Mar 012016
 Posted by on UTC 2016.03.01Tue at 02:57 voting :NOL1LW  Add comments

O39QCF ‘-’

  1. NYM1X1 ‘This {post & its comments}’s ‘TOU(Terms Of Use) including copyright ©, confidentiality/privacy, & info’s allowed use’ is’s default TOU(Terms Of Use) except: none
  2. NZ23L1 ‘completeness stage’ CONSTRUCTING
  3. .

    NZ3GR7 ‘name anew’

    1. O39QGC ‘‘US President 2016- election ‘‘especially what I need to know’™’: who to vote for (Bernie: #FeelTheBern!) & why :O39QGZ’ :O39QCF

  4. NYM1YF To reply & discuss, please use’s default methods (click) except: none.
  5. NYMMA7 remaining sections ‘definition’ + ‘post history additional’ + ‘comments’

  6. NYM1YV ‘definition’: ‘‘definition in ‘NOLDef’ of concept’s’ (else in ‘NOLDef’ to-be)
    1. remaining sections
    2. O3BOUU section  ‘completeness stage’ in reverse order:
      1. O3BOVD  draft 1 ~40% complete; ~90% complete on most essential
    3. O39QGZ US President 2016- election ‘‘especially what I need to know’™’: who to vote for (Bernie: #FeelTheBern!) & why :O39QGZ
      1. O39RIL all candidates prioritized (from most preferred & recommended) and why –giving the deep & core reasons
        1. O39WYM –here sorted by individual candidate regardless of his/her party, but as that here happens to place adjacent all the candidates in a given party, I’ve further grouped the results by party.
        2. O39WMB independent party candidates
          1. O39WNX –I always choose them first when practical, notably to move away from US’s only 2 practical parties, which leads to substantial corruption, notably it’s easy to buy off both
          2. O39WMP –there are none this year, however
          3. O39WR9 clearly (again) ‘Bernie Sanders :O39RJ4’ would be the obvious choice (especially given the details of that link), he being formerly always Independent and seemingly only forced to register a party in order to practically run for US President. :O39WR9
        3. O39WN8 democratic party candidate :O39WN8
          1. O39RJ4 Bernie Sanders :O39RJ4
            1. O39RUD ‘notable pros thru cons’
              1. O3BYA9 the candidate most likely by far to fix American government’s most core problems
                1. O3C0BA –best ad on this: please watch

                  1. O3C82J alerting: we’ve got a ‘rigged economy: .. most new wealth flows to the top 1% ..a system held in place by corrupt politics, where Wall Street banks & billionaires buy elections. [and] You can’t change a corrupt system by taking its money’, meaning all the other candidates really can’t fix our core problem because, unlike Bernie, they’re all being funded by billionaires. Only Bernie’s ‘campaign is funded by millions of small contributions, people like you who want to fight back. .. Join us for real change.’
                2. O3C09S as further explained by the next points
              2. O39RJY can be trusted dramatically more than any other candidate,
                1. O39RXW especially to address ‘America’s core problem :O39RN4
                2. O39RY5 because:
                  1. O39SHA where his money comes from & is spent, as  unlike any other presidential candidate that I know, now or even in the past, he …
                    1. O39RYF is the only candidate not funded by billionaires
                    2. O39SHU is the only candidate which gets not only most, but nearly all of his funding by grass-roots (meaning many small individuals (like you & me)); other candidates get far less, typically almost none, here, instead having their campaign (so vote!) paid for by the wealthy (big corporation & wealthy individuals)
                    3. O39VV8 spends frugally on himself, as normally flies coach, plus goes to Denny’s, much like today’s Pope (Francis)
                    4. O39VUX is  NOT wealthy
                  2. O39T58 he’s really politically advanced & smart, as shown by
                    1. O39T66 the ideas which increasingly many love about him, including now a sizeable fraction of the US, he’s had & followed & promoted for decades! , it’s just that people back then weren’t yet ready to see it.
