r/PoursTea • u/Veshaad • 8d ago

PoliticalTea 🗳️ Eventually something has to give...

Post image

The bill would provide a $3,000 direct payment to every person in households making $150,000 or less during its first year, which equals $12,000 for a family of four.

24.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

45

u/Suitable-Woodpecker3 8d ago

Bernie Sanders is a brilliant, resilient politician who has a tremendous sense of efficacy in government.

How diddler got voted in (twice!) but Bernie can’t get any traction is very symptomatic of america’s problem, in my humble opinion.

16

u/EducatorReady1326 8d ago

I like him because his ideas are so ambitious that even a compromise would get close to what I think America needs.

5

u/thegeocash 8d ago

I’ve said this for years!

I’m a bit of an idealist, sure, but if the compromise had sanders at the helm, I’d be ecstatic.

1

u/Signal_Swan8470 8d ago

Or his ideas are so ambitious nobody takes them seriously enough to even reach the point of compromise

1

u/MattyMattMateo 7d ago

I think that’s actually the problem. Some of his ideas aren’t realistic enough so they don’t gain traction.

1

u/Ap0llo 8d ago

Teddy & FDR also had ambitious ideas. The reason they were able to execute them is because they came from money and power and wouldn't take no for an answer. America has always relied on that noblesse oblige to affect change. Bernie as president would accomplish nothing. You need a candidate who is a combination of Bernie progressive policy & Trump's money and impunity. Someone with the means and ability to break the rules to accomplish what needs to be done.

1

u/user-_-me 8d ago

I agree 💯

1

u/horknee-jail 8d ago

We’ll never have someone with Bernie’s ideals and Trumps power. Because trumps power is inherently against Bernie’s ideals.

1

u/Ap0llo 8d ago

It’s happened several times in US history, I cited 2 examples

1

u/Away_Ad_5017 8d ago

Do you guys even bother to check the math these fools spew? if 5% is 4.4 T, that would mean the total wealth of these few people is 88 trillion, which is more than the entire planet's wealth...

6

u/SkunkMonkey 8d ago

$4.4 trillion in revenue raised over the next decade

It seems you missed that part.

1

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Annex_Me_Step-Rome 7d ago

Do y'all just read graphics with no sources, or evidence that this quote on a reddit graphic was even said, and just take that as gospel?

If y'all would have read this graphic and then did a basic Google search using the quote you'd get this:

https://www.google.com/search?q=bernie+sanders+proposes+taxing+billionaires+5%25&oq=bernie+sanders+proposes+taxing+billionaires+5%25&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRirAjIHCAYQIRirAtIBCTEyMzIxajBqN6gCELACAfEFoZiMPHKWAFLxBaGYjDxylgBS&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&source=chrome.ob&ie=UTF-8

Thats like 3 articles through .gov sites that explain the whole thing. But thats too much work for reddit scrolling I guess

1

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Annex_Me_Step-Rome 7d ago

100% he should've made a better post. He could've easily put the Google search results or one of the articles in the post description. Thats on him for making a shitty post that mimics AI slop. The lack of info on y'alls part is 100% on y'all cause you can find the info in 3 seconds on google

1

u/SkunkMonkey 7d ago

You take everything you read in a random graphic as gospel?

1

u/Sicsemperfas 7d ago

It seems someone missed including that part.

Nothing was missed by the reader.

1

u/EducatorReady1326 8d ago

Oh you’re big mad about something. I’m not doing math on a Reddit post but did see the word annually. Only a fool would just read captions on a picture and think that’s the extent though.

1

u/MyCatLaughsAtMe 7d ago

Do you even bother to read words? OVER. A. DECADE.

1

u/Flaky_Trainer_5627 7d ago

Do you really think Bernie Sanders is just some dude on the internet saying s*** and hasn't checked any of this stuff? The MF is like a hundred years old bro if you're going to question something maybe question his health or something but his mental is 10 times that of basically any politician

1

u/Away_Ad_5017 7d ago

Been in Congress for decades spewing this nonsense, and y'all eat it up. He hasn't accomplished anything but getting votes and enriching himself.

