2016 Election Thread

[Shane Wahl]

Going back to not reading this thread again!

[PseudoSABR]

 

Looks like a normal teenage reacting to a parent trying to hug/kiss them in public.

 

It's a funny gif, and Cruz is a scumbag, but it's annoying how people are trying to make this a bigger thing then it is (reported all over the place etc).

Oh, I know.  I did frame the link neutrally after all.  

 

Though, she does somehow capture my sentiment - in that mean school yard kind of way that Cruz seems to be made of.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I would end everything else I was doing to make damn sure that latter pair won.

I hope we'd all be right there with you.  I think the American public isn't the suckers people take them for...

[mikecgrimes]

 

I know you think that Trump is a super secret Democrat and all, but why do you just blindly assume Cruz would get all of Carson's support? Trump and Carson are closer to each other than Carson and Cruz.

 

People like Carson because he is a Washington Outsider....sorta like Trump.

 

If you were going to support Trump you would already support him.  Trump might get 2 or even 3% of that support but the majority will go to Cruz.

[mikecgrimes]

 

 

"National debt would double in four years."

What on earth are you talking about?

 

For Bernie to deliver on his promises it's tough to see this not being true or close to true.  I know he has some tax the rich ideas but there's only so much money you can get, and you can never apply a tax on what you would collect under current conditions.  Oddly the same is true with Trump, usually a third party type candidate like him who has large support has national dept at the top of his list.

[TheLeviathan]

He does not yell what he thinks. Where are you folks getting this "angry old man" nonsense. He actually provides arguments in a rational manner as opposed to Clinton platitudes.

 

I don't disagree Bernie has less platitudes, but he is constantly shouting the same dozen or so platforms in response to basically everything he gets asked. (I think at the last debate he turned a gun question into both campaign and health care reform. It feels like all of his responses end up there). I'm really unclear how this is even a point of contention. Hell, I know some Bernie people that like exactly his cantankerous persona.

[nicksaviking]

 

I don't disagree Bernie has less platitudes, but he is constantly shouting the same dozen or so platforms in response to basically everything he gets asked. (I think at the last debate he turned a gun question into both campaign and health care reform. It feels like all of his responses end up there). I'm really unclear how this is even a point of contention. Hell, I know some Bernie people that like exactly his cantankerous persona.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like Bernie, but I think a dozen platforms might even be pushing it. He redirects nearly every response back to his economic ideas.

 

I agree with most of his economic reforms; I could probably get behind all of them if framed correctly, but he's a one trick pony and he appears to be as inflexible as the tea party which his supporters so despise. Half of his ideas won't even get enough support from Democrats in congress, nothing would get done and the sour taste left by the inaction would only serve to push support back toward the right. Like it or not, any kind of socialistic policies will have to come slowly and from a more moderate Democrat.

[DaveW]

 

 

Oh, I know.  I did frame the link neutrally after all.  

 

Though, she does somehow capture my sentiment - in that mean school yard kind of way that Cruz seems to be made of.

It wasn't in response to you, I just saw it posted on a bunch of websites trying to actually make it into some sort of news story/real thing.

 

 

[DaveW]

Don't get me wrong, I like Bernie, but I think a dozen platforms might even be pushing it. He redirects nearly every response back to his economic ideas.

 

I agree with most of his economic reforms; I could probably get behind all of them if framed correctly, but he's a one trick pony and he appears to be as inflexible as the tea party which his supporters so despise. Half of his ideas won't even get enough support from Democrats in congress, nothing would get done and the sour taste left by the inaction would only serve to push support back toward the right. Like it or not, any kind of socialistic policies will have to come slowly and from a more moderate Democrat.

Very well said. I like Bernie and some of his ideas, I think it's important that we have some senators like him (I would prefer more) however in 2016 his ideas etc aren't going to work out.

 

First off: He can't win a general election against any GOP candidate who could actually reach the middle (Rubio? Kasich? Paul?). He can't do it. Maybe he could beat Trump or Cruz heads up, but I wouldn't want to roll those dice.

 

Second: As you said, he would have zero GOP support for any of his ideas and would struggle to get 50% of the Dem support as well. Essentially the Dems would be wasting 4 years and dooming the party.