                    2. O39TDD the leading competitors in the race notably copy Bernie (and never with giving him credit), including:
                      1. O39TA5 leading competitor’s Hillary’s great success (besides her just being already famous) mostly comes from copying Bernie, detailed at O39SYQ
                      2. O39TFW even top competitor Trump copies Bernie plans, else has notably similar plans, on healthcare, though always falsely denies this when called on it.
                  3. O39W1D nobody, not even Republicans, seem to question his honesty & sincerity & caring, & related trustworthiness
                  4. O39W1W quite unlike many people especially politicians, he publicly apologies when he is wrong (notably the case when one of his staffers got into Hillary’s data),
              3. O39S1L more than any other candidate, has the best agenda in the eyes of those you would be wise to trust, and goes the farthest with it
                1. O39S7X notably in the eyes of the smartest people who are also the most caring about their fellow humans, not just caring of {themselves & their immediate friends & family or their unscientific ideology}
                2. O39TRM with top issues of, from roughly biggest first:
                  1. O39SRA income inequality,  including
                    1. O39SSN as that’s the top thing by far which corrupts our politics & government
                    2. O39SQ2 seeks the highest minimum wage: $15/hr.
                      1. O39TMA –same as the US cities top here (with the notably highest minimum wage): Seattle & now Los Angeles.
                      2. O39TM0 In noted contrast, Hilary comes 2nd at $12, and all Republican candidates seem to avoid talk of increasing minimum wage.
                    3. O39TQ9 nearly all other of his top issues also notably help reduce income inequality
                  2. O39TTP getting corruption, both illegal & even legal, out of our government
                    1. O39TUV including
                      1. O39TPR campaign finance reform is a top issue
                  3. O39TVP the best education for all Americans: by far the most progressive here.
                    1. O39TW3 seeks free bachelors/4-year degree for every American
                      1. O39TXB In noted contrast, Hilary comes in 2nd with just wanting to make student loans & tuition cheaper. Others, as Trump, want to cut the Dept. of Education entirely.
                  4. O39TYW the best healthcare for all Americans, including
                    1. O39TZJ free healthcare (so socialized medicine) for all Americans
                      1. O39U4D by simply expanding Medicare to cover all.
                      2. O39U0Q In noted contrast, no other candidate is offering free healthcare to all Americans
                        1. O39U30 Hilary just wants to improve existing Obamacare in unspecified ways.
                        2. O39U3C Trump emphatically wants to offer free healthcare to only homeless people, but the details he’s vague on when questioned verbally.
                    2. O39U79 paid ‘family leave’ to employees
                  5. O39U8F best war policies, including
                    1. O39U8X most stopping of America’s militarily policing the world, notably getting into wars which are needless, extremely costly, & now-continual
                      1. O39UAQ including only candidate (with the bravery to) vote against the Iraq war (a war for faked reasons, and which then created ISIL probably by design)
                      2. O39UCM also effectively voted against the terrible Vietnam war, by as best he could then: registering as a conscious objector to such wars.
                  6. O39UGP most protective of the environment…
                    1. O39UHF though Hilary would probably be very close, except she took several months before also following Bernie’s lead and disfavoring the Keystone Pipeline.
                3. O39UXX neutral
                4. O39UY8 O39UY8: seems to be so focused on certain things, indeed the most needed things, that the other President issues might not get enough of his attention, and being US president is a extremely broad job
                  1. O39V3J to the appearance degree that he’s been cruel & incorrectly called ‘mono-focused’ by Hilary
                  2. O39V54 but
                    1. O39V8O the US president job has a very large support staff
                    2. O39V8U US presidents in the past have done far worse, as tuned out of their core & even whole job entirely, as for long & many vexations and  even at critical moments (as 9/11), things President Bush junior was infamous for, yet still the country drove on.
            2. O3C11P the feeling of the people supporting Bernie Sanders is captured by this artistically wonderful ad

            3. O3C6ST please do ‘‘‘best supporting Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign ..’.. :O3BVTN
          2. O39SFQ Hilary Clinton :O39SFQ
            1. O39SYE ‘notable pros thru cons’
              1. O39SYQ not always but generally good, but notably & obviously because, for ~10 years now(!), she slowly eventually copies what ‘Bernie Sanders :O39RJ4’ does :O39SYQ
                1. O39UJH but, even though her copying is obvious & serious to anyone who follows Bernie, she never admits she is copying him –very bad IMHO, even if few others have the integrity to do this, what she does here is still IP theft thru lack of attribution, in the vein of  plagiarizing
              2. O39UO1 she would make the 1st woman US president, but realize that seeming virtue backfires if she’s not as least as good as any other candidate, and especially if her presidency turns out to be not outstanding just so or worse.
              3. O39VGC has years of experience in/around white house, especially from formerly running for US president & then becoming Secretary of State, but that is not so great and may be even a bad indicator, as
                1. O39VIR as Secretary didn’t accomplish anything I heard of, remarkably in contrast to her campaign competitor Obama.
                2. O39VL0 may be too entrenched in bad white-house operating procedures, as O39USP would suggest.
              4. O39URE –neutral —
              5. O39UVJ does not seem fully trust-able, including, from increasing worse
                1. O39USP once was precious & very very good, notably when she proposed & fought for essentially Obamacare about 10 years before that happened, but it seems from being shot down there she’s gotten cynical & embittered, so this now turns into a negative. :O39USP
                2. O39WGW she lacks feeling warm, for instance is often criticized not to be smiling & “chill”, which can be written off as just aesthetic but is indeed probably indicative of internal bitterness or/and excessive ego.
                3. O39VO1 her email handling, as she…
                  1. O39VRA she is under FBI investigation for it, IMHO deservedly
                  2. O39VOM she took ~1 year of accusation before she apologized any
                  3. O39VQW she has never admitted what she would well know: what she did sneaky gave her a serious competitive advantage in office: to be able to censor her every email before it ever is known to the rest of the world
                    1. O39WEI something the republican politicians don’t seem smart enough to exactly call her on, but which I clearly being an IT & info-security expert.
                    2. O39WBS something so major in modern times, Chris Christy  & Gen. Petraus would have loved that, as it would have saved both of them from their top downfall.
          3. O39X5O republican party candidates
            1. O3BZO7 overall
              1. O3BZOJ ‘notable pros thru cons’
                1. neutral
                2. O3BZP9 seemingly all of them trash including negatively lie about seemingly all accomplishments of the present presidency
            2. O39X68 John Kasich
            3. O39X97 Ted Cruz
            4. O39X75 Ben Carson
              1. O3C05F ‘notable pros thru cons’
                1. O3C05P appears too {soft-spoken and/or slow and/or dumb}
            5. O3BZLD Marco Rubio
              1. O3BZLT ‘notable pros thru cons’
                1. O3BZM6 good & indeed seeming-best candidate at appropriately & publicly  putting down Trump
                2. –neutral
                3. O3BZNV as TRMS pointed out, severe misleading, effectively lying, on US dealing with Iran, by mis-claiming
                  1. O3BZV5 failure of present presidency (!)
                  2. O3BZVE thru clever misleads, success of Ronald Reagan (!  — a guy not all bad, but who, on Iran, who constitutionally & morally deserved impeachment: Iran Contra scandal)
                4. O3C00D seemingly favored by big money as the electable candidate who is most {buy-able, meaning controllable by them}
            6. O3BTC1 Chris Christie
              1. O3BTCY ‘notable pros thru cons’
                1. O3BTNS governed a significant blue state (NJ) passably except for a few scandals especially O3BTEJ
                2. O3BTFO neutral–
                3. O3BTD8 bad quality (because offset by bad intention-ed): smart
                4. O3BTEJ Bridge-gate, costing the effect of 1 or 2 lives, was sleaze & almost certainly his doing :O3BTEJ
                5. O3BTFZ after his dropping out, his then endorsing Donald Trump is blatant total hypocrisy based on all prior he says, by 10s of clips showing so in TRMS 2016.02.26Fri, IMHO revealing clearer than anything he’s a spineless rat trying to leach on to whomever appears the lead, and meanwhile will claim complete opposites.