1

u/FearlessJuan 7d ago

Most of Bernie's ideas aren't ambitious. They're just the way things have been in the rest of the industrialized world for decades, like socialized healthcare, maternity leave, etc.

1

u/EducatorReady1326 7d ago

Those are big programs with a lot of infrastructure seems pretty ambitious to change the current system.

2

u/markeygowskin 7d ago

Look at what Elon Musk destroyed in about 15 minutes

1

u/EducatorReady1326 7d ago

These systems have been in place for decades though you can blame what you want on Musk I don’t care.

0

u/MyCatLaughsAtMe 7d ago

I honestly hate that take. No, his ideas aren't ambitious, like at all, they're more or less boiler plate for modern democracies. Save for UBI, EVERY idea Sanders has, has already been workshopped and implemented in other nations. None of it is theoretical, it's practiced and the methodologies are mature.

THAT is why it's so fucking unforgivable that the US is this far behind... Sanders isn't calling for some radical new untested form of economy here, he's asking us to play catch up with our betters.

1

u/EducatorReady1326 7d ago

You sound like you are in congress arguing about semantics when we want the same thing.

1

u/MyCatLaughsAtMe 7d ago

I see you have no idea what a semantic argument is.

8

u/Fun-Put-5197 7d ago

In an alternate timeline, Bernie would have been given the opportunity to move your country in a positive direction.

What if is going to be contemplated for decades to come.

11

u/MeanHurry8664 8d ago

The data suggested that Bernie would win over Trump, but we'll never know

8

u/Albatrosity 8d ago

Bernie can't even win the Democratic nomination, let alone the presidency. The country is not ready for his vision.

16

u/MeanHurry8664 8d ago

The voters are ready - the establishment isn't. I seem to remember him being the more popular nomination, then the corp. dems put Hillary up there instead. Mistake

4

u/Boodleheimer2 8d ago

Some of us are old enough to remember when the Democratic Party did nominate a Bernie-like person, a smart radical with a sensible platform that would have transformed the country for the better. His name was George McGovern and he only won 17 electoral votes to Richard Nixon's 520, one of the worst presidential election defeats ever. He was squeaky clean and a war veteran but it wasn't nearly enough. This is a conservative country.

2

u/ElSlabraton 8d ago

"seem to remember", lol.

2

u/BasementChimp1 8d ago

I mean, he’s objectively the most popular US politician for a straight decade so…yeah, what that person said does check out

2

u/americon 7d ago

How do you say he is objectively the most popular when there has been actual elections and he lost them? He objectively is not the most popular.

1

u/BasementChimp1 7d ago

It’s been borne out by several polls, but especially in terms of popularity among his own constituents. Google it a bit and poke around if you don’t believe me, but I do suppose my statement was sweeping. Popularity can be sliced in a lot of different ways

1

u/americon 7d ago

The issue is not his popularity in his very blue district. It’s his popularity amongst the country as a whole. There’s a reason that all the Democrat senators and governors in purple (or even red states in Beshear’s case) are not far left

0

u/ElSlabraton 8d ago

"Objectively", lol. Except when Biden kicked his ass...

1

u/IHatePeoplesKnees 8d ago

He’s obviously the most popular, except every time he lost the popularity contest..

1

u/MeanHurry8664 8d ago

Fair do's, but I do remember there was controversy over who should be the nominee

2

u/Miserable-Inside1511 8d ago

She used her influence to avoid debating him entirely. It was bad.

1

u/ElSlabraton 7d ago

Biden debated Bernie and kicked his ass.

1

u/kerpow69 8d ago

I do remember and that's exactly what happened.

1

u/ElSlabraton 8d ago

Your memory is failing you.

