I've followed him since long before Sanders was running, and agreed with his assessment of the 2008 crisis completely (and the state of our economy/union in general).
I am a diehard Hillary fan (and was in 2008, too), but it's not hard for me to see Bernie's appeal. There are plenty of intelligent, well-informed voters who support him.
This was my main point to OP. We can argue about the rest all day, but the idea that if you're informed, you will support Hillary is uninformed itself, smug af, and peak assholery.
I am a diehard Hillary fan (and was in 2008, too), but it's not hard for me to see Bernie's appeal. There are plenty of intelligent, well-informed voters who support him.
This was my main point to OP. We can argue about the rest all day, but the idea that if you're informed, you will support Hillary is uninformed itself, smug af, and peak assholery.
Wow. I leave for 20 minutes and all hell breaks loose.
I agree with asdfjkl that a YUGE part of the reason this Congress has fought Obama so hard is because he's black. And I don't think that this current Congress is likely to play nicely with either Hillary or Bernie.
But I think the person best situated to lead a change in the composition of Congress is Hillary, not Bernie. Hillary has worked really hard for the party. And love or hate the two-party system, it's what we've got and electing Democrats to Congress is our best shot of enacting progressive policies.
Hillary has more popularity with women and minorities, both of whom are large parts of the Democratic base. The Obamas are going to balls to the wall campaign for Hillary in a way that they wouldn't for Bernie. Hillary's skeletons are out there while Bernie's weird sex writings and praising of Ortega and Castro have barely been touched by anyone. The polls showing that Bernie beats Trump by greater margins than Hillary are soft.
The ability AND INTEREST that Hillary has in working for the party and the down ballot candidates, her intelligence and policy wonk nature, the loyalty she will have from congressional Democrats, and the potential to partially reshape Congress with her at the top of the ticket convince me that she's far better suited to getting stuff done than Bernie is.
BUT, going back to the OP, I don't think that automatically means every Bernie supporter is uninformed. I mean, I think I am MORE informed, but let's be real here - I know more than everyone because OBVIOUSLY THAT IS WHY I AM ARGUING ON THE INTERNET and also I am an asshole.
I think it's so odd how Bernie is always played off as being so far left of Clinton. They're voting records are so similar, they support really similar platforms and where they do differ he is occasionally to the right of her, such as gun control. I just don't see how his presidency would be this miracle and result in the saving of American and hers would be total shit.
This is more annoying to me than anything else. Yes, they say different things, but everything Hillary is saying is left of center. She has ALWAYS been left. Clinton has a rating of “hard core liberal” according to the OnTheIssues.org scale. She barely, BARELY ranks more moderate than Bernie Sanders. She was even ranked more liberal than Obama.
This talking point needs to DIE. I don't know where it came from, or HOW it sticks. ANY research anyone ever does will prove this point. So, I don't get it. I don't like it. The argument instantly makes me think you are not informed. Sorry, not sorry.
(This does NOT mean Bernie supporters are uninformed. I mean this ARGUMENT is an uninformed argument.)
I am a diehard Hillary fan (and was in 2008, too), but it's not hard for me to see Bernie's appeal. There are plenty of intelligent, well-informed voters who support him.
This was my main point to OP. We can argue about the rest all day, but the idea that if you're informed, you will support Hillary is uninformed itself, smug af, and peak assholery.
Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal? I ask sincerely. Most people I know IRL who have issues with voting for him cite the disconnect between the pipe dream ideas and his ability to actually implement them. Without any sort of high-level discourse about an actual plan towards (any of) his goals, he's veering really closely to the HS kid who runs for class president on the platform of free pizza and more vacation days for everyone! I mean, who doesn't want those things and understand their appeal?
I GET the appeal. I see the who and the what, but I need the how. And telling me that he's just not throwing it out there because I just won't understand it is not doing him any favors.
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
I don't know, I can't answer for the OP or anyone else. I know that there are smart people who support him. But I also know that there are smart people who support Trump (OK, I am assuming here, because I don't actually know any smart people IRL who openly support Trump). And I know there are a lot of smart people who sometimes just blindly support ideals they agree with without any tangible backup. I got the sense from OP's post, which I kind of see similar anecdotal evidence of in my own real life, that she is seeing that kind of support for him and it's a little infuriating. Because the reverse of what you are saying is also true. There are a ton of Bernie supporters who think HRC's supporters are stupid, uninformed, and, as you've made plenty of mention here in this thread, not true liberals. That knife cuts both ways.