            7. O39XBB Donald Trump
              1. O39XBP overview
                1. O39XC1 Has some big notable positives, which could make him a great candidate, possibly even approaching the ‘democratic party candidates :O39WN8’, if it weren’t his even bigger indeed huge negatives, which then drop him down to bottom.
              2. O39XJV ‘notable pros thru cons’
                1. O39XK6 neutral
                2. O39XKF serious NPD(Narcissistic Personality Disorder) which
                  1. O39XU0 is by my diagnosis –realize I’m not a psychologist but readily could be.
                  2. O39XPV NPD many uneducated & timid people mistake for very confidence & intelligence, when it’s typically the reverse
                  3. O39XMV from increasing worse
                    1. O39XYV has led him to use as his campaign slogan ‘Make America Great Again’, which is drippy wrongfully insulting to not only America’s present leaders but to all present America.
                    2. O39Y24 has led him to go as far as break the constitution by
                      1. O39Y2U demanding use of torturous methods to get info (as reported by Hayden in latest Bill Maher Real Time)
                      2. O39Y38 calling for the ban of Muslims from {immigrating & even returning} to America
                    3. O39XNE IMHO has a fair chance of leading him to get America into, & even start, World War 3
      2. O39QY5 I cover in {abbreviated & table form} in {my spreadsheet table /3757#MCYFVR} rows O0P2A2 thru O39R26, which
        1. O39R63 alert:  is probably hard to read for many due to spreadsheet limitations
        2. O39RBW for every candidate,
          1. O39R7J ranks indeed numerically scores him/her in my usual column for that ‘MCXDAN .. Destiny Chosen Option’
          2. O39RCU gives his/her candidacy Wikipedia page in the usual column for that ‘MD21TX .. Wikipedia Entry’
          3. O39RGF gives his/her replacement if & when leaving race, in the usual column for that ‘O245ZK ..Replacement notably when ends race’
            1. O39RGQ note a candidate’s name is in bold only iff s/he still running
    4. O39RN4 America’s core problem :O39RN4
      1. O39RQN is Financial inequality including the government to be illegally & legally corrupt
    5. O2YROS inspired by a SMS discussion of recommending Bernie to Edgar :O2YROS
      1. O2YS2N Bernie: a draft dodger? Or really effectively a war hero.
        1. O2YSAX ‘..Edgar..:
          1. O2YRZW Yep. But as a soldier i cannot respect a presidential candidate that went out of his way to avoid military duty. 12:39 PM
          2. O2YS1B Obama is lot of things…..but of all the negative things we’ve seen and heard…draft dodger wasn’t one of them 12:39 PM
          3. O2YS1P That means a lot when military lives are at stake….how can a troop respect a commander in chief that did that? 12:41 PM’
        2. O2YSCQ ‘Me:
          1. O2YS9Y Let me start first with what you shared that seemingly most upsets you about Bennie, as indeed if that’s not resolved, you probably wouldn’t want to hear any more of him. You suggest & were quite upset Bernie was ‘a draft dodger’ -glad u say your concern. Indeed that wd be some concern for me, too, even if I hadn’t done 9yrs in the military. So after u told me I did a Google search, & from it, wow! Quick find: Is it possible u got mislead by right-wing media? As they circulated that “news” but, as I’ve seen sadly common in today’s right-wing media, that’s false & construed, in fact easily shown so: -news anyone could get from Google or just Bernie’s Wikipedia entry ‘In addition to his civil rights activism,.. Sanders applied for conscientious objector status during the Vietnam War ..’. ‘dodging‘ is false & construed because in this context ‘dodging’ would imply breaking the law or at least morally abusing some legal gap; but Bernie did not break any law nor abuse any loophole: as was every young man’s right, he filed as conscious objector, AND IN A TIME when war as defined by the US was obviously & brutally wrong: the depths of Vietnam for godsakes. If I was him then, I would have done the same thing. 9:50 PM
