2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX - Page 24 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-26-2016, 05:23 PM   #346
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post

It will be great to have a debate between the platforms that a majority of Democrats and Republicans respectively support, rather than confusing things by having some corporatist try and argue that she's on both sides of the aisle.
fuzzy BigMac math


They're both idiots for doing so.

Sanders comes off as desperate, and will expose his lack of plan to both the right and left now that they don't have that hated shrew in the room.

Trump can't debate one on one.

They both have rather short fuses and I wonder how that will play out.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 05:44 PM   #347
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,464
Local Time: 12:27 AM
The guy's just being a dick at this point .

Go away. I'm sure there's some maple syrup legislation that needs passing.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 05:51 PM   #348
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,594
Local Time: 05:27 AM
Or a new post office needing a name?

This debate would be bad. Both just shouting slogans at each other and the crowds going crazy.

And it would hurt only one person, and that's Clinton. Maybe she can debate Ted Cruz on another network


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BEAL is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 06:09 PM   #349
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,609
Local Time: 11:27 PM
don't get me started on my hatred of fptp. i've long been in favour of mmp. it would also allow for coalitions which...oh look at that, would help allow for third parties to gain greater representation. the green party could form a coalition with the democrats, for example, so there would be no "wasted" votes.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 06:44 PM   #350
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post

And it would hurt only one person, and that's Clinton. Maybe she can debate Ted Cruz on another network


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I've been going back and forth on this; I think this could go either way.

She could just let them yell at each other and show all the "independents" that both extremes are full of shit. Or they'll gang up on Hillary and Trump wins out.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 06:54 PM   #351
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,887
Local Time: 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
So, is the Sanders vs. Trump debate actually going to happen? They've both said yes.

Upon doing more research, Trump's team is actually talking to networks about it. It would be a pretty easy thing to do for charity since they could just demand that the networks donate a certain share of advertising revenue over to the charities that Trump/Sanders support.
The very idea of this potential debate is sexist
__________________
Bluer White is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:01 PM   #352
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 12:27 AM
And it's about white privilege too since it's a debate that minorities can't afford to allow to happen!
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:03 PM   #353
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 12:27 AM
Sanders has a pretty lengthy bunch of DNC platform proposals alone and this doesn't even account the racial justice side of things or Israel-Palestine as he has appointed Cornel West and a Palestian activist to the group writing the platform for the convention. Nor does it go into the changes he wants to make concerning the primary process and including younger/poorer activists into the party's fold rather than letting it be headed by older, whiter and richer individuals.

Taking from this lengthy interview:

Bernie Sanders: He Speaks About Attacks, Democratic Platform


What are the top four or five policy proposals you want to convince the Democratic Party to adopt at the convention?

We start off with the assumption that in some areas, there’s going to be broad agreement already. I don’t think there’s going to be much of a debate, frankly, that we need to raise the minimum wage actually to $15 an hour. We don’t have to waste time on that. I think that will probably pass quite overwhelmingly. Secretary Clinton has not come out for the [New York Sen. Kirsten] Gillibrand bill which is in the Senate on paid family and medical leave. I don’t think there’ll be much debate on that. I think we’ll have that as well.

I think the issues of contention will be the understanding that Secretary Clinton has been wrong in supporting virtually every single one of these trade policies. I think what this campaign has shown is that working people understand that NAFTA and CAFTA and PNTR with China have been disastrous for working families. I think there will be some opposition to my point of view but I have the feeling that we’ll win that debate as well.

Secretary Clinton has come up, as usual, with a very complicated and convoluted approach on higher education. You got to spend half your life filling out forms and checking your income every day. I’m not sure that we will not win fairly easily on the issue of making public colleges and public universities part of what we consider to be public education, making it free. I suspect we’ll win that one as well.

I think the real debate will center around how aggressively we take on the fossil fuel industry. I will push for a tax on carbon. Secretary Clinton now opposes that. I think the crisis on clean water is one of the evolving crises in our country around the world. I think you’ve got to ban fracking.

I think a very contentious issue of where there will be a debate—serious debate—and I think we have a shot to win. When I tell you we’re going to have a debate, almost all of my supporters will be supportive and then we can get some of Clinton’s supporters. I don’t think it’s going to be, these votes will come down all Sanders versus all Clinton. And I think, you’ll see, you’ve got progressive people, you’ve got Clinton with the support of some unions there, and some of those people will come over to us on the issues.

I think a contentious issue which we have a shot to win is whether or not we break up the large financial institutions and we create a new financial system not based on a handful of giant Wall Street banks. That will be contentious. If I were a betting guy, I’d think we’d win that. But we may not.

I think the polls suggest that among Democrats there is strong support for a Medicare-for-all, single-payer system. And my guess is we’ll probably win that one too. We may not. But I think we’ll win that one as well.

The other issue that will be contentious is tax reform and making sure the wealthy and profitable corporations start paying their fair share of taxes.

So those are a few of the issues. I think we’ll win most of them. I think the Wall Street fight will be a difficult one, