2016 Election Thread

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think I'm the only one "predicting" it here. I am merely pointing out that history shows it happens when inequality gets "too" big. I don't know I'm predicting it, but I am suggesting that some elites are thinking it could be a problem, and more should think about if it is or not.

Yep. I don't think any of us are predicting it - none of us want it to happen because of the ugly ramifications of such an event - but if things continue down this path for too long, it's almost inevitable.

 

We've seen 35+ years of overly pro-business American government. It's time for the pendulum to swing back in the other direction.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think you are raising a point that is at best tangentially related to the issue of taxing the rich. Any merger or acquisition made by google has to be approved by the SEC, no?

My point is an addendum to Ashbury's post. We shouldn't forget one simple tenet of capitalism: money begets more money begets power begets even more money.

 

Companies and people who gain too much money and power are often a detriment to the system, not a benefit... and we've been dancing with the devil far too long in this regard. Our news, devices, and services are delivered and controlled by far too few, both on personal and corporate levels.

 

Simply put, the consolidation of power has gone too far in this country (and world, as the US is not entirely unique in this regard).

[Shane Wahl]

Those with that consolidated power are not going to willingly "unconsolidate."

[mikecgrimes]

Last night felt like the end of Bush, the worse case senerio is getting better and better.  Just put this thing on Cruz control and win this thing.  I know, I know, people who aren't planning on voting Republican to begin with think he can't win.

[TheLeviathan]

I'd sooner move to Canada than see Cruz win.  What slime.

[DaveW]

I'd sooner move to Canada than see Cruz win. What slime.

 

Cruz is slime. I would leave for Canada in a heartbeat as well, I already work for a Canadian company and I like hockey. I'm halfway there already!

[formerly33]

Listening to Ted Cruz debate is like reading an Always33 game thread. He's unsure how to begin and extremely reluctant to end.

 

(That's not meant as a compliment to either party.)

[USAFChief]

Last night felt like the end of Bush, the worse case senerio is getting better and better.  Just put this thing on Cruz control and win this thing.  I know, I know, people who aren't planning on voting Republican to begin with think he can't win.

As someone who isn't planning on voting Republican, I'd be willing to concede the Republican nomination to Cruz today.

[Badsmerf]

What is it about Cruz that makes you like him? I'm very much Libertarian, so I wish Paul was as likable as Ron was. In fact, Ron Paul was probably ahead of his time. Put him in these debates and he would destroy these guys. I liked the message Rand was sending with the deficit and spending. I also think he is on the right track with his tax reform. A much more palatable plan than anything I've seen elsewhere. While Bernie Sanders wants to raise minimum wage, Rand was to eliminate a bunch of taxes that stifle growth. Its not perfect, since the rich would undoubtedly benefit more from this plan, but that is where politics comes in and would make it better. He has to try to appeal to the conservative crowd somehow right?

 

I also wish Rubio wasn't such a zealot on some issues. I think he has a good foundation with solid values, but I can't tolerate some of the ultra right conservative agenda. Him missing a bunch of votes in the Senate also bothers me. All he has to do is vote. He has a team working for him that tells him which way to vote. I have a hard time understanding why our congressmen think it is acceptable to not do the one thing we put them in office for. Plus, he skated around the question when asked about it and put the blame on someone else. That might work for some people, but he is going to have to answer to it.

 

Trump/Carson: they are on the way down. The fact both of them are leading in the polls is a perfect example of how out of touch this party and their base is. If one of them are still leading and the other option is someone like Cruz, I will vote for them just so I can see them annihilated in the presidential election. You can't vote people in that call people losers or have no problem alienating the largest religion in the world.    

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

Nate Silver thinks Bush might be done already....and he's right a lot.

[Willihammer]

I tried watching the debate, it was too painful and I had to turn it off shortly after the tax questions. Memo to Republicans. Don't get into longwinded speeches about how you're going to trim the 70,000 page tax code down to 3 pages, or how you're going to do a flat tax but oh it will probably be 15% not 10%, or maybe 28% if you want to balance the budget, and we'll have to close loopholes and apply it to capital gains to make it work... Nobody cares how you cut taxes, just cut them. That's what you're supposed to be about.

[Mike Sixel]

According to analysis, every Republican but 1 gives super easy answers......compared to the "norm" and certainly compared to the Democrats.

