Jump to content

Bernie Sanders 2020 Watch

Dropout

By Dropout
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Hank Scorpio
Hank Scorpio

When Bernie is president only the rich children will be put in cages. 

Johnny Sack
Johnny Sack

Watching you commie fucks lose this election is going to be enjoyable. 

Longhorn_Fan68
Longhorn_Fan68

it is really, really stupid that in the richest country in the world people are dying from lack of insulin. it's unconscionable, really.

Posted Images

EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted

LOL

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/454682-federal-labor-complaint-filed-against-sanders-campaign

An unidentified individual this week filed an unfair labor practice complaint against Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign alleging illegal retaliation against staffers. 

The complaint, filed on Monday with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), came amid a dispute between unionized field organizers for Sanders’s campaign and its management over wages that workers say fell below the senator’s long-touted $15-an-hour standard.

While the Sanders campaign initially guaranteed its employees salaries equivalent to at least $15-an-hour, field staffers alleged that long hours had caused their wages to drop below that threshold.

That dispute was resolved on Tuesday after field organizers accepted an offer from the Sanders campaign to boost salaries to the equivalent of at least $15 an hour.

The unfair labor practice complaint mentions five alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act, including improper retaliation against employees and the unlawful discharge of a staffer. 

The full complaint has not yet been made public, but a summary of the allegations appears on the NLRB’s docket for July 22. 

The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to The Hill's request for comment. A spokesperson for the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 400, the union representing Sanders’s campaign staffers, said that the union was looking into the allegations, but declined to comment on the complaint.

Sanders’s campaign made history in March when it announced that it would become the first major presidential campaign to unionize.

The identity of the person who filed the complaint was not made public, but anyone can file a complaint with the NLRB, regardless of whether they have a direct connection to the alleged violations. The complaint will initiate a preliminary investigation by the NLRB’s branch in Indianapolis.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3265

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 7/29/2019 at 6:12 PM, EMAWesome said:

LOL

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/454682-federal-labor-complaint-filed-against-sanders-campaign

 

 

This is actually the first time Bernie has ever personally  experienced a real life labor relations issue .  He may actually learn basic business concepts 

Edited by EuroHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dropout

Dropout 355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
23 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

What's obtuse about it?    Bernie and his supporters want the Democratic Party to give him their full party support even though he's not a member.  Why wouldn't they reciprocate? 

We want their full party support sure. Let’s not pretend Bernie will ever get it. In a sense they are reciprocating that reality. The rest is up to the voters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Dropout said:

We want their full party support sure. Let’s not pretend Bernie will ever get it. In a sense they are reciprocating that reality. The rest is up to the voters.

You don't think the party will endorse Bernie if he wins the primary and is the Democratic nominee?   That doesn't make sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28777

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

What's obtuse about it?    Bernie and his supporters want the Democratic Party to give him their full party support even though he's not a member.  Why wouldn't they reciprocate? 

I know you are not Zavala or Chrispy so arguing from bad faith questions is beneath you. It's pretty fucking obvious why the DSA wants Bernie as the nominee and will not endorse a non-socialist that might win the nomination.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, F250 said:

I know you are not Zavala or Chrispy so arguing from bad faith questions is beneath you. It's pretty fucking obvious why the DSA wants Bernie as the nominee and will not endorse a non-socialist that might win the nomination.

 

 

It's not a bad faith question.   It's a good faith question that uses a manner of speaking to obviously express a point of view.   The point of view I explained in my response to you:  it seems hypocritical to me for DSA to expect the full support of the Dem party for their guy who isn't a Democrat, but not give the full support of their party for the Dem's gal should she win, simply because she's not a socialist.  I read that DSA endorsed John Kerry and Barack Obama, neither of whom professes to be a socialist, so it can't be about party or ideological purism.  And wanting Bernie as the nominee is beside the point, because we're talking about the scenario if he is not.   Why would they rule out Elizabeth Warren if she wins the Dem primary? 

 

Edited by Mojo Hand
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28777

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's not a bad faith question.   It's a good faith question that uses a manner of speaking to obviously express a point of view.   The point of view I explained in my response to you:  it seems hypocritical to me for DSA to expect the full support of the Dem party for their guy who isn't a Democrat, but not give the full support of their party for the Dem's gal should she win, simply because she's not a socialist.  I read that DSA endorsed John Kerry and Barack Obama, neither of whom professes to be a socialist, so it can't be about party or ideological purism.  And wanting Bernie as the nominee is beside the point, because we're talking about the scenario if he is not.   Why would they rule out Elizabeth Warren if she wins the Dem primary? 

