back the NSA.

    Overall I would take a Bernie Sanders over about half of the declared Republicans at this point

    1. That *should* be true, but given the enormous amount of leeway granted to Presidents through executive action, it probably isn’t. Look at some of Obama’s EPA regs. No need for congress there (as if they’d do anything about it). An even more Marxist Pres could totally shut down industries through regulation.

    2. The Republican Congress is doing a good stopping Obama.

      1. Ha ha hahaaa ha HA..

      2. I want some of what Winston is smoking.

      3. Some people need to recalibrate their sarcasm detectors.

    3. I can definitely see some good coming out of a Sanders Presidency in areas of criminal justice reform and paring back the NSA

      Yes, because we all know that leftists don’t enjoy jailing everyone from sexual deviants to political opponents–and they aviod an intense surveillance state with every fiber of their being.

  27. I’d take him over any Democrat with the possible exception of Jim Webb, and any Republican hailing from Fla., Penn., NJ, Ark., NY, and wherever Ben Carson is from (Detroit?)

    1. What if a dog was running? A Female Collie, in good heath, and well behaved.

      1. I was always partial to monkeys. Man. Could you imagine a monkey in a suit or diaper giving a speech.

        Man I WISH.

      2. I would prefer a lizard. Then we could all drag ourselves to the polls every four years over the fear that the wrong lizard might win.

  28. Actually, when you get a better look at that picture on the main page, he kinda looks like an older, evil Matt Welch.

    1. AHHHH!!! I SEE IT

  29. I’m going to spend the remainder of the year posting VOTE BERNIE 2016 propaganda on Salon

    Can you buy bumper stickers already? I’ll take 100. I’ll put them on other people’s cars.

    1. Hi Gilmore,

      Are you going for jeb or Marco next year? I look forward over the upcoming year to the very important reasons you think we should all vote for gay marriage bigots in the GOP.

      I’m here more for the comedy than anything else, really.

      1. The gay marriage bigots are the people who call in death threats to stores whose owners have differences of opinion.

      2. “Gay marriage bigots” I assume you aren’t talking about pre 2012 obama.

      3. “I’m here more for the comedy than anything else, really.”

        Well you are the joke so I suppose it’s only fair to say that you are here for the comedy.

      4. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

      5. AmSoc,
        that’s the beauty of your ignorance. You don’t get half the humor

        For the benefit of society, can you summarize what is good about socialism and cite 4 examples of socialists countries that are successful and thriving in the history of the world?

        You seem like an erudite chap.

  30. He looks like a rodent.

    1. Don’t rodents usually look like rodents?

      1. This comment could be disparaging towards Ratbertarians.

  31. Could be interesting seeing what Bok can do with that mug.

  32. Sanders is gonna legislate everyone wear Birkenstock sandals. Even frequent tourists like me who come into the state would be given sandals handed out by customs agents.

    1. Just be thankful he’s not the Nehru jacket type.

  33. Ah, the whole support someone on the basis that they would not be able to implement their terrible agenda. Worked well with Obama.

  34. Will sanders also excoriate George Soros- the world’s richest Nazi Collaborator?

    No, I didn’t think so. Socialists gotta stick together.

    1. the world’s richest Nazi Collaborator

      Excellent. I will remember that.

  35. So, the Media has finally had to notice that Shrillery is the Wicked Bitch of the West, and now the Democrats are sending in the clowns to distract us until it’s time for act two. Then they propose Lurch (I mean Kerry ?. no I don’t) and we’re supposed to go mad with joy and relief.

    The contortions the Republican establishment will have to go through to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this time are going to have to be epic. I’m making popcorn.

    1. Then they propose Lurch

      Or Al Gore. (shudders)

  36. He’s not going to beat Clinton. Wall Street is going to pump gazillions of dollars into the Clinton campaign and will likely fund center – rightish CPACs that will attack Sanders.

    Wall Street had a brief fallout with Obama few years ago. Unlike the rioters in Baltimore, there are probably enough people in big business (mostly democrats) that recognizes the peril of fringe leftists given too much power.