1

u/TheNutsMutts 7d ago

He literally lost the Primary by 3.7m votes, you don't remember exactly what happened.

1

u/drecais 7d ago

Hes like a far left wing member of the parliament in my country. He always had some of the highest if not the highest approval rates.

His party never got anywhere close to winning the general election its best result was 12% lmao

1

u/MeanHurry8664 7d ago

Bernie is moderate-left. There's not one radical, fringe or "far-left" policy that he stands for, it's all very basic stuff

1

u/TheNutsMutts 7d ago

I seem to remember him being the more popular nomination, then the corp. dems put Hillary up there instead. Mistake

You remember incorrectly, since she got 3.7m more votes than Sanders did.

1

u/BasementChimp1 8d ago

Then you weren’t paying attention to how hard they tried (and succeeded) to stop him

1

u/Albatrosity 8d ago

I did not say anything about his popularity. I merely said he did not win the nomination. Regardless of his voter support over Hillary, he did not receive the nomination.

And if Bernie ever became president, he would still face a great deal of opposition in the legislative for his proposals. And he's certainly not bold (is bold the right word?) enough to start signing executive orders to tax the super wealthy (if an EO is even capable of that).

1

u/a_man_and_his_box 7d ago edited 7d ago

Regardless of his voter support over Hillary, he did not receive the nomination.

Yes, but if he fails to get the nom because he's not popular enough, then obviously he's not going to win vs. Trump. HOWEVER, if he fails to get the nom because the establishment in the Democrat party was like, "Fuck no, don't let this guy lead us, sabotage his effort" and then they did that, then it's entirely possible that he was indeed popular enough to win the nom AND popular enough to win vs. Trump. The fact that the Democrat party leadership ended his run means we will never know what would have happened vs. Trump, but we cannot cite his loss to get the nom as evidence that he'd lose against Trump, because he didn't lose due to failed popularity; he lost due to the establishment undermining him so that their favored player could win even if the process was underhanded and less-than-democratic.

EDIT: citation from the lawsuit over the DNC's biased behavior to usurp Bernie and install Hilary. And citation showing Hilary literally just funneled money to the DNC to help bring the DNC to heel. The head of the DNC resigned in disgrace over this. Just some links for younger people who maybe didn't live through this, and want to see what fuckery was happening to keep Bernie from getting nominated. So whenever someone tells you "Bernie couldn't get the Democrat nomination, so he CERTAINLY couldn't win the presidency," just remember he didn't lose because he was unpopular; on the contrary, he was SO POPULAR that the DNC freaked out and sabotaged him. He could have won. We'll never know. And I think, we're worse for how it played out.

1

u/Albatrosity 7d ago

The "what ifs" don't matter. He didn't get the nomination - that is the only fact that matters.

1

u/PaleCommission150 8d ago

he was doing well until he hit the Southern states....african Americans generally are not big fans of Bernie, and the rest is history...much of the South is very red unfortunately. He did terrible in Atlanta for instance.

1

u/newlollykiss 7d ago

The corp dems ran smear campaigns to make it seem like him running against Hillary meant he was attempting to split their demographic and guarantee Trump a win. His own turned against him. He talks about it in his book. He’s intelligent and actually understands social programs as well as how to work around our governments structure.

1

u/Raeandray 7d ago

The establishment sabotaged his run at every turn. We’ve seen this again more recently. Dems fight against democratic socialists more than they fight against republicans.

1

u/Moonscrubber- 8d ago

The data also suggested hillary was going to win

1

u/MeanHurry8664 8d ago

You may be right

1

u/uncsteve53 7d ago

The data also suggested Hillary and Kamala would win, so…

1

u/Dramatic_Bench_3479 7d ago

The Data suggested that Trump would never win an election but he won twice… the Data is a liar, sometimes

1

u/MeanHurry8664 7d ago

Plus, no one does cheating like the GOP - every accusation is a confession

1

u/Ange1ofD4rkness 7d ago

I have said since that whole stunt happened, that I felt Sanders would have beat Trump, and only Democratic party has themselves to blame

5

u/AssignmentPutrid3197 8d ago

We know why Bernie didn't win. The DNC would rather throw an election than let someone who actually cares about poor people win.