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
Well, Bernie Bros are a subset of Bernie supporters. Even my Bernie supporting roommate feels the need to unload on Bernie Bros occasionally. Like the Bernie Bros tossing out labels like "whore" at Hillary. So, no. She did not mean if you support him you are sexist. She didn't even say anyone was sexist, or mention sexism, or even use the word sex. So, not sure where you got that.
I believe the point of her post was similar to what eclaires wrote. That the particular postings by OP's friend are making her lose respect for them, not all Bernie supporters. They appear to be posting that not voting for Bernie means you don't understand his message. Which, for most of this board, is simply not true. Just as it is simply not true that anyone voting for Bernie must be uninformed or unintelligent. The OP seems to be perturbed that seemingly intelligent people can't understand why not everyone is feeling the "bern."
fenton , are you coming back or did you just post that rant to get us fired up on a slow Friday?
I've gotten myself into more demanding jobs, so I can't hang out here all day, but I can return more often to break the Hillary hypnosis infecting this place!
Come on.. "Hillary hypnosis" You've got to be kidding. Everyone knows it is a vagina conspiracy we have going on here.
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
Well, Bernie Bros are a subset of Bernie supporters. Even my Bernie supporting roommate feels the need to unload on Bernie Bros occasionally. Like the Bernie Bros tossing out labels like "whore" at Hillary. So, no. She did not mean if you support him you are sexist. She didn't even say anyone was sexist, or mention sexism, or even use the word sex. So, not sure where you got that.
I believe the point of her post was similar to what eclaires wrote. That the particular postings by OP's friend are making her lose respect for them, not all Bernie supporters. They appear to be posting that not voting for Bernie means you don't understand his message. Which, for most of this board, is simply not true. Just as it is simply not true that anyone voting for Bernie must be uninformed or unintelligent. The OP seems to be perturbed that seemingly intelligent people can't understand why not everyone is feeling the "bern."
Right. I've been told on numerous occasions that if I bothered to do any research, I'd easily see why Bernie is the only choice. Because Hillary is really a Republican in disguise. Which makes me question whether they have actually researched anything themselves because that's patently false.
Bernie's plans would require enormous tax increases on middle and lower income Americans. HRC's plans do not.
Bernie would struggle to find Dems to vote for huge tax increases, let alone members of the GOP.
There's just one reason Congress is more likely to work with HRC. And--if Congress won't work with her, she still has a better shot of enacting her plans because they don't require enormous new funding sources.
Bringing down Wall Street is more important to you that women having equal rights?
Aside from the hyperbole of "bringing down," yes. Absolutely, 100%. We are at risk of the world grinding to a complete halt, which almost happened in 2008. We can come back from oppressive reproductive legislation in a short time...you can't just get SCOTUS to strike down another Great Depression.
The great thing about living in the U.S. is that you have every right to prioritize that way and choose a candidate accordingly.
Having hung out here for a couple of years, it strikes me that a majority of this board prioritizes women having equal rights over bringing down Wall Street. We're also allowed to have that priority and choose a candidate accordingly, and it's bro-ish (Bernie style) to imply that the only reason we do so is that we're suffering from "Hillary hypnosis."
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
I feel like you and I are reading different OPs. monkey wrote (bolding mine):
My problem stems from a couple of my friends. We used to be really close politically (democrat-leaning), and I still admire my friends for their professions (they are involved in education/social advocacy professions). I love them and respect them immensely. However, it's dawning on me that they are both Bernie Bros (one male, one female). It's really upsetting to me.
I went to law school with one of them, and the other really should have gone to law school. They're both maybe in their early 40s? They are SO SMART and I admire them SO MUCH. But they're so far gone for Bernie. The things they post on Facebook just don't make any logical sense, but they are so passionate. I have another friend who is refusing to vote for superdelagates in our state (senators, governors, etc.) because they just don't "see" the progressive vision Bernie has.