  37. I honestly wouldn’t call it “naked class envy.”

    Sure, most of these folks have the wrong solutions to our problems (i.e. statism), but I find very little to quibble with in their diagnosis of the problems. People like Sanders bitch about the market being rigged against most average people. Well, is it not? Our whole banking system is one giant government-enforced cartel. If a bank is even close to being subjected to market forces, the government swoops in, declares it “too big too fail,” and funnels billions of dollars its way. These people of the fringe Left are on the right track; they realize the government isn’t on their side.

    Instead of considering them mortal enemies, libertarians should genuinely reach out to them. All it takes for a far-out Leftist to become a libertarian is for them to realize that we offer better solutions to the problems that we both see.

    1. Bernie Sanders is as much “on our side” as ISIS is for opposing US Foreign policy.

    2. “All it takes for a far-out Leftist to become a libertarian is for them to realize that we offer better solutions to the problems that we both see.”

      but that kind of assumes that they are motivated by concern over the problems, and I’ve seen damn little evidence that that is so.

      Face it, the Statist path was tried, extensively, all through the 20th Century. The evidence is in. It doesn’t work. So, for people to still be pushing the Statist approach they must be one (or both) of two things;

      Dumber than dog turds

      and

      Hungry for the power that Statism gives them to meddle in other peoples’ business.

      It usually seems to be both, frankly.

    3. People like Sanders bitch about the market being rigged against most average people. Well, is it not?

      Ah, wonderful use of the passive voice. When you put it in an active voice and add the right subject, it becomes much clearer:

      “The government is rigging the market against most average people.”

      Instead of considering them mortal enemies, libertarians should genuinely reach out to them.

      These people consider libertarians “mortal enemies” and nothing we can say will change their view. Furthermore, their prescription to government dysfunction is to give government more power, which will only make the problem worse through regulatory capture. That is, Sanders would try to pass additional regulation and laws with the intent to reigning in corporations, but those regulations and laws would just be used by rent seeking corporations to make the problems worse, not better.

      All it takes for a far-out Leftist to become a libertarian is for them to realize that we offer better solutions to the problems that we both see.

      These people wouldn’t be “far-out Leftists” if they had the slightest understanding of economics or public choice theory. And even if Sanders could be made to understand and change direction, he would lose most of his followers.

    4. Just because an avowed Socialist sees the inequities caused by the system, it isn’t a reason to reach out to them in the hopes they’ll lessen the burden and let people and markets figure things out. For Sanders, the solution to inequities is more state control.

  38. I honestly wouldn’t call it “naked class envy.”

    Sure, most of these folks have the wrong solutions to our problems (i.e. statism), but I find very little to quibble with in their diagnosis of the problems. People like Sanders bitch about the market being rigged against most average people. Well, is it not? Our whole banking system is one giant government-enforced cartel. If a bank is even close to being subjected to market forces, the government swoops in, declares it “too big too fail,” and funnels billions of dollars its way. These people of the fringe Left are on the right track; they realize the government isn’t on their side.

    Instead of considering them mortal enemies, libertarians should genuinely reach out to them. All it takes for a far-out Leftist to become a libertarian is for them to realize that we offer better solutions to the problems that we both see.

    1. On second thought…

  39. “Contain yourselves”

    I’ll try. I certainly won’t have to apologize for him as a libertarian like you guys do for rand Paul. He is, hands down, the best candidate for limited government so far announced.

    Ed, I think the metamorphosis of reason.com from a site that libertarians could discuss limited government to a site that reposts what’s on breitbart.com has not been good for you all. Have you ever considered cutting out the boss and the middleman and taking your right-wing bitchfest to talk radio? There’s not enough angry assholes on AM radio, I say.

    1. “He is, hands down, the best candidate for limited government so far announced.”

      You can’t have 15 dollars min wage, racial quotas, and protectionist “America Only” economic policy without big government.