          2. O2YSEK But times had changed since then (or at least I thought), so I trusted that US would learn from its Vietnam lesson, indeed President Bush over & over said ‘Iraq would NOT be another Vietnam’, so I joined the military 9 years, from E1 to E5 to O1 to O2 as u may recall; but before I even made E5, congress right away sent me (& u?) to war waged again on lies, and again to get big biz rich, indeed this time even for the riches of the US VP (Dick Cheney, as major owner of Halliburton): so I & all my fellow solders were, no, not sent ‘a war to seize WMD’ as Bush told everyone, there were NO WMDs as we know the leaders already knew, but rather to have US & Iraq soldiers & Iraq civilians bleed & die, literally have ½ million people die, plus now the rise of ISIS, for oil & obscene profits of US military contractors! And contractors we personally saw, as they daily plagued me & me fellow solders (we being the leading supply unit) like vultures until all us solders got kicked out & sent home with our tails between our legs so they could steal our supply mission, apparently from their framing us! 9:55 PM
          3. O2YSFO Still I am NOT against the need to do war & military action …IF truly called for; indeed every few weeks strongly I encourage young folk I run into to also join the US military as I did in the many cases I could see it could help them, notably to get our military’s top training, plus a rite of passage American society otherwise painfully lacks. But any US citizen wanting to register Conscious Objector because US wars (indeed since WW2) have a history of being disgraceful, I give full support. -As how could I lie to anyone that the US wars I and plenty more US soldiers were & are sent to usually sent to are justified? -especially when it’s that’s so seriously & now obviously false that …now for years most US soldiers are killed NOT by some foreign enemy but by their own suicide! -no doubt heavily because they can increasingly well see, probably thanks especially to the web & social media, that the wars they & their fellow soldiers are called to fight are actually typically for immoral, selfish, & disgusting reasons; and who would want to live with causing such shame? 10:14 PM
        3. O2YSHF ‘Edgar : ..  and as far people having a conscience on war… problem…i welcome it….so long as you’re not position to send others into danger where you dared not go……senate….fine….but not the white house….. 10:20 PM’
        4. O2YSK4 ‘Me: ’ (draft unsent)
          1. O2YSKV So I ask you, which is worse? (1) A person as Bernie who chooses legally not to fight war if it’s so stupid & hurtful? –indeed when the war later IS clearly shown & admitted to indeed by very wrong. (So, in the final result, that act is arguably honorable, indeed ‘early political activism’ as Wikipedia classifies it). Or is worse (2) any person, including so military as being a former 4 star general, BUT who sends thousands of, indeed here ½ million, people to their death mostly needlessly, well except for perhaps the common reasons: international “ “ (zealot nationalism) & especially for big biz profits, including (as happened) to create a replacement enemies (now ISIS) so we can have excuse to have endless more such wars. Obviously that’s much worse. So the core concern should not be if this one person or that goes to war, but should this and all such wars even be happening –where since WW2 the general answer is generally steadily No.
          2. O2YSNA And when it comes to that, the big question “should US go to war.. again?”, well Bernie is the only presidential candidate (to have the foresight & especially guts) to vote No on that, what is now admitted a very wrong war (Iraq), a decision that could have saved ½ million peoples lives. Wouldn’t that be “a little” more important, including to even ur & my lives as soldiers? So what I see is no draft dodger but the Paul Revere call we should have listened to: What I see is a guy who, legally voted NO, both times by the means he was given, against 2 big wrong wars (Vietnam then Iraq) that needlessly cost in the order of a million lives including ~100K now dead US soldiers, and at a time when few had such guts to speak up. So by the facts, actually Bernie is a guy, had we had the smarts to listen to him when so many others were misleading us, nearly 1 million people including 100K US soldiers would probably still be alive today! If anything I call THAT being the real solider: someone who, if we would have only heeded, would have saved a million lives.
      2. O2YSP3 other (Me) (draft unsent)
        1. O2YSPG You say Bernie ‘made some comical statements that have had [me] scratching my head’ –naturally a concern. What are you referring to?
