Home | About | Donate

New Poll Shows Sanders Ahead of Clinton by Widest Margin Yet


#1


#2

People's Candidate vs. Oligarch.

Dear Sen. Sanders,
Nothing would give us greater pleasure than to see you beating Don Trump for the presidency too.


#4

I was under the impression that Nevada allowed same day registration, but maybe that's only the Republicans. By the way, I support Sanders ...


#5

In my view, and as I have stated before Bernie, would win the POTUS against any Republican. But the 800 # Gorilla is HRC and her rotten corrupt Democratic party acolytes. She is such an alligator that she will stop at nothing, even if it means losing to Trump, which would not surprise me!


#6

If internal party machinations ensure Hilary Clinton nominated as the Democratic candidate for President, Trump will crush her as he will take his gloves off and slam her record focusing on any number of scandals including the one over her Emails.

Sanders is not going there so the establishment somehow thinks this means Trump will consider it off bounds as well.


#7

Sanders seems like the red headed stepchild of the Democratic Party. It is obviously that entrenched status quo elites (in general) don't want a reform minded people's candidate to get in. Seems just about the best damn election that I will ever see :smiley:.

The Repubs don't want Tzar Trump and the Dems don't want to feel the Bern. Oligarch billionaire vs. the People's Candidate.


#8

Hillary is becoming so desperate to keep it looking like she is winning that she is fast using up her credibility and trustworthiness quotient. Were the media to run the story it would crush her ratings. I'm guessing that either it can't be proven despite what videos show? Maybe Bernie is avoiding the dirty tricks making the Dems look bad? Or maybe he doesn't have the extra $100 million to put out a few ads showing this stuff? In any case we should communicate online about it for him.

Apparently flipping a coin (America got embarrassed) and picking a card (America was already embarrassed) wasn't enough.

Hillary's trustworthiness in action!!!


#9

The establishment wins whether its Hillary or any of the Republicans.


#10

MSM, especially MSNBC, have been vanguards for the establishment. The ease of corrupting America's elections is not a comfort. Read recently that the reason Obama won over Hillery was the size of Obama's support. Presently, the strategy being used by the establishment, is a neck-and-neck race. It took the DNC and its political chicanery to create an image that Hillery was also garnering similarly sized audiences.

Hillery is advocating more austerity. Bernie is advocating a democratic republic.


#11

...Sanders would win in a landslide against GOP frontrunner Donald Trump...

Big Money wins if either Trump or Clinton plant a Sold sign on the White House lawn; it's all about defeating the electorate.

The head of the DNC is glaring proof that she doesn't care about a "landslide".


#12

BINGO! In the I row.


#13

Meanwhile, elsewhere on CD today, James Carden writes:

So while it seems likely that in the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s convincing win in Nevada that Sanders is more or less finished...

Please refer all subsequent premature reports of Bernie's demise to Mark Twain.


#14

All you corporate, media, political, banker/Wall St whores should take notice! Reports of Sanders political demise are highly exaggerated!

I expect corruption and BS from the media talking heads, but what really sticks in my craw are the "real leftist" talking heads that have bashed Sanders endlessly for this or that "failure" or whatever, but offer nothing except their own verbiage/blather and BS - they might as well support Clinton or Trump! These people see and write on critical issues, as do we all - political corruption, banker/Wall St frauds, MICC endless war, a laundry-list of sins and abuse of power, BUT, they don't come up with any viable alternative to the position Bernie Sanders is in NOW! Only Jill Stein, a woman of character and integrity, has the issues, but zero name recognition, funding, or snow-balls chance in Hell of gaining power or effecting change. The revolution they supposedly support is undermined by divisions they sow!
IF any of those clairvoyant "real left", or however they style themselves, would have supported and furthered Sanders principled stands on domestic issues (and he is not without flaws/warts) thru the primary process at least, they would deserve some respect rather than just contempt. Examples of the bash Bernie crowd are Chris Hedges, Joshua Frank, and Paul Street to name several prominent nay-sayers who obliquely serve the oligarchy even as they denounce it...IMO. Where has all their blather actually gotten us?


#18

It's not going to be what we want. Bernie IMO hasn't a prayer, even if he gets the most pop. votes like Gore did in 2000 HRC will have the Supers like BV$H had Jeb in Fla. and Scalia in DC as backstops. HRC is going to in all probability be our candidate and we had better either reconcile ourselves to it or vote for Jill Stein or some other throw away candidate that just puts Trump in the WH. I'll hold my nose and vote for our Corporatist over their crazy ass demagogue and Oligarch. I also believe Hillary can prevail even with her scandal ridden record and corrupt inclinations. Why? Because Donald J. Trump has even higher negatives with Indies and half of his own party hates him. There 's going to be a certain amount of sad to say Reagan Dems. going to Trump , but there is also going to be a certain amount of Country club Republicans going to Hillary. It's going to be a scary close affair. Hillary is by no means a shoo in this fall just because we think Trump is a fascist monster. We should never forget Nixon, Reagan, and GWBush all won twice in our lifetimes.


#19

Here we pretty much see what should be happening -- a liberal America embracing a liberal -- even more so,
a populist candidate.
I just want to jump ahead a little bit and remind us all that we have had candidates for PEACE before --
JFK, who was assassinated. Khrushchev who was cooperating with JFK, sidelined. Pope John XXIII, making
the church a democracy and supporting liberation theology in the church which was responded to by the rise
of a right wing coup within the church on Vatican II. Two succeeding Popes to John XXIII, who likely would
have also ended the ban on contraception, also died under suspicious circumstances.