I read that as monkey having a couple of friends who post illogical things about Bernie, earning them "Bernie Bro" status. This doesn't mean she thinks all Sanders supporters are unintelligent, and it certainly doesn't mean that anyone who supports Sanders is a sexist bro.
Unloading on Bernie Bros also does not mean unloading on anyone who supports Sanders. It refers to a specific subset of his supporters.
I have a few IRL friends who are Berners and also DH likes him more. I don't get into it with anyone. To me, it doesn't matter. HRC is going to get the nom, so there is no reason to convince anyone of anything. Its basically a done deal.
Except that he continues to extort $27 from broke ass millennials. It's reprehensible.
(omg, fuck this quote function) "Are there really people, outside of maybe genuine bootstrap conservatives, who don't understand his underlying appeal?"
Apparently, OP, who invited everyone on the board to "unload on Bernie Bros." Which I guess means if you support him, you're a sexist bro, which I don't even understand. Is this more Madeline Albright BS about going to hell if I don't vote for the lady?
I didn't mean to create a space for "Bernie Bro" bashing! After I hit the post button I realized how bad the title sounded. I think it comes down to the fact that I'm burned (Berned?) out on Facebook. I wrote the post after seeing 5 too many Facebook posts calling for Hillary to drop out of the race. And I'm disappointed that my friends are taking out their frustration with the superdelegate situation on candidates who otherwise represent their interests and calling on others to do the same. It just seems so extreme.
Honestly, I should just block them on Facebook. I was trying to understand where they were coming from but I feel like the stuff they post only comes from super biased and misleading sources so I'm at a loss.
Several people in this thread have implied that I simply haven't looked at Hillary's website or I'd know what her detailed plans are for fracking, climate change, affordable college education, universal health care, and wall street reforms. I'll rise above the continued "if you only educated yourself" insinuations and just say, I HAVE looked at her web page and I don't find it to be any more specific that Sanders. Sanders has some very specific climate change reforms. Hillary has some very specific college-education reforms (that I don't fully agree with). Sanders is vague on rural communities; Hillary is pretty fucking vague on Citizens United, and climate change.
The point is, Sanders page gets pretty specific. I think there is a double standard at work here. Maybe some people need to take a look at Sanders's page? It's one thing to say, "Yeah, I looked and don't agree" but this constant chant of "HE HAS NOT PLAN" is not true.
Also Re: Matt Taibbi, he's no more "in" for Sanders than Krugman is "in" for Hillary. Krugman's op ed on how the financial meltdown had nothing to do with big banks was, IMO, a complete credibility-destroyer. No one can honestly argue that with a straight face and the fact that big banks still haven't been reigned in is one reason why the world's economy continues to be "at play." Boom or bust cycles will continue, recessions/depressions will continue. Taibbi was right to hold GWB accountable for letting the meltdown happen, Obama accountable for failing to punish or reform, and he's right that as long as we have leaders who pretend the banking industry is A-Ok (and journalists who will regurgitate those talking points), the economic picture of the world (YES THE WORLD) will continue to be a picture of instability.
To the extent they aren't really different, I think it's fair to reverse some of the questions in this very thread. Because I agree that they aren't exactly worlds apart. So, um... what's Hillary's plan for funding universal healthcare and entirely subsidized college education? What is her plan for getting across-aisle agreements on climate change, fracking, and wall street reforms? I see that "HE HAS NO PLAN" language thrown around, but I'm not terribly persuaded by this. I mean, he has a plan that involves tax reform. I can't fault him for not outlining the section by section revisions to the code that he plans. Most of the country has to pay H&R block to fill out a 1040EZ. What kind of specificity are we requiring here, and do we require it from Clinton, as well. I mean, assuming their platforms are actually nearly identical.
Her website is a start if you're genuinely asking. She has very detailed proposals for those things on her site.
The question was rhetorical. If Bernie's page isn't specific enough for you, Hillary's shouldn't be either. They're formatted differently, and they come out differently on a small handful of issues, but they are equally specific in content.
Are you being serious with this? Have you noticed the onslaught of legislation in the last 10-20 years that has chipped away at reproductive rights since Casey v Planned parenthood made it a free for all? Are you saying that the women who are effected by these laws shouldn't worry about it?
Also, reasoning like *this* probably hurts Bernie with a very large segment of women, FWIW.