        2. O2YSQC You say ‘Black and Latino voters are gullible enough that..’ this is readily labeled as racist. To be non-racist, how about rephrasing to say ‘It appears significant uneducated people are gullible enough that.. And polls show in US Latinos & blacks tend to be less educated than white.’
      3. O2YSRA on the problem of today’s US govt, by ‘Me’ draft unsent
        1. O2YSS7 You say ‘they believe that the democrats [politicians] care’ –many do, and indeed there are even some, possibly many, republican politicians who care, too; the question is how much to they care more or/and get-manipulated-by {special interests aka lobbyists & PACs aka lobbying}. –this portion of the US government, often not talked about by the politicians (likely because their voters to know how much instead these lobbyists & PACs actually rule them) IS, IN A WORD (lobbyists & PACs), THE APPARENT CORE PROBLEM WITH THE US GOVT TODAY. So I reply much more on that below.
        2. O2YSTE U write Democrat politicians ‘keeping the minority voters dependent on government. … another form of slavery’ -sounds bad & fancy, but actually what exactly are u saying? -Do you mean having not ‘minority’ but substantial people dependent on govt benefits? -as healthcare which _everyone_ needs, and which Europeans & Canadians already get for free? -Or do you u & me were paid for our military jobs? 😉
        3. O2YSU8 Your IMHO biggest point: govt spending (ur last point) and national debit. Most core you say ‘all [democrat politicians] represent to me is more..DEBT’; well the republican politicians certainly would like everyone to believe this, and that instead republicans are for cutting taxes. But
          1. O2YU60 BIG NEWS:
            1. O2YU9B look at the real data:
              1. O2YU70 Did u know per legit chart and the next, that debit increase/decrease doesn’t seem better under _either_ party’s rule? –thus the numbers show republican politicians don’t actually seem better here than dems –despite they always claiming they do!; nor do dems perform better.
              2. O2YU7D And per legit chart , it appears, despite what rep politicians like to famously say they _don’t_ do, US taxation has actually decreased under Democrat pres & increased under republican pres … though the diffs don’t seem big, so really neither party is doing well.
              3. O2YU7P These unbiased charts show republican politicians regular claims {they will cut debit & taxes whereas democrats won’t} is actually historically false, and in fact that dems are sometimes are slightly better on taxes, overall neither party is substantially helping.
            2. O2YTDF Also, possibly less based on hard facts but still indicative, I Google ‘Searched for taxes & debt were raised higher in republican presidencies   [2016.02.20SatPst] 2:45pm’ finding {page 1, so 1st 10 results} are full on this topic
              1. O2YU2Y with result #1 being this 2010.07.06 FB post, more readably here, which similarly concludes ‘While it is a great sound bite, the facts show that the Republican “tax and spend” rhetoric about Democrats is not based on the facts.’ and continues going even further to say ‘The facts do show that it takes a Democratic President to control and reduce spending. The truth is that the Republicans are the party of “borrow and spend”…’
                1. O2YUGS aside: quotes an article which is unfortunately offline, including article source not in*/
          2. O2YTD0 Why? Again it seems lobbyists, the tinkers u don’t normally hear about; so again more on that below.
        4. O2YSVC U write: ‘Wanna give voters “free” thingz….then fine…pay off our debt …..balance the budget. ….then with the surplus and only then …provide public assistance’ -that of course sounds good on the surface, but what about the details? Most notably, the US is most & hugely indebted to China BUT is unlikely & unwise for the Chinese to pull out, indeed ‘America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors‘ -as detailed by & its section. So given that, we would apparently be wise to instead use this fine loan for stuff we need -stuff which will really need now & especially that will pay us back from investing…
        5. O2YSWG Take heath care. Everyone needs it; so no surprise US has always tried commercialize it and (since someone’s life is on the line) there’s huge money spent & made there. But still everyone needs it, so what would it cost to give it away free? -Unthinkable, right? Huge money, right? No, actually more likely to save us big money! For here’s the facts typical Republican politicians (lobbied by the US healthcare industry) DON’T want u to know: established countries as Canada & Europe who provide healthcare free universally typically provide better care than US does and for 1/3rd the cost! (source: Bernie & Sicko & others). So then how about {universal health care,_2016#Health_care } –that should actually help us _reduce_ our debit! (But do of course expect the big healthcare biz to be very mad so tell u the reverse.)