Sanders just isn't a viable candidate in 2016, if he somehow wins Iowa (and landslides in NH) then I think you see Warren jump into the race.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Don't get me wrong, I like Bernie, but I think a dozen platforms might even be pushing it. He redirects nearly every response back to his economic ideas.

 

Yeah, I was trying to be kind.  I don't feel like I need to hear or see Bernie speak again.  I've heard him in two debates and in about 4 interview settings and I think the vast majority of what he said was verbatim every time.  

 

He really is more like a left-wing Tea Party guy than most people want to admit.  And I don't want any of the right wing Tea Party nutjobs anywhere near a diplomatic summit either.

[PseudoSABR]

 

He really is more like a left-wing Tea Party guy than most people want to admit.  

That's going to far.  Socialism is a viable form of governance for developed nations.  What the Tea Party seems to be advocating is to abdicate governance altogether.   Although it might be unpalatable to the American public to a similar degree that the Tea Party is - the socialistic argument doesn't depend on bluster and ignorance.  Our country has moved so far right, that our perception of what is viable form governance is distorted.

 

That said, I agree with the general sentiment that Bernie wouldn't fair well against a moderate Republican, but I'm not sure the primary process is going to produce that.   Part of the reason the Democrats have put forward so many bland moderates as their nominee is that liberals are too willing to compromise their values by playing the long-game - sometimes that works (Bill Clinton) but sometimes it doesn't (Kerry, Gore).  

 

As much as I want to keep the Whitehouse from Republicans, I think it would do America a lot of good to have debate about socialism on the main stage.  

[Craig Arko]

In the end, I'll just say that any Social Contract I wind up agreeing to will not have an implied Theocracy run by a modern-day version of the Medici family.

 

This limits my choices, but I'm okay with that.

[Willihammer]

The Tea Party is/was a mishmash of conflicting ideas about religious freedom, military unilateralism and free markets. Sanders has a more cohesive philosophy of everything that reduces to redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor. He's more like the left wing version of Ron Paul, IMO, whose thoughts on any topic could be reduced to the need to abolish the Fed.

[Mike Sixel]

In fairness, we've spent the last 30-40 years redistributing wealth to the rich.......so maybe some balance would be good for the long term health of the nation/world.

[Willihammer]

 

In fairness, we've spent the last 30-40 years redistributing wealth to the rich.......so maybe some balance would be good for the long term health of the nation/world.

A few times during this discussion I've made an apolitical comment that gets a political retort. Sanders is a one trick pony in the same way Paul was. You don't need a conservative bias to see that. Whether redistributing wealth would be good or bad for the country is a separate question.

The other time was when I had the audacity to suggest, based on polls, that Trump might not fall out of contention before caucus time. Obviously the polls are still favoring him today but we'll know soon enough.

[Willihammer]

That being said I'd be happy to discuss wealth inequality too. But its kinda hard when you are already framing it in "reverse Robin Hood" terms which is not actually true. Most of the wealth that has made the rich richer, is new wealth. And median incomes have flatlined for the last 15 years, not 40.

[TheLeviathan]

That's going to far.  Socialism is a viable form of governance for developed nations.  What the Tea Party seems to be advocating is to abdicate governance altogether.   Although it might be unpalatable to the American public to a similar degree that the Tea Party is - the socialistic argument doesn't depend on bluster and ignorance.  Our country has moved so far right, that our perception of what is viable form governance is distorted.

I should've been clearer on the point I was comparing. Both Sanders and most Tea Partyers are very tunnel vision. They have one objective and are hyper focused on it. Sanders doesn't debate, he just recites his position. Like it or not, Sanders is mostly bluster as a candidate. He has good ideas, but articulating them is only possible by reading them in a formalized fashion.

 

Like a lot of tea party people he attaches himself to one issue and just rides that ferociously into office. Maybe another way to say that s that he lacks multiple dimensions as a candidate.

[Mike Sixel]

 

That being said I'd be happy to discuss wealth inequality too. But its kinda hard when you are already framing it in "reverse Robin Hood" terms which is not actually true. Most of the wealth that has made the rich richer, is new wealth. And median incomes have flatlined for the last 15 years, not 40.

 

It takes time for the world to change, the elimination of the middle class started with Reagan's work, but it takes a long time for it to happen (that and the flattening of the earth).

[Willihammer]

It takes time for the world to change, the elimination of the middle class started with Reagan's work, but it takes a long time for it to happen (that and the flattening of the earth).

