Will Bernie Sanders Be Assassinated If Elected?

I think he will be. He will have two choices abandon his whole philosophy or end up like Kennedy. He's in his 70's it would not be hard to make it look like natural causes. He never really had power before he's always been a fringe candidate in one state. Compared to the power of Washington he was insignificant. But now despite the media working hard to discredit him and despite the lack of wealthy donors he is getting popular. There are people above the president he is just a figure head similar to the Queen of England. Although the Queen herself has more power then she lets on and is in cahoots with the people above the president I am talking about her role that is portrayed to the public. It's just too dangerous to let him in the white house. He will ruin the whole system the elite have in place.

There would massive gridlock worse then we saw with Obama to try to stop it. Even if we assume there would be no assassination this gridlock will be used to make him look incompetent just as it was used with Obama. But Obama had the support of the elite. Imagine how much worse it would get. But even if leaves office and another big money candidate is put in his place the seed has been planed with the people. It would harder to get them to swallow the system as it is now. Just like 1984 pointed out the under class outnumber these elite and if they ever truly understood their power the elite would loose all control.

 

First, a person does not get anywhere near the office of president unless they have been selected and vetted beforehand. Even if the voters did get to decide, the two choices they have are authorized in advance. Presidents are just figureheads anyway.

But regardless, I don't see why Bernie Sanders would be perceived as a threat to the system. He is a big government socialist type politician who would really be pushing for more of the same thing but using different rhetoric. I can see how some of the things he says may appeal to certain people on the surface, but I have not heard him address any real issues or offer any real solutions to the system itself, which he is part of since he is a career politician.

I don't see him being elected, though. Or selected for that matter.

 

I remember how people feared the same about Obama. Everyone was certain that "The Klan" would certainly take him out. Which just goes to show how little people understand that group. The KKK already feels totally abandoned by the country and wouldn't lift a finger to "help" the current US government in any way. And making a martyr of Obama would not have served their agenda.

Sanders is a puzzle. At first he's an unashamed socialist from a state that rivals any deep south backwater in sophistication and like Rat said, he'd likely just expand government and bring even more of it into our daily lives. I'm personally getting tired of regulations upon regulations being levied against us in what seems like nothing more than turnip squeezing. But more recently I have heard Sanders gab on about the immigration issue as if he lifted a few cheat sheets from Trump while his back was turned.

I never considered Trump to be a "real" republican and I sure don't see Sanders as a "real" democrat. The two of them are just plain perplexing, but offer a charismatic message. And as we know all too well, Americans vote for the shiny, flashy, loud toys in the box. Issues take a back seat to showmanship.

 

well obama hasn't been, although i'd almost swear some of the compromises he's had to make might have been to avoid being.
people who would expect the assasination of a president or prime minister to radically change a government, really don't very well understand how parlimentry government works.

do i really believe bernie, or anyone else, wouldn't make major concessions once they were sworn in? i suppose its not impossible, but i've yet to see any president in my life time who hasn't.
(and yes, i was two years old when eisenhour was elected).

 

it would be easier to discredit him. JFK had a lot of political power, Bernie doesn't carry the same clout. . Its too easy to paint Bernie as an old, incompetent bumbling socialist and turn everyone against him.

 

and trump as a loose nut with more money then good sense, but a bernie vs trump general election, might at least, as jetstoned suggested, draw a crowd of interested spectators.

hillary, well there can't be a second of everything without being a first, but you know, the clintons have this 'business solutions' thing, which is so much same old, and of course the republicans, i don't see how, in their current situation can come up with anything but worse, so the thing is, bernie is a real thing, and he represents where more people then media wants us to think, are coming from.

so the only real contest is between him and hillary. and until that's decided, the republicans won't know which way to smear.

 

I worked to help get Obama elected the first time. And let me tell you... campaigning for him in the frikken' Ozarks was NOT an easy task. But, I believed in him.... drank the all the kool-aid and then asked for more. He is a brilliant orator. Reminiscent of Barbara Jordan's 'Who then will speak for the common good?" speech.

Disappointment has reigned practically since day one of Obama's presidency. I now consider myself an independent.

I'd like to believe in Sanders.. and I'll probably vote for him, if given the opportunity. But, I'm done with kool-aid.

Hillary.. doll, I know it's supposed to be your turn and all that but NOPE.

 

i think it would be very good democratic stratigy, to keep the republicans guessing, until the very last vote of the nomination, whether it will be hillary or burnie.
for the first woman president, i would rather see jill or liz.
as for who's likely to sponser an assination attempt, no i wouldn't expect it to be the klan, either, i don't think they'd have the guts to expose themselves to that much public hubris,
more likely the american legislative exchange council, or the national (corporate) chamber of commerce.
it is the interests of money, more then those of hate, which would see themselves as have the most to loose.
but either better sense will prevail, then anyone assisnating anyone, or all bets would be off anyway.
whoever gets in, will be forced to make compromises, just like everyone who ever has. that's just the way the system works.
we can only hope to elect people who share some of our interests,
not find guarantees of furthering them.
kennidy wasn't shot for trying to defuse racial animosity, he was shot for trying to defuse mccarthyism.
and so yes, the same forces of IDEOLOGICAL prejudice and fanatacism, would like to see a saunders presidency cut short,
but the congressional constipation has been far more effective in opposing obama, then any attempt to assisnate him would have been.
i don't see the forces of so called political conservatism, likely adopting a different stratigy with bernie or hillary.