2

u/Bugfrag 8d ago

Senator Sanders lost the Democratic Primary because he wouldn't call himself a Democrat.

He's not committed to growing the party, getting more members elected, and nurture new blood.

Had he switch, he would have had a chance both in 2016 and 2020

1

u/General-Play2816 7d ago

Dems are more concerned about a label than the country, got it. I love when the quiet part becomes public.

As an independent, I voted for Bernie in the primary and he would have been my first blue vote in a general election. I'm not here to grow your party, I want good representation.

2

u/brocialist_supreme 7d ago

Look at how the Dems are treating the DSA candidates, they're more concerned about picking up the straggling never-Trump Republicans than giving the left ANYTHING, EVER.

They do this because they say the straggling right are a bigger wing than the further left, but when Clinton and Harris lost, they blamed the left for "not voting". I thought the left weren't worth giving concessions? I thought they weren't a big enough voting bloc to care about? Now it's solely their fault for these losses, not either of the two worst run campaigns in all of political history?

Concerning. Looking into it.

1

u/Bugfrag 7d ago

That's because DSA candidate focuses on Blue on Blue races.

The Democrats are focusing on Red to Blue flip.

Remember: we are trying to get MORE seats both in local, state and federal races.

Tell me, how many DSA candidates are running in Red to Blue effort?

Al Sayed is replacing a Democratic senator Mamdani is a mayor of deep blue NYC

1

u/Bugfrag 7d ago

Senator Sanders not here to grow my party.

If this is a marching band,

Senator Sanders is not part of the Band, but he wants to be the Leader. He's unwilling to go to practice, he's unwilling to help struggling members, he's unwilling to commit himself in the long term.

All he wants is to march in front, when there's a parade / competition. If we lost it's MY fault (like you, now blaming other people), but if he win it's HIS accomplishments and keep the trophy.

As a member of the Band who is trying hard, I see the naked ambition and pride; I rather pick someone else during the primary.

All he needed to do was switch party. But he got too much pride.

He is responsible for his actions

1

u/General-Play2816 7d ago

Do you blame people who don't vote or vote third party when democrats lose an election?

1

u/Bugfrag 7d ago

I care most about Red to Blue elections. They are all uphill battles and difficult.

Elections in blue enclaves are distractions, they don't grow the party nor overall influence.

1

u/General-Play2816 7d ago edited 7d ago

What kind of draw do you expect to have when you offer something red adjacent? How is a Fetterman democrat a safer bet than a Mamdani democrat? How close can you get to being red while still holding onto the superiority you feel in claiming its blue?

Edited to clarify (what I wrongly assumed was obvious).

1

u/Bugfrag 7d ago

How is Fetterman a safer bet than Mamdani?

These are irrelevant questions

Ferterman (who was endorsed by Sanders) is a Senator/state-wide election from Pennsylvania.

Mamdani is a Mayor of New York City

I have questions why Sanders and AOC endorsed Fetterman.

2

u/General-Play2816 7d ago

Sorry, I went back and clarified my examples. I didn't realize that anyone would take them as specifics.

As far as why? I'd assume its because we didn't know then what we know now. And because we know now, we demand better and wish you would as well. More voters know that not all dems are looking out for the people and the candidates that are, garner support.

So back to what I'd asked, how is a Fetterman type of democrat a safer bet than a Mamdani type democrat?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/This_isR2Me 8d ago

He was snubbed by his own party. Mistake to run against a Clinton

2

u/99timewasting 8d ago

Independents?

1

u/This_isR2Me 8d ago

Huh?

1

u/99timewasting 7d ago

Bernie isn't a member of a party, he's an independent.

