Buttload of Faith: the 2016 Presidential Primary Thread (Pt 2)

Read the link.

http://www.skychariot.com/N90BR/SproulTCRabbitCF144.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CZYBjldVIAE8b0N.jpg

This is Our America

There seems to be a pretty massive double standard. Sanders get's points for voting against the iraq war, though it didn't mean a thing, but Clinton get's none for the failed health care reforms in the nineties. New York is a safe seat, but Vermont is apparently really competitive... And being a congress member is somehow better than being Secretary of State and First Lady of US and Arkansas.

Look: Hillary Clinton is the most experienced candidate. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise. She might not be a good politician, she's obviously too centrist for most of this board - including me - but stop arguing that she isn't vastly more experienced than Sanders. It's stupid.

look: there aren't that many danish nationals arguing for the establishment american democratic candidate online at 0445 local time. it's ridiculous to argue otherwise

"failed health care reforms"

she bungled this, dickweed

look: there aren't that many danish nationals arguing for the establishment american democratic candidate online at 0445 local time. it's ridiculous to argue otherwise

― mookieproof, 23. januar 2016 04:50 (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Sure, but what has that got to do with anything?

Man, Sanders fans are the worst.

That second sentence was in reaction to humangarbage.

i was kind of being flippant about the iraq war vote, but 'voting against the iraq war, though it didn't mean a thing" is a stupid thing to bring up while also discussing our veteran affairs

There seems to be a pretty massive double standard. Sanders get's points for voting against the iraq war, though it didn't mean a thing, but Clinton get's none for the failed health care reforms in the nineties. New York is a safe seat, but Vermont is apparently really competitive... And being a congress member is somehow better than being Secretary of State and First Lady of US and Arkansas.

Look: Hillary Clinton is the most experienced candidate. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise. She might not be a good politician, she's obviously too centrist for most of this board - including me - but stop arguing that she isn't vastly more experienced than Sanders. It's stupid.

― Frederik B, Friday, January 22, 2016 10:45 PM (5 minutes ago)

saying sanders' iraq war vote means nothing is a joke, sorry. (maybe it means nothing in terms of the outcome of this election, but it...signifies something.) votes on iraq sure meant a lot in 2008.

agree though that clinton is more experienced. is experience itself a virtue? not necessarily. but i'd agree that arguing that their "experience" is comparable is not really useful

if there is a difference between signifying and meaning something then it's beyond me, but that war fucking meant something

i think Frederik might have been meaning more in terms of policy tho idk

outcomes, nevermind

It's great that Sanders was against the Iraq war, it's a massive plus in my book as well. But it's not a policy achievement, his vote didn't have actual consequences. He didn't stop the war. It says nothing about his policy abilities, it just says something great about his views. But so does Clinton's health care reform attempts.

Of course the consequences of Clinton's support led us to war though.

There's some truth to this. I respect her chops as a policy wonk, but I'm not sure her political skills have really been proven. Her record of electoral success is basically two easy NY Senate races. Bernie has a much more impressive record of winning competitive races (and as an Independent, which is not easy in American politics).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_Bernie_Sanders

bernie sanders hasn't had to run a real election in 22 years and vermont is roughly comparable in population to portland oregon

It's great that Sanders was against the Iraq war, it's a massive plus in my book as well. But it's not a policy achievement, his vote didn't have actual consequences. He didn't stop the war. It says nothing about his policy abilities, it just says something great about his views. But so does Clinton's health care reform attempts.

― Frederik B, Friday, January 22, 2016 11:02 PM (9 minutes ago)

you realize that hypothetically as president he may have a slightly larger influence over these sorts of decisions

bernie sanders hasn't had to run a real election in 22 years and vermont is roughly comparable in population to portland oregon

― iatee, Friday, January 22, 2016 11:07 PM (6 minutes ago)

yet by virtually all accounts he's running a pretty great campaign so i guess it doesn't matter

Sure, but what has that got to do with anything?

