Comments by "Clint Holmes" (@clintholmes2061) on "Bernie Sanders Comes Out SWINGING at Debate....and Supporters LOVE IT" video.

@jesusf.2600 Sanders should pick Nina Turner... someone who doing the right thing by supporting him for president and isn't splitting the progressive vote.
4
@TheMisfitPond All substance? Hardly. The questions were terrible and the candidates aren't allowed to say anything that is too long for a bumper sticker.
2
@TheMisfitPond Regarding, "I don’t like the fact that they frame the questions horribly" Good. You shouldn't. But don't underestimate how important and how bad this is. The corporate media is doing everything they can to use right wing talking points to frame every issue. They also do shit like trying to pit people against one another rather than trying to educate viewers on their positions. Regarding, "give so much time to a bunch of candidates nobody cares about." I'm actually of the principled belief that all candidates should be given similar amounts of time assuming they have earned their right to be at the debate. I'm also for having lots of voices being given the right to talk, especially when we are still this far out. I'm actually pissed that Mike Gravel was not allowed to debate and I'm pissed that 3rd party candidates are not allowed to debate during the general. Or political system is better and better served by allowing more inclusion. Regarding, "But considering the circumstances, Bernie did an excellent job at being substantive and quippy with his answers." Considering the fact that the format is god awful Bernie did fucking great and I'm very, very, very happy about it. It would just be nice if he didn't have to take loaded questions and if he were allowed to speak for longer on incredibly important topics.... and for others as well. Just because he did great doesn't mean the format is better than it is. Regarding, "politics also requires you to fire back in gimmicky ways if you want to reach more people." But it shouldn't be specifically designed to make this more important than the substance. How many times do the moderators cut people off when they have things they want to say? Let them speak for fucks sake. But take that time in account. If someone wants to run over the time let them but then skip the next question that might have gone to them and even out the time in that way.
2
@TheMisfitPond I'm not saying there is zero substance but I am saying that it is mostly theater. Take the closing statements. It's like they are actors reading lines. I love Bernie and he did great but it would have been better had he been allowed to talk for longer stretches of time. The topics they are trying to talk about can't be broken down into sound bites. And because they aren't given the proper amounts of time to talk it does just become about shit like "I wrote the damn bill." I love Sanders and loved that he scored this "point." But it shouldn't be about scoring points. It should be about debating ideas and that takes more time than they are given. The format is innately terrible and that's WHY it's that way. They can't let the public actually get informed.
1
@TheMisfitPond Forgive me for nitpicking and don't take this to mean that I don't think we are on the same team but I have no doubt that we are. I do tend to only focus on areas that I disagree. With that in mind... Regarding, " I don’t think they have all necessarily earned their right to be there." As for what "earned" means this is very subjective. I definitely don't think it means, they are a progressive even if I personally am a progressive and want those ideas center stage. It is arguably a good thing that some corporate dems are their to be punching bags and to give viewers some perspective on what the differences are. Regarding, "Most of them are only there because they sold out to corporate america." Yup. Mayor Pete is a great example of this. He's super young with little record and that record isn't good but corporate media loves him and are happy to talk about him. He is a prime example of a manufacturing consent for a candidate. Compare that to Bernie in 2016 when Ed Shultz was told NOT to cover him announcing his running. Regarding, "bernie, Warren and marrianne lol" Bernie is the man and clear choice. Warren has openly admitted that if she makes the general she will happily take legalized bribes. Their is a reason why the corporate media and wall street seem to be warming to her and those reasons are not good for true progressives. Marrianne is a decent person but the first thing she said about universal health care was ATROCIOUS. That and I think that a person should have at least some experience in politics before running for the highest political office in the land. I need a record or I have no good way to know if I'm dealing with (and this is hypothetical and not meant to be a definitive statement) a snake oil saleswomen who is only looking to increase their brand awareness and sell books.
1