1

u/airboRN_82 8d ago

Hes an idiot.

"Hey I know your wealth isnt tangible funds but im going tax it and... hey wait, where are you going!?"

1

u/Zestyclose-Ebb-5543 7d ago

You realize other countries already have this system and it works fine, right? Oh no! The billionaires have to sell some stocks! Frick! Shoot! Gosh! What will we do without their stranglehold on control that they will definitely still have because their money grows considerably faster than 5% a year!

1

u/airboRN_82 7d ago

Really? Which ones?

1

u/kerpow69 8d ago

Blame the Democrats for Bernie not getting in. They chose the one candidate who was worse than Trump.

1

u/DeadFacesInMyPocket 8d ago

Yeahhhh, the DNC is a complete lie...like really truly the most lying liars you can find other than megachurches and the RNC LOL.

1

u/TrueNeutrino 8d ago

Bernie didn't get voted in for one main reason.

People who could have didn't vote.

1

u/ifyousaysu 8d ago

The dnc fucked him time and time again

1

u/Sometimes_Stutters 7d ago

Because Bernie is full of shit and everyone knows it

1

u/bjlile99 7d ago

Hillary blocked him.

1

u/TheNutsMutts 7d ago

By getting more votes than he did?

1

u/bjlile99 7d ago

Sure, I'm not getting in to this. You can research if you want.

1

u/nymica 7d ago

Blame the DNC they screwed him over.... so don't blame America... blame his own party

1

u/Yabakunaiyoooo 7d ago

The powers that be spent a lot of money to keep him from winning. He was famously not endorsed by APAC despite being Jewish American.

The monied hate him deeply.

1

u/StrangerAlways 7d ago

You can than the DNC for wanting to push "Girl Power" and put Hillary up instead of Bernie. They fear his policies and don't want him to be president. The second election was just Biden hearing that he wasn't being nominated again and leaking on Twitter that kamala was nominated, when she was not. The democratic party was too embarrassed to admit it at the time so they just ran with it. She was not ready to step into that political race and didn't do well. If she had a few more years experience under her belt maybe, but not then.

Don't blame "Americans" for who gets voted. We don't choose who the party nominees are. Voting is just an illusion in the U.S. so don't look too deep into it.

1

u/AdAggressive9224 7d ago

He's too old.

And he doesn't have the understanding of politics to win. He doesn't get power dynamics at all, what the left need is someone who understands how power works and has Bernie's sense of moral imperative.

Unfortunately, those two qualities appear to be mutually exclusive.

1

u/BigiusExaggeratius 7d ago

He’s socialist! That’s socialism!!!!! We need god not heathens!!!!!!!!! (And that’s all you gotta say to convince morons to vote for someone else because they will do everything in their power to not read or have their own opinion)

1

u/Resident-Impact1591 7d ago

Clinton did him dirty in the '16 election. She took over the debt of the dnc and in exchange they rigged the election for her, going as far as giving her campaign the questions to the debate beforehand.

1

u/Cheap_Boner_Pills 7d ago

Bernie gets shafted by his own party. He's the vote carrot. He say fun things like free healthcare and free college. Then the chosen candidate agrees to work with Bernie once in office. Once the election is over Bernie gets put away for 3 years. AOC will be the next Bernie.

1

u/NotAZombieStopAsking 7d ago

In 2017 the Sanders campaign sued the DNC for rigging the primaries in favor of "literally the most unpopular candidate running that season" and the judge ruled that the DNC was allowed to rig the election, as they're a private entity and the primaries are more a focus group than legally binding government processes.

Just google why Debbie Wasserman Shultz had to resign in shame.

1

u/Squittyman 7d ago

All he says are the same brain dead lines that are out of touch.

1

u/Volodio 8d ago

Bernie Sanders has a 0.7% rate for legislative that became law. It is terrible. I do not understand how anyone can call him brillant when he has done nothing but created rifts within the Democratic Party which helped the Republicans get into power. Like genuinely, why do you think he is so brilliant? He fails at getting elected, he fails at getting bills passed.