Don't you know that rights issues can be won easy peasy?! Just like The Great and Powerful Bernie of Oz said -- the power was in the people, all along. All women have to do is click their ovaries together and reproductive rights will be theirs.
You make everything out to be so complicated. WHY DO YOU HATE PROGRESS, JEANIE?!
Worst case, we can ALWAYS count on the supreme court to protect our rights and get it right. LORD KNOWS they have never let us down. It's not like the court will ever change when justice die/retire or anything.
To the extent they aren't really different, I think it's fair to reverse some of the questions in this very thread. Because I agree that they aren't exactly worlds apart. So, um... what's Hillary's plan for funding universal healthcare and entirely subsidized college education? What is her plan for getting across-aisle agreements on climate change, fracking, and wall street reforms? I see that "HE HAS NO PLAN" language thrown around, but I'm not terribly persuaded by this. I mean, he has a plan that involves tax reform. I can't fault him for not outlining the section by section revisions to the code that he plans. Most of the country has to pay H&R block to fill out a 1040EZ. What kind of specificity are we requiring here, and do we require it from Clinton, as well. I mean, assuming their platforms are actually nearly identical.
She's actually outlined a fairly solid plan for all of these. To the point that economists aren't sitting around with their heads hanging over their beers going, "WTF shit did I just read?!" They've been able to calculate it down really well. She also has the personal contacts to be able to broker deals, or at least bring people to the table.
Do you know what Bernie's climate change plan is? "We're going to bring down big oil!" Uh, ok? That's it. That's his whole plan.
See, this is where the conversation breaks down, because this is just... well... wrong. You might disagree with his plan, but here's the content:
This is not to say that Clinton doesn't also have a plan, but she's not any more specific about it than Bernie. For example, here is one of the prongs of her climate change plan:
Energy and Climate Security: Reduce the amount of oil consumed in the United States and around the world, guard against energy supply disruptions, and make our communities, our infrastructure, and our financial markets more resilient to climate-related risks.
I actually don't think she needs to be any more specific than this on her webpage because the average voter isn't capable of understanding anything much more specific than this. But this does mean that she and Bernie are pretty much playing the same game with the "I will put more vending machines in the school cafeteria" platforms.
I don't think Bernie has NO plans. I think the plans he has are not feasible. I also have no idea what free college looks like. He has said this on his website:
"1.MAKE TUITION FREE AT PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.
This is not a radical idea. Last year, Germany eliminated tuition because they believed that charging students $1,300 per year was discouraging Germans from going to college. Next year, Chile will do the same. Finland, Norway, Sweden and many other countries around the world also offer free college to all of their citizens. If other countries can take this action, so can the United States of America.
In fact, it’s what many of our colleges and universities used to do. The University of California system offered free tuition at its schools until the 1980s. In 1965, average tuition at a four-year public university was just $243 and many of the best colleges – including the City University of New York – did not charge any tuition at all. The Sanders plan would make tuition free at public colleges and universities throughout the country."
Okay, does this mean college employees are now federal employees? Does this mean the government will basically provide scholarships? WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE!?! I have no idea. Do you? Am I missing something? Saying "make it free" is all well and good, but what does "free" look like? And what will this do to admissions standards? Or education standards? Will the government get a say in curriculum as it is footing the bill? And this just means public universities, so this does nothing for private universities. So will private universities have free reign concerning curriculum? And what will this mean about the worth of any particular degree?
I think these are valid questions. Questions I have not seen an answer to. Questions that lead me away from being swayed by his pretty words. Questions that people SHOULD BE asking Sanders, but when I pose them, I am called names from the "bro" segment.
I don't think Bernie has NO plans. I think the plans he has are not feasible. I also have no idea what free college looks like. He has said this on his website:
"1.MAKE TUITION FREE AT PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.
This is not a radical idea. Last year, Germany eliminated tuition because they believed that charging students $1,300 per year was discouraging Germans from going to college. Next year, Chile will do the same. Finland, Norway, Sweden and many other countries around the world also offer free college to all of their citizens. If other countries can take this action, so can the United States of America.
In fact, it’s what many of our colleges and universities used to do. The University of California system offered free tuition at its schools until the 1980s. In 1965, average tuition at a four-year public university was just $243 and many of the best colleges – including the City University of New York – did not charge any tuition at all. The Sanders plan would make tuition free at public colleges and universities throughout the country."