 

And, not everyone agrees taxes should be cut, btw.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I also wish Rubio wasn't such a zealot on some issues. I think he has a good foundation with solid values, but I can't tolerate some of the ultra right conservative agenda.

This.

 

Trump/Carson: they are on the way down. The fact both of them are leading in the polls is a perfect example of how out of touch this party and their base is. If one of them are still leading and the other option is someone like Cruz, I will vote for them just so I can see them annihilated in the presidential election. You can't vote people in that call people losers or have no problem alienating the largest religion in the world.

Also this. Trump and Carson, whether they win or not, are an indictment of the modern GOP. They're laughably bad candidates who spew dangerous ideas and in a normal environment, they'd be alongside Huckabee; radicals with 1-2% of the vote and not taken seriously by anyone.

 

Cruz is more qualified but has nearly as many bad ideas. While he wouldn't be annihilated in a general election (a la Trump or Carson), he'd lose handily to whomever the Democrats nominate.

 

Right now, I don't see a single GOP candidate with a shot to beat the Democrats. It's the inverse of the 2000/2004 elections when the Democrats nominated Boring and Somehow, Even More Boring and expected people to vote for them.

 

But hey, at least Boring is better than Crazy.

[Willihammer]

Fiorina could be a force IMO. She is candid enough and sane enough but needs to stay on point with cutting taxes and spending, and steer away from foreign policy where she is too inexperienced to sound so hawkish. She is the only one who has a prayer of beating Clinton IMO.

[TheLeviathan]

I think Rubio has a prayer if he wins the nomination and pulls a Romney where his positions suddenly look less ridiculous because he's no longer pandering to the base.  

 

Fiorina is good in debates, but her actual track record is pretty ugly.

[DaveW]

 

Fiorina could be a force IMO. She is candid enough and sane enough but needs to stay on point with cutting taxes and spending, and steer away from foreign policy where she is too inexperienced to sound so hawkish. She is the only one who has a prayer of beating Clinton IMO.

No chance IMO, she is a nut. Terrible CEO, and wants to go invade every country, she clearly is in over her head just like she was when she was CEO at HP. Hard. Pass.

[DaveW]

 

 

I think Rubio has a prayer if he wins the nomination and pulls a Romney where his positions suddenly look less ridiculous because he's no longer pandering to the base.  

 

Fiorina is good in debates, but her actual track record is pretty ugly.

Man I don't see it, Rubio is just too far off the rails for me, now he is going after China today for their "two child policy"

 

I love how he is leading the old "let's blame the liberal media durrrr" trope. That NEVER gets old and really makes a candidate look like a petulant child.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Fiorina could be a force IMO. She is candid enough and sane enough but needs to stay on point with cutting taxes and spending, and steer away from foreign policy where she is too inexperienced to sound so hawkish. She is the only one who has a prayer of beating Clinton IMO.

Eesh, no. Fiorina would be skewered in a general election.

 

Her tenure at HP wasn't just bad, it was historically awful. Good luck running as a "business first" candidate when you drove the world's largest computer manufacturer into the ground like a lawn dart.

 

Fun fact: HP stock gained $3 billion in value the day she was ousted from the company. That's how eager the market was to see her out of the position.

 

And now she wants to lead the world's wealthiest country?

 

lulz

[Willihammer]

 

Eesh, no. Fiorina would be skewered in a general election.

 

Her tenure at HP wasn't just bad, it was historically awful. Good luck running as a "business first" candidate when you drove the world's largest computer manufacturer into the ground like a lawn dart.

 

Fun fact: HP stock gained $3 billion in value the day she was ousted from the company. That's how eager the market was to see her out of the position.

 

And now she wants to lead the world's wealthiest country?

 

lulz

I wish her record at HP were better but I think many people would prefer someone with a lousy business background than one with no business background, which describes everyone else in the field except Kasich and Trump. Kasich was at Lehman Bros in 2008 and Trump has filed 4 bankruptcies and cost the taxpayer millions for personal gain. She is the best of the few options there are with respect to business acumen IMO.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I wish her record at HP were better but I think many people would prefer someone with a lousy business background than one with no business background, which describes everyone else in the field except Kasich and Trump. Kasich was at Lehman Bros in 2008 and Trump has filed 4 bankruptcies and cost the taxpayer millions for personal gain. She is the best of the few options there are with respect to business acumen IMO.