 

The Democratic Party serves a utilitarian purpose to bring about a desired political outcome. These people are not loyal Democrats that will pull the lever for anyone with a D in front of their name. I think it would be hypocritical for the DSA to endorse a Biden or Harris ticket. They are gaining influence within the party, there is no reason for them to compromise.

I don't follow the DSA but I will take a wild guess and say they are in fact ideologically motivated otherwise they would just be Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, F250 said:

The Democratic Party serves a utilitarian purpose to bring about a desired political outcome. These people are not loyal Democrats that will pull the lever for anyone with a D in front of their name. I think it would be hypocritical for the DSA to endorse a Biden or Harris ticket. They are gaining influence within the party, there is no reason for them to compromise.

I don't follow the DSA but I will take a wild guess and say they are in fact ideologically motivated otherwise they would just be Democrats.

I don't have a problem with them reserving judgment depending on who the Dem nominee is, and then refusing to support Biden or Harris.  But ruling out all Dems categorically is a different thing altogether.   Warren is to the left of Obama and Kerry, who DSA endorsed, and is standing with them on MFA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dropout

Dropout 355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

You don't think the party will endorse Bernie if he wins the primary and is the Democratic nominee?   That doesn't make sense. 

Did I say that? The Democratic Party will support whoever wins their nomination. How could they not? That’s what this nomination process is about amirite? The entirety of the actual people that make up the Democratic Party as it is will never fully support Bernie Sanders.

You are creating a false equivalency to somehow cast Bernie and his followers in a bad light. It is a commonly used tactic as there isn’t anything to actually attack Bernie on. So you attach his followers and the like. I’m sure if the DSA were an actual major party and someone won their nomination they would endorse that person. Instead they are a small faction of the Democratic Party as a whole. If centrist democrats were to come out now and say they will support Bernie Sanders then you may have an argument. But as is you’re reaching.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28777

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I don't have a problem with them reserving judgment depending on who the Dem nominee is, and then refusing to support Biden or Harris.  But ruling out all Dems categorically is a different thing altogether.   Warren is to the left of Obama and Kerry, who DSA endorsed, and is standing with them on MFA. 

They haven't endorsed a Democratic candidate in the last 2 Presidential elections, this isn't a new turn of events. As to why they won't endorse Warren, I assume it has to do with her "I'm a capitalist" position.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Dropout said:

Did I say that? The Democratic Party will support whoever wins their nomination. How could they not? That’s what this nomination process is about amirite? The entirety of the actual people that make up the Democratic Party as it is will never fully support Bernie Sanders.

You are creating a false equivalency to somehow cast Bernie and his followers in a bad light. It is a commonly used tactic as there isn’t anything to actually attack Bernie on. So you attach his followers and the like. I’m sure if the DSA were an actual major party and someone won their nomination they would endorse that person. Instead they are a small faction of the Democratic Party as a whole. If centrist democrats were to come out now and say they will support Bernie Sanders then you may have an argument. But as is you’re reaching.

I'm not trying to cast anyone in a bad light.   I like Bernie; I donated to and voted for him in 2016 and would happily support him as the nominee now.   And I think the way the Dem party treated him in 2016 was a disgrace.  I've argued about that numerous times with people like Hugo, who has said that the Democratic Party was right to favor actual Dems over someone who wasn't in the party. 

I'm just disappointed to see that DSA is essentially doing the same thing by ruling out supporting Warren if she wins.  The Dems will support Bernie if he wins; why won't DSA support Liz if she does, after supporting Kerry and Obama? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I'm just disappointed to see that DSA is essentially doing the same thing by ruling out supporting Warren if she wins.  The Dems will support Bernie if he wins; why won't DSA support Liz if she does, after supporting Kerry and Obama? 

Because Bernie is a democratic socialist and Warren isn't. They're socialists. They are not going to endorse non-socialists.

When you said, "I thought he was running as a Democrat?" you were absolutely being disingenuous because implicit in that question is the idea that someone cannot be both socialist AND a Democrat. That might be Pelosi's understanding of things, but the will of the centrists and shitlibs is not law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

Because Bernie is a democratic socialist and Warren isn't. They're socialists. They are not going to endorse non-socialists.