        6. O2YSXG So then if we’re _saving_ money via better healthcare, what else wisely spend our the national loan on? How about as affordable college & esp. free college education for all Americans …now that in our info world HS degree is no longer generally good enough for the good jobs -which is notably being pushed by Bernie,_2016#Tuition-free_public_universities . And again, just like healthcare, since everyone needs education, we can likely cut the costs there too by getting rid of the de-constructive profiteering completion. Plus just like good affordable a college loan, get America college degrees, then America makes more money, and then also pays off that ed loan! -so, unlike many a Rep politician will tell u, instead of raising the national debit from better public service, we lower it. (But do expect college & college loan profiteers to be real med so tell u the reverse.) See a pattern?
        7. O2YSZ4 Still, say we still have more expenses and especially national debit. Indeed again back to your biggest point: why is the US in so much debit in the first place? Well to get back to that,
          1. O2YUS1 as we see from the core stats above, Republicans don’t do any better than Dems at reducing the debt;
            1. O2YUSR which appears to me well explained:
              1. O2YUUP notably because the US lack of {campaign finance reform,_2016#Campaign_finance },
              2. O2YUV7 both parties are being bought off by special interests as Kochs as I shared earlier, notably to get politicians to favor the big biz & { wealthy,_2016#Income_and_wealth_inequality } to notably
                1. O2YUZH favor them undeserved & obscenely priced government contracts esp. war profiteering,
                2. O2YUZU keep the loop holes & cut their taxes below anyone else, and
                3. O2YV04 keep them unregulated including even just to protect our environment.
          2. O2YUX8 Well stop all this abuse of government, get the wealthy to again pay their share, and then it would seem our national debit would be gone!
            1. O2YUY9 And dems and even few rep candidates have dared to propose doing this in their campaigns; BUT their campaigns are still being funded by the billionaires, so do they do they really do it when they actually get elected? -Of course not!
            2. O2YUYI But Bernie is first presidential candidate who is NOT funded by the billionaires (& ‘refuse [billionaire] money as well’ adds giving full detail, plus more at,_2016#Fundraising & ); so unlike all other candidates, Bernie uniquely CAN be trusted to not have alternator motives And after decades of candidates promising all sorts of good but, due to this big secret money, not actually doing it, that makes all the difference.
      4. O3BNYZ section location: ‘2016.02.20Sat :O2YRO8’ kid 1 originally thru now, now fwd. O3BO1Q

  7. (for this post) my ‘motivation’ (and, TBA, its achievement)

  8. ‘success of this’
  9. NZ3KAG ‘annex’
  10. NYWZWX ‘so post category’
    1. O3BO7F ‘voting NOL1LW’
  11. NYM1ZP ‘post history additional’: ‘‘post history additional’ ‘in reverse start order’:’
    1. O3CA2V {post.status.snapshot{;date2016.02.29MonPst1856‘;after ID ’minutes 16 since Pst1840‘;revision ’1‘;version0‘;words ’4698‘;as ’need to get something published before ‘Super Tuesday, which is 2016.03.01Tue :O3BWY1’‘;do ’{updates all manually noted} {everything is new} + {completed small updates thru {none}} + then NY0WO6 with 191 replacements then {got rid of nbsp ‘ ’: 263~ replacements}, Publish 1t then continue editing‘}}’
    2. O39Q7K {post.status.snapshot: date2016.02.28FriPst0939‘;after ID’ minutes 4 since pst0935‘;revision ’1‘;version0‘;words ’~300‘ ;as ’need a proper place to put this, notably to do {move none as fresh}’; do ’following NXBIBI with {{template plus no source text} last {addition if known else history entry} /5415#O37PZI ~ (post 1st-latest and {related: no}), create {this ‘document’  }‘}’.
  12. NYMK00 comments next & elsewhere, per reply instructions.