Her being the least awful out of truly horrendous options doesn't mean she should get the nomination. Fiorina is a good example of the Peter Principle. She failed running a large-scale organization. She should not receive a promotion for it.

 

I think the biggest problem with our political climate is that the people most qualified to run for office want absolutely nothing to do with political office. What sane, balanced, successful person wants anything to do with public office in the 21st century? They can quietly make their millions and do wonderful things without being dragged through the mud non-stop for four, eight, or more years.

 

As a result, we get the people who crave public power... The last people who should get the job, really.

[Willihammer]

I would be all in favor of a 1000000% pay raise for important public offices like President, to make some of that truding through the muck worthwhile and attract better candidates.

[Badsmerf]

To be honest, I thought Fiorina did a good job in the debate explaining what happened with HP. I felt a big boost when she was asked about a former board member (can't remember the name, Powers maybe) and him wanting more votes for people that make more money. She clearly separated herself from him by saying that is one example of why she disagreed with him. 

 

It is one thing to be fired. It is another if you don't accept it and learn from it. I can accept her being fired, and it seems she has grown from the experience. One failed job (your fault or not) should not define you. I question her position on tax reform a whole lot more than position as CEO. I really think shortening the tax code in the US to 3 pages is simply ludicrous. 

 

I was mildly impressed with Kasich. I think him speaking out against the irrationality is going to work in his favor if he continues to stay in the race. He has a lot of relevant experience too. Business sector and public. I think he could be a dark horse in this race. He probably is the last guy the Democrats want to see (especially since he will own Ohio... 62% approval rating).

[Mike Sixel]

Running a business is NOT a good prep for running a nation. They are not the same thing, even a little. I don't get how anyone thinks that experience being a CEO prepares someone for running a government.

 

One reason the Bush was bad is that he had no experience actually having to worry about taxation. With the taxation w/o representation world of Oil fueling ( nice, IISMS) their state, he literally had no experience trying to figure out tax and spend policies. Someone who has NEVER had to negotiate with another politician as our president? It doesn't make any sense when you really think about what the job is.

[drjim]

Seems we're all set for a Clinton 2-3 point win over Rubio. Exciting...

 

My limited hopes were that the next President would keep us out of dumb wars and not inflate a financial bubble (anything else was gravy). Doubtful we'll even get that.

[drjim]

Running a business is NOT a good prep for running a nation. They are not the same thing, even a little. I don't get how anyone thinks that experience being a CEO prepares someone for running a government.

 

One reason the Bush was bad is that he had no experience actually having to worry about taxation. With the taxation w/o representation world of Oil fueling ( nice, IISMS) their state, he literally had no experience trying to figure out tax and spend policies. Someone who has NEVER had to negotiate with another politician as our president? It doesn't make any sense when you really think about what the job is.

I think you're mistaken in the first part. Running a business is as good a prep as anything. Managing people, creating vision, making decisions. All seem like good prep for being a President.

[Willihammer]

My limited hopes were that the next President would keep us out of dumb wars and not inflate a financial bubble (anything else was gravy). Doubtful we'll even get that.

Isn't that the Fed's job? (2nd part)

[drjim]

Isn't that the Fed's job? (2nd part)

Half of it (monetary policy) and the Fed will be fine.

 

It's irresponsible fiscal policy that worries me most, likely in the form of eliminating regulations or a dedicated tax break/shield.

[TheLeviathan]

To be honest, I thought Fiorina did a good job in the debate explaining what happened with HP. ng).

Fiorina is constantly pimping her HP record and Brock is spot on: the business community felt so good about her track record the company value skyrocketed for firing her. She's also lost a lesser election already too.

 

Kasich is a good candidate. His problem is that he's too rational for the party he's running for.

[TheLeviathan]

I think a successful CEO is a good quality for someone wanting to get into politics.  But one should serve in the Senate or other places to better familiarize themselves with foreign policy issues and domestic policy.  

 

Pulling a Carson or a Trump is just absurd, as demonstrated many times by those same candidates.

[Mike Sixel]

I think you're mistaken in the first part. Running a business is as good a prep as anything. Managing people, creating vision, making decisions. All seem like good prep for being a President.

But the most important parts are the negotiations to actually get stuff done when the other side has all the power and doesn't agree with you. Bill Clinton pulled that off, Obama mostly has not.