      Vermont tried to go single payer but God had mercy on their souls. Thankfully, there will be JUST enough sane people to stop lunatics like Sanders from winning the white house.

    2. Fuck Off You Stalinist Stooge.

    3. I’ll try. I certainly won’t have to apologize for him as a libertarian like you guys do for rand Paul. He is, hands down, the best candidate for limited government so far announced.

      The quality of a candidate depends not only on his dreams and fantasies, but also on what he can realistically deliver.

      Like most socialists, Sanders is a well-meaning idiot (the rest are crooks). That is, he wants to help everybody, but he is so incompetent that he doesn’t even realize how ludicrous and doomed to failure his political program is. I hope Sanders runs, because he’s such a clown that he has no chance of winning, but he may cause problems for Clinton.

      I will wait before making a decision on Paul and the remaining Republicans.

    4. “He is, hands down, the best candidate for limited government so far announced.”
      If making something exponential bigger and giving it near complete control over the economy constitutes ‘limiting’, then yes, yes, you’re quite right.

      I suppose we shouldn’t try to reason with someone who fails to realize that ‘socialism’ and ‘limited government’ are diametrical opposites of each other.

  40. Are you people really that dense, or just that un-educated? I’m wondering how many years worth of history the lot of commentors on here have studied between all.

    Libertarianism fails. It fails because people are greedy, selfish pricks by nature. Don’t believe me, visit Somalia for a week.

    Socialism, however, is about the government actually stepping up to the plate and doing what it was intended to do – govern… by the people, for the people. Sanders is the only politician who actually, truthfully gets that.

    Libertarianism brought us the Koch brothers. Socialism brought us Sanders, Out of those choices, which one represents “The People”?

    1. visit Somalia for a week.

      Socialism, however, is about the government actually stepping up to the plate and doing what it was intended to do – govern… by the people, for the people. Sanders is the only politician who actually, truthfully gets that.

      Libertarianism brought us the Koch brothers. Socialism brought us Sanders, Out of those choices, which one represents “The People”?

      I’m going to give you an A for trolling.

    2. BJ, out of the two choices I’ll take the one that produces something. Socialism is for shitheads.

    3. Libertarianism fails. It fails because people are greedy, selfish pricks by nature.

      Actually, libertarianism is the only form of government that is robust to greedy, selfish pricks.

      Don’t believe me, visit Somalia for a week.

      Somalia was actually a lot worse when it did have a national government.

      Socialism, however, is about the government actually stepping up to the plate and doing what it was intended to do – govern

      Friedman explained this pretty well:

      HEFFNER: I understand, but again that is the philosophic basis of the argument that government must step in.

      FRIEDMAN: But it’s a false argument, because it assumes somehow that government is a way in which you put unselfish and ungreedy men in charge of selfish and greedy men. But government is an institution whereby the people who have the greatest drive to get power over their fellow men, get in a position of controlling them. Look at the record of government. Where are these philosopher kings that Plato supposedly was trying to develop?

    4. Fuck off, BJ. You are about to get schooled by libertarians.

      Somalia was run by a communist sometime back in 1960. It’s because of him that Somalia is in the situation it’s in. If you support socialism, which only works in Denmark because everyone has the same culture (wink, wink) you are doing it because you love Stalin. Go ahead, asshole, defend those purges. Say hello to Pol Pot for me, stooge.

      1. Sarcasm doesn’t work if you’re not coherent. I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

        Socialism has no record of creating prosperity. Places like Denmark or Japan or wherever are ethnically homogeneous, nationalist, and are hardcore protectionist. No impoverished and undocumented Mexican will find long term success selling tacos in Denmark. He won’t find work, residency, or even “free” healthcare, and will be looked at strangely by mean spirited Euro trash.

        Europe and many parts of Asia are the most volatile and depressing places to live on earth. Many Italians and Koreans live with their moms well into their mid 30’s. The women do all the prep for holidays and stuff. They waste the prime of their years doing meaningless work.