When you said, "I thought he was running as a Democrat?" you were absolutely being disingenuous because implicit in that question is the idea that someone cannot be both socialist AND a Democrat. That might be Pelosi's understanding of things, but the will of the centrists and shitlibs is not law.

If they don't endorse non-socialists, why did I see that they endorsed Kerry and Obama?  Did that not happen? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If they don't endorse non-socialists, why did I see that they endorsed Kerry and Obama?  Did that not happen? 

Yes, they did. And they might end up endorsing Warren should she win the nomination.

I have no problem with, "We are socialists, Bernie is the socialist, and we are all-in on him."

Also, it's kind of awesome that the DSA has become so influential that anyone even thinks about them. Hell yeah.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
The Republican is VERY concerned that the DSA is going to hurt the socialist agenda.

lol

This Republican doesn't care if you and your peeps want to act like children and throw temper tantrums when you don't get your way, so long as it's on your own time and not helping the worst president in history stay in power.

 

Grow up, man-child.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted

Which of the two following groups is more responsible for the election of Donald J Trump:
1) The Democratic Socialists of America
2) Lifelong Republican voters

It's fairly obvious. The DSA is not going to help re-elect Trump no matter what they do. As much as I am impressed with their growth, they are still a virtually-nonexistent group in terms of national electoral power. They will not vote for Donald. They will not encourage others to do so.

Go talk about something you know about, my Republican-on-vacation friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
Which of the two following groups is more responsible for the election of Donald J Trump:

1) The Democratic Socialists of America

2) Lifelong Republican voters

It's fairly obvious. The DSA is not going to help re-elect Trump no matter what they do. As much as I am impressed with their growth, they are still a virtually-nonexistent group in terms of national electoral power. They will not vote for Donald. They will not encourage others to do so.

Go talk about something you know about, my Republican-on-vacation friend.

Cancer kills a lot more people than Ebola too. Doesn't mean that Ebola isn't awful.

 

19 people lost their lives today because of a hateful, vile president. And yet you and your people are so obsessed with jacking off to your own purity on the internet that you can't accept an adult concept like compromise.

 

I understand that you live in your little white bread gated community. But this stuff has consequences for real people. 19 people died today. You don't see it in your little bubble of privilege, but the people out there in the world that your gate is meant to keep out are suffering because of our president. To not endorse a Democrat, who ever it may be, because you didn't get your way, is childish.

 

Grow up, man-child. Enjoy your night.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Cancer kills a lot more people than Ebola too. Doesn't mean that Ebola isn't awful.

Unlike conservatives, the DSA isn't awful. The DSA doesn't perpetuate an ideology of deprivation, poverty, and hate like conservatives do. Conservatives (you and those like you) have spent decades entrenching the power of bigots and sowing the seeds for the nightmare of fascism you have finally opened your eyes to. The socialist agenda in the US has been fighting against everything that you supported up until 20 minutes ago.

But here you are, temporarily awaken from your stupor, with the wreckage you created all around you and whining, "Why didn't you stop me!? This is YOUR fault!"

Quote

19 people lost their lives today because of a hateful, vile president.

And how did he get to power, Republican?

Why is he waving your flag? Is it an accident? An anomaly? An unforseeable consequence of hateful white male conservatism?

One would imagine that facing Trump would give you the humility to understand that your entire political and ideological history proves that you don't know shit and should maybe sit down and listen.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dropout

Dropout 355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
25 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Cancer kills a lot more people than Ebola too. Doesn't mean that Ebola isn't awful.

 

19 people lost their lives today because of a hateful, vile president. And yet you and your people are so obsessed with jacking off to your own purity on the internet that you can't accept an adult concept like compromise.

 

I understand that you live in your little white bread gated community. But this stuff has consequences for real people. 19 people died today. You don't see it in your little bubble of privilege, but the people out there in the world that your gate is meant to keep out are suffering because of our president. To not endorse a Democrat, who ever it may be, because you didn't get your way, is childish.

 

Grow up, man-child. Enjoy your night.

 

Wtf are you talking about Brad? Start a thread connecting the DSA not endorsing a democratic nominee and the El Paso shootings. Has jack shit to do w Bernie Sanders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...