Which of Reagan's actions, specifically, do you think should be undone?

[TheLeviathan]

 

It takes time for the world to change, the elimination of the middle class started with Reagan's work, but it takes a long time for it to happen (that and the flattening of the earth).

 

The left has plenty to be accountable for as well.  Any of us that went to college since the mid-90s have the left to thank for crippling student loan debt, for example.  Amid a variety of other issues it caused with the value of a college education.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Which of Reagan's actions, specifically, do you think should be undone?

 

Good question. I think his biggest contribution was convincing US citizens that unions were bad, and taking all their money. Also, that government itself was inherently wrong/bad/ineffective. 

 

But, I'd have to go back....again, though, it is about the belief system that led to actions later that was his real crowning achievement. 

[Mike Sixel]

 

The left has plenty to be accountable for as well.  Any of us that went to college since the mid-90s have the left to thank for crippling student loan debt, for example.  Amid a variety of other issues it caused with the value of a college education.

 

College / University is really messed up in the US right now. The explosion of non-teaching expenses, and the "free" revenue issues are certainly major problems.

 

But, those pale in comparison to busting unions and cutting taxes on the wealthy, imo.

[TheLeviathan]

 

College / University is really messed up in the US right now. The explosion of non-teaching expenses, and the "free" revenue issues are certainly major problems.

 

But, those pale in comparison to busting unions and cutting taxes on the wealthy, imo.

 

I agree with you on taxes.  On unions I'm less inclined to agree, they come with a host of their own problems, largely because of the way unions operate politically.

 

I'd be 100% for a resurgence in unions if we reform campaigns and contributions so that they (among many groups on the right) can buy less political influence.

[PseudoSABR]

http://ilikeberniebut.com/

[Willihammer]

Good question. I think his biggest contribution was convincing US citizens that unions were bad, and taking all their money. Also, that government itself was inherently wrong/bad/ineffective. 

 

But, I'd have to go back....again, though, it is about the belief system that led to actions later that was his real crowning achievement.

It kinda sounds like you're saying Reagan brainwashed people. Are you saying Reagan brainwashed people, and that ultimately lead to the inequality situation today?

[Craig Arko]

It kinda sounds like you're saying Reagan brainwashed people. Are you saying Reagan brainwashed people, and that ultimately lead to the inequality situation today?

Well...

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

It kinda sounds like you're saying Reagan brainwashed people. Are you saying Reagan brainwashed people, and that ultimately lead to the inequality situation today?

 

How/where did I say one person brainwashed people? If I convince you to change your mind, did I brainwash you?

 

What a loaded phrase, typical of political discussions.

 

 

[Willihammer]

How/where did I say one person brainwashed people? If I convince you to change your mind, did I brainwash you?

 

What a loaded phrase, typical of political discussions.

The only person we are talking about is Ronald Reagan. You said he convinced people that unions were taking their money. The implication seems to be that people didn't know that until he told them, and that resulted in the decline of unions. Ditto taxes.

 

If I misunderstood, please clarify.

[mikecgrimes]

 

I should've been clearer on the point I was comparing. Both Sanders and most Tea Partyers are very tunnel vision. They have one objective and are hyper focused on it. Sanders doesn't debate, he just recites his position. Like it or not, Sanders is mostly bluster as a candidate. He has good ideas, but articulating them is only possible by reading them in a formalized fashion.

Like a lot of tea party people he attaches himself to one issue and just rides that ferociously into office. Maybe another way to say that s that he lacks multiple dimensions as a candidate.

While I don't really think socialism  could work I as a tea partier would rather have pure socialism then what we have now.  I think on most issues we are far better off going to one extreme or the other even if it's the extreme I disagree with.  If socialist had the same point of view we could get somewhere.  I think people mislable what the tea party really is for political purpose so I get why people are afraid of us, but we want what the socialist want we just have a different and in our opinion better way to get there.

[Hrbowski]

 

Good question. I think his biggest contribution was convincing US citizens that unions were bad, and taking all their money. Also, that government itself was inherently wrong/bad/ineffective. 

 

But, I'd have to go back....again, though, it is about the belief system that led to actions later that was his real crowning achievement. 

It sure seems that government is ineffective, and I don't think that Reagan was the leader of that movement.