        Now, they can escape a lot of “worst case scenarios” that plague America because the government do guarantee somethings. But this usually means you get to live in a cheap, tiny ass apartment that doesn’t come with heat or appliances and participate in economies that cut the middle anyway they can.

    5. Do you feel the same about Hugo Chavez/Nicolas Maduro and the people of Venezuela? How has their representing “The People” actually affected the people?

    6. Is there a Godwin’s Law equivalent for mentioning Somalia?

    7. Libertarians works because people are greedy selfish pricks by nature. We harness all that greed and selfishness and turn it into prosperity.

      What do you think that under socialism people magically stop being greedy and selfish? Or that only benevolent nice people will get into government? Socialism gives greedy selfish people a GUN. Libertarianism forces them to use voluntary exchange.

      Also, what the fuck did the Koch brothers ever do you you? Aside from fund NOVA.

    8. The Koch brother have produced a lot more for the people through their business (and profited themselves enormously too) than Sanders ever has or will.

      I’d rather be sold food at a fair price by someone who asks nothing else then have shit shoved down by throat for free by someone who then spends the rest of my life telling me how much I owe them. That’s the difference between capitalism and socialism.

      Let me know when Americans are huddling into canoes and floating en masse to Cuba and Venezuela.

      “I’m wondering how many years worth of history the lot of commentors on here have studied between all.”
      At this point I have to believe you’re trolling, I really do. The history of last century is essentially the history of socialism killing tens of millions of people and impoverishing half the worlds population. To even know that the 20th century happened is to know that socialism is the worst economic system ever conceived. Period. Try reading something by someone other than Marx for a change and you’d realize that pretty quickly.

    9. Yeah! Government has the guns! Whoopee! Government has the jails! Yee Haw!!! Government runs the courts and can take all your assets if you don’t buy health insurance!## Praise Jesus!!!

      Government works because you have no choice but comply!!! Hallelujah!!!

      Comply or die!!! Sign me up, Comrade!!!!!

  41. Oh, please, run Bernie!

  42. “(David H. Koch is a trustee of the Reason Foundation, which publishes Reason magazine and Reason.com)”

    which is why you took the net neutrality stance that benefited your boss the most.

    *hat tip*

    -FFM

    1. Nice fedora.

  43. That photo’s got to be 25 years old. Back then he only had two chins.

  44. At this point I’m starting to think that Hillary might qualify as an honest politician. At least once she’s bought, she stays bought. But I might need to get some feedback from foreign governors.

  45. Remember Little Bernie’s campaign motto: Socialism is for the people, NOT the socialist!

  46. I know he caucuses with the Democrats but how can he run in their primary if he is an independent?

    1. He is an independant Democrat. Just like Maine’s Anus King.

  47. It’s too bad Bernie can’t get elected.

    Bernie and a Republican Congress would get nothing done, which would be great.

    Hillary and a Republican Congress will find LOTS of ways to work together.

    1. You think Bernie hasn’t learned the Obama Executive Order magic trick?

      The son of bitch can do plenty of damage, using a pen and a phone.

  48. Uncle Bernie is about as consistent as politicians come these days so have to give him props for staying on message even if I may not agree with it. You know exactly what you are getting with Bernie unlike snakes such as Hillary, Warren or O’Malley.

    Bernie has also improved his speaking, he’ll be able to fire up some crowds. May have some issues with his wife’s background.

  49. upto I looked at the receipt four $4773 , I didn’t believe that…my… mom in-law was realy receiving money parttime from there new laptop. . there aunts neighbour started doing this 4 only twenty one months and recently paid the dept on their villa and bourt a new Car
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  50. my roomate’s half-sister makes $71 /hr on the computer . She has been laid off for 5 months but last month her pay was $17321 just working on the computer for a few hours
    …… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  51. What a teratoma.

  52. He needs to do something with his spittle problem. There’s a reason why Saint Bernard’s don’t win Westminster – the drooling is just damn ugly

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.