We've had Begin/Sadat/Carter -- Sadat was assassinated -- and there were very strong attacks on Pres.
Carter. We've had Isaac Rabin, who was also assassinated.

Long before that, we had Dag Hammarskjold at the United Nations where there are suspicions of assassination.

We had Martin Luther King, Jr. who had moved forward from his leadership as a Civil Rights leader attacking
the system of Segregation, to someone speaking nationally for the poor -- and again, against violence and the
Vietnam War. Again, assassinated and a jury has found our own government complicit in the assassination.
http://www.thekingcenter.org/assassination-conspiracy-trial

We had Robert Kennedy as a peace candidate - he was assassinated on the night it became overwhelmingly
obvious that he would win the presidency.

There are many other liberal and progressive leaders who have been either assassinated or eliminated in other
ways -- Dirty tricks have been used not only to attack candidates like George McGovern but as "October
Surprises" in the case of Nixon vs Humphrey where Nixon was keeping peace talks from going forward,
offering promises of a better deal after his election.

We had the Reagan/Bush October Surprise, after everything had been done to prevent Carter from rescue
attempts -- as a number of helicopters went down in the desert because the necessary sand filters had not
been applied to the engines. Ollie North was the commander of that mission -- Secord was second in command.

The Reagan/Bush team seems to have clearly blocked release of the hostages to the Carter administration,
until such time as Reagan was sworn in.

I'm sure we all have memories of other incidents which seem suspicious or too coincidental -- it's a long list.
Not too long after the JFK coup, Ted Kennedy was a passenger in a small plane which crashed, killing at least
one -- and causing him injuries to his back.
Later, Ted Kennedy decided to run for the presidency

By August 1979, when Kennedy decided to run, polls showed him with a 2-to-1 advantage over Carter, and Carter's approval rating slipped to 19 percent. Kennedy formally announced his campaign on November 7, 1979, at Boston's Faneuil Hall. He had already received substantial negative press from a rambling response to the question "Why do you want to be President?" during an interview with Roger Mudd of CBS News broadcast a few days earlier. The Iranian hostage crisis, which began on November 4, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which began on December 27, caused the electorate to rally around the president, allowed Carter to pursue a Rose Garden strategy of staying at the White House, and knocked Kennedy's campaign out of the headlines.

Ted Kennedy and his swollen press entourage arrived in two planes in Boston on Nov. 7 for the announcement of his candidacy. He chose Faneuil Hall, so long associated with great Boston orators, to speak forcefully against Carter. The crowd and reporters alike sensed they were attending a historic event. Kennedy was way ahead in the polls, drawing about 65 percent. How could Teddy possibly lose?

Then came Chappaquiddick. This is another event being challenged. And there's an interesting review of the threats the
Kennedy family lived under -- and I doubt we knew all of them -- in "The Taking of America 1-2-3 by Richard Sprague.
http://www.voxfux.com/features/TOA/ToA.html

I'd just like to ad to this that as Carter announced a Boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics over the USSR
invasion of Afghanistan, he knew very well that the US had put troops into Afghanistan six months before in
order to "bait the Russians into Afghanistan ... in hopes of giving them a Vietnam-type experience."
Carter also knew -- as Brzezinski has made clear -- that the US/CIA had created the Taliban/Al Qaeda and
financed it through ISI-Pakistan.

We can't, of course, act on information we don't have -- secrecy is the enemy of democracy -- but we do have
this history to look at and to use to question events in future.

Granted, shock is a perfectly normal reaction -- but too often that shock has included numbness which has
prevented the public from appropriate follow up action.

Don't think it's over -- it's not.

The right wing can only rise on violence, lies, deception, threats, stolen elections --
and questionable "events" -- that's always been true and it's still true today.


#21

Go Sanders Go !
The republican and democrat establishment have a serious problem; cannot face reality.
Two persons of two different party and ideology are being voted because the following:

  • Those two candidates stated they do not received money from big donors, Wall Street, Corporations, private prisons, etc.
    *Those two candidates stated they will not privatize SS and Medicare.
    *Those two candidates stated they will stop outsourcing and create jobs; without considering if those jobs come from the private or public sector.

If one of those candidates is not elected, people will hold their nose and vote for the other; one is democrat the other is a republican. One is Sanders, the other is Trump.
So, the reality that the Democrat establishment is not facing is that if Bernie Sanders is not elected, a great number of people, will hold their nose and vote for Trump.


#22

It seems astonishing the total Dem Nevada caucus participant totals was about 12,000 people, while the Rep caucuses had over 70,000. Nevada is apparently a state that can go either way and is neither overtly red or blue, but Jeeze, is that the best Dems could do there?


#23

I find myself wondering ... if corporations are "people", perhaps we can provide them with an awakening, you know, something akin to a 'near death experience'.


#25

It makes one look like a sore-loser when they make accusations that cannot be proven. I think Sanders is wise to just ride the momentum. It seems that all that Mrs. Clinton is doing to prop herself/her numbers up is sending more support towards Mr. Sanders.

What it's going to come down to is whether the machinery of the Establishment will manage to push through ITS agenda, or if it recognizes that the crowds outside the castle gates can no longer be safely contained.

The bastards have gotten away with so much lately... from false flag events to the rape of civil liberties to massive thefts against the U.S. treasury to crimes against nature...

Sooner or later, the universe DOES arc towards justice.

Let's hope THIS is that moment!


#26

Her name is Hillary.