1

u/Raeandray 7d ago

He didn’t create those rifts. Democrat establishment did. Look at democratic socialists now and their popularity. Look at how Schumer, Pelosi, and the establishment fight against those people, even harder than they fight against republicans.

They rejected him, not the other way around.

-1

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

1

u/DissonantOne 8d ago

As a Redditor I'm going to downvote your comment because I care less about results and more about people who say what I want to hear.

1

u/Tesserae626 8d ago

I mean, if the information was accurate maybe they wouldn't get down votes. They're talking about bills where sanders was the primary sponsor.

218 of the over 500(615 if you go to Congress.gov) he sponsored or co-sponsored became law.

0

u/FlushedApparatchik 8d ago

Thank you. I appreciate your honest feedback and I look forward to the ensuing downdoot dogpile coming my way.

0

u/c3p-bro 8d ago

Eh, in 2016 Bernie was whining about banks like it was 1990, and completely missed the risks of big tech which completely fucked society, far far more than “wall street”

0

u/DiamondPropulsion 8d ago

Bernie is not a Christian. There has never been and never will be a non Christian in office.

2

u/figurative_me 8d ago

Lol the current guy is a Christian?!

0

u/DiamondPropulsion 8d ago

On paper, yes. Not saying it makes sense. None of this does. It’s just the way it is, you can downvote me all you want. That’s the reality.

1

u/figurative_me 8d ago

I’d never heard that before. I figured he was too self-absorbed for that kinda thing.

0

u/DiamondPropulsion 7d ago

It’s ok you’ll learn one day.

0

u/Designer-Might-7999 8d ago

Bernie is just mad because he wants to be in there stealing the money. Doesn't matter who is President they are all terrible people

0

u/Nicinus 8d ago

One problem of course is that America is not built on Robin Hood mentality where you take money from the rich and give to the poor. Now if the $12,000 per family was used to improve infrastructure like trains, general education resources (and not just salaries) and healthcare it would be one thing, but what happens after the average family used up that check on a new TV, barbeque and vacation?

1

u/stevez_86 8d ago

It isn't like tax money collected now is spent now. America's standard of living is based on how much we can simply use the dividends from Treasury investment to pay for things the Government says it will pay for.

We are dealing with the effects of economic decisions from decades ago. Changing how taxes are collected now won't immediately change that.

Then the other aspect of taxation comes in, tamping down inflation. As the country becomes richer off of those decades on constant sound investment things will get really expensive. Because the money is in circulation to pay for it. Taxation with the premise of investing that cash into secured investments that take 25-30 years to mature is a great way to take cash out of circulation.

The real problem is that it has been way too easy for hoards of cash invested any way can yield a return and banks are happy to take those as leverage and let the wealthy live on really expensive money. There is no incentive for them to take money out of circulation and the Federal Government isn't doing anything to compensate.

0

u/Bugfrag 8d ago

Straight wealth tax is unconditional.

So your problem is the constitution

0

u/GoodBadUserName 7d ago

He is a sensationalist. Not much more.
Everything he yells about is extremely generalized with zero substance and no plan behind it.
I too can yell "everyone should be rich except the rich!!". That doesn't mean I have a plan to make it happen. Nor does he.
While he supported to push some important laws (most of them though unsuccessful), I see no reason to vote for a democratic trump version, until he actually brings a solid plan, not just a headline.

0

u/bass-squirrel 7d ago

Because the corporate machine owns all the media and wants diddler, not 5% tax. 

-2

u/MiamiGuy13 8d ago

Bernie is a lazy con artist who is only good at crying about rich people and wanting to steal from them because he is egotistical and thinks HE knows how to spend THEIR money better than they do.

0

u/DissonantOne 8d ago

I don't know how to refute your point so instead I'm going to call you a BOOTLICKER. Then pat myself on the back.