Man, Sanders fans are the worst.

sure

Man, Sanders fans are the worst.

sure

― mookieproof

don't talk about my mom like that

he's run a great campaign by making promises he can't keep, being the only alternative to the establishment and saying things that appeal to white primary voters w/ far from mainstream political views. so he's run 'a great campaign' just like trump has run 'a great campaign'.

i agree! how is hillary different

hillary isn't selling people single payer health care and free college tuition

school sucks don't go to class

Let's return to going round and round about Trump and Cruz, shall we? This is worse than Christmas dinner

hillary isn't selling people single payer health care and free college tuition

Please refer to the Warren snippet I posted above

Ouch, I posted my pentimenti

I predict nobody will be nominated or elected president

iatee
Posted: January 22, 2016 at 10:28:01 PM
hillary isn't selling people single payer health care and free college tuition

Man both of those goals sure are terrible

I'm looking for a democrat without ambition or hope, so your take really resonates with me.

If Clinton just admitted she was going to capitulate right off the bat, that would save a bunch of people the time it took to get mad at Obama for not accomplishing as much as they hoped, so it would serve the schaudenfreude wing of the modern Democratic Party.

ah yes we just need sufficient quantities of ambition and hope, that'll make all those bleak realities that exist in american politics disappear and then we can just press that free college button.

clinton would be better at playing w/ the gridlocked republican congress narrative

Right so basically you're running the same arguments republicans use about democrats buying votes with food stamps and obamaphones. Cool.

i think almost every single narrative i see on tv is bullshit

that'll make all those bleak realities that exist in american politics disappear

no. you're right. these will only disappear as soon as we give up and do nothing about them.

everyone itt needs 2 chill out

I'm kinda surprised that the whole single payer healthcare is such a kryptonite issue in a way, considering that the current system of healthcare is considered a total lag on US corporations that have to fit the bill for their employees. You might think that getting that whole expense out of their wheelhouse (that Nixon wanted to do back in '72) and back on the taxpayers would be considered a good thing. I read an article a few years back that it was considered a 8-12% lag on competitive pricing on US product exports in certain industries.

If it was me, I'd sell 'free college' in a way to get people into more engineering, mathematics, computer science or education degrees. That way it would be sold in a way that corps. are going to profit from the results. But what do I know...

the earth's core is the limit for how low this thread can go

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/krugman/2016/01/23/wonks-and-minions/?smid=tw-nytimeskrugman&smtyp=cur&referer=

the Clintonite kind of experience

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_blames_bernie_for_an_old_clintonite_hustle_rotten_shame_20160119

nothing has stuck to the teflon don yet so who knows but thought this was a pretty effective superpac ad - http://youtu.be/rcUCLwWCihE

Sanders soon figured out that he and almost all other Congress members had been tricked into providing a blank check for the marketing of bogus collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps made legal by the legislation, of which a key author was Gary Gensler, the former Goldman Sachs partner recruited by Clinton to be undersecretary of the treasury.

Eight years later, when President Obama nominated Gensler to head the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, it was Sanders who put a temporary hold on the nomination, stating: “Mr. Gensler worked with Sen. Phil Gramm and [former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman] Alan Greenspan to exempt credit default swaps from regulation, which led to the collapse of AIG and has resulted in the largest taxpayer bailout in U.S. history.”

^^ I remember this, and contra Frederik I'm happy with a senator who says nay.

that ad almost makes me like trump

I was gonna say, where's the abortion-loving / universal healthcare touting / complimenting women on their actual skills Trump now?

that ad almost makes me like trump
― akm, Saturday, January 23, 2016 10:15 AM (30 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

is the ad supposed to be slanderous because it exposes his incoherence, or because it's bad to believe the things he says in the video (which are all mostly rational things)? probably both

incoherence as in inconsistency/flip flopping/etc

oh awesome - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/nyregion/bloomberg-sensing-an-opening-revisits-a-potential-white-house-run.html

awesome indeed

http://www.pophistorydig.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/1968-nixon-esquire-lt.jpg

welp. waiting on the veracity but still

https://twitter.com/jjsimonCNN/status/690965417175560192