Okay, does this mean college employees are now federal employees? Does this mean the government will basically provide scholarships? WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE!?! I have no idea. Do you? Am I missing something? Saying "make it free" is all well and good, but what does "free" look like? And what will this do to admissions standards? Or education standards? Will the government get a say in curriculum as it is footing the bill? And this just means public universities, so this does nothing for private universities. So will private universities have free reign concerning curriculum? And what will this mean about the worth of any particular degree?
I think these are valid questions. Questions I have not seen an answer to. Questions that lead me away from being swayed by his pretty words. Questions that people SHOULD BE asking Sanders, but when I pose them, I am called names from the "bro" segment.
There are several arguments going on in this thread. So it's hard to respond to each of them without being a post whore, so I don't mean to accuse you of things you haven't said, but to respond to this specific point (and then I have to go to a carnival with my kids), I DO think it's feasible. And I think that if we overreach as liberals, we'll get something that is at least palatable. I think that Sanders has put together a good plan for "free" college and that it is sufficiently specific for a campaign website. You have posted part of his plan, here is a link to the rest:
I think one of the issues for me is that I have family who still live in Socialist countries and nothing that Sanders is suggesting seems all that radical to me. I think the Bernie Bros are destroying what could be a good dialogue and I'm pretty pissed at them for it, but I'll tell you, nothing has made me more anti-Hillary that THIS message board (and my Aunt Karen). I have found that comments that consistently are made here, including in this thread (not the OP, but the "if they just understood" type stuff down thread), to be so incredibly off-putting that it makes me think "I am not like these people, I must not be a Hillary-type voter."
Ultimately, I accept that Hillary will be the nominee and I will vote for her. Like, it's not even a hard decision. But what I object to in this thread and in others like it is the suggestion that there's some kind of intellection superiority among the HRC contingent. There's not. Sanders's supporters are slightly left of HRC's. End of story.
ETA: As for your questions, I could answer several of those based just on an understanding of how the federal government allocates money to the states and how states fund their Universities. So I can see how "free" college is possible using federal taxes and funding to the states. But to be clear, Hillary doesn't answer those either with her grants and "reduced loan burden" platforms. The short of it is that both plans use federal money to incentivize the states to participate in their respective federalized plans. Hillary's plan isn't good enough for me. It's good enough for me to vote for her over Trump, but not good enough for me to vote for her over Bernie.
She's actually outlined a fairly solid plan for all of these. To the point that economists aren't sitting around with their heads hanging over their beers going, "WTF shit did I just read?!" They've been able to calculate it down really well. She also has the personal contacts to be able to broker deals, or at least bring people to the table.
Do you know what Bernie's climate change plan is? "We're going to bring down big oil!" Uh, ok? That's it. That's his whole plan.
See, this is where the conversation breaks down, because this is just... well... wrong. You might disagree with his plan, but here's the content:
This is not to say that Clinton doesn't also have a plan, but she's not any more specific about it than Bernie. For example, here is one of the prongs of her climate change plan:
Energy and Climate Security: Reduce the amount of oil consumed in the United States and around the world, guard against energy supply disruptions, and make our communities, our infrastructure, and our financial markets more resilient to climate-related risks.
I actually don't think she needs to be any more specific than this on her webpage because the average voter isn't capable of understanding anything much more specific than this. But this does mean that she and Bernie are pretty much playing the same game with the "I will put more vending machines in the school cafeteria" platforms.
Thanks, I've read his site. I'm not wrong. His whole plan boils down to taking down big oil. It's just wordier than that.
HRC has prongs to her climate change policy. That's the whole difference between the two of them. Bernie is so focused on one thing that he's not seeing the bigger picture. The oil companies are just 1 (and maybe not even the biggest) drivers for climate change. The biggest driver is human consumption of fossil fuels, not the companies themselves.
This is not to say that Clinton doesn't also have a plan, but she's not any more specific about it than Bernie. For example, here is one of the prongs of her climate change plan:
Energy and Climate Security: Reduce the amount of oil consumed in the United States and around the world, guard against energy supply disruptions, and make our communities, our infrastructure, and our financial markets more resilient to climate-related risks.
I actually don't think she needs to be any more specific than this on her webpage because the average voter isn't capable of understanding anything much more specific than this. But this does mean that she and Bernie are pretty much playing the same game with the "I will put more vending machines in the school cafeteria" platforms.
Thanks, I've read his site. I'm not wrong. His whole plan boils down to taking down big oil. It's just wordier than that.
HRC has prongs to her climate change policy. That's the whole difference between the two of them. Bernie is so focused on one thing that he's not seeing the bigger picture. The oil companies are just 1 (and maybe not even the biggest) drivers for climate change. The biggest driver is human consumption of fossil fuels, not the companies themselves.
Thanks, I've read his site. I'm not wrong. His whole plan boils down to taking down big oil. It's just wordier than that.
HRC has prongs to her climate change policy. That's the whole difference between the two of them. Bernie is so focused on one thing that he's not seeing the bigger picture. The oil companies are just 1 (and maybe not even the biggest) drivers for climate change. The biggest driver is human consumption of fossil fuels, not the companies themselves.
Well, clearly HRC wins. Because prongs.
Focker out.
Hey, you're the one that said it, not me. I'm sorry for you that Bernie's plan is shit. It's like any of his other plans. It's all talk and no substance. When I first read his plan I was all, "Cool, he's actually addressing climate change." Then I read more and, nope, just changing the message to his economic plan again.
I don't particularly like HRC, and it grates that you (general Bernie fans) can't separate the discussion to talk just about Bernie. He has some massive flaws, but when put up against the foil of HRC or Trump, he doesn't look all that crazy. But back to you, specifically, notice I didn't mention HRC in our first exchange regarding climate change. YOU did.
Are you being serious with this? Have you noticed the onslaught of legislation in the last 10-20 years that has chipped away at reproductive rights since Casey v Planned parenthood made it a free for all? Are you saying that the women who are effected by these laws shouldn't worry about it?
Also, reasoning like *this* probably hurts Bernie with a very large segment of women, FWIW.
Don't you know that rights issues can be won easy peasy?! Just like The Great and Powerful Bernie of Oz said -- the power was in the people, all along. All women have to do is click their ovaries together and reproductive rights will be theirs.
You make everything out to be so complicated. WHY DO YOU HATE PROGRESS, JEANIE?!
I am so tired of the notion that women and minorities always have to wait their turn.
Fuck you in the goddamned face, assholes. We have been birthing your motherfucking babies, handling the brunt of household shit, managing the goddamned households, feeding, clothing and caring for your babies, your shitty ass green fucking lawns, stocking your shelves, farming your land, and all manner of shit for generations.
How about for once white men wait a goddamned minute while women and minorities address the inequalities?
Especially because, while I am not one who believes that if women ruled the world it would be oh so much better (bullshit) I do believe that those inequalities are 75% what the fuck is wrong with the goddamned world, and our country in particular.
Ignorance avoidance of women's issues and race issues is keeping us all from succeeding.
Don't you know that rights issues can be won easy peasy?! Just like The Great and Powerful Bernie of Oz said -- the power was in the people, all along. All women have to do is click their ovaries together and reproductive rights will be theirs.
You make everything out to be so complicated. WHY DO YOU HATE PROGRESS, JEANIE?!
I am so tired of the notion that women and minorities always have to wait their turn.
Fuck you in the goddamned face, assholes. We have been birthing your motherfucking babies, handling the brunt of household shit, managing the goddamned households, feeding, clothing and caring for your babies, your shitty ass green fucking lawns, stocking your shelves, farming your land, and all manner of shit for generations.
How about for once white men wait a goddamned minute while women and minorities address the inequalities?
Especially because, while I am not one who believes that if women ruled the world it would be oh so much better (bullshit) I do believe that those inequalities are 75% what the fuck is wrong with the goddamned world, and our country in particular.
Ignorance avoidance of women's issues and race issues is keeping us all from succeeding.
I want to re-emphasize this point because it's an excellent one.
Can you imagine how much additional innovation there would be if all Americans (and really everyone in the world, but we're talking about the U.S. election at the moment) had true opportunities to reach their potential and succeed? There are so many amazing ideas out there that will never have a chance at being reality because racism and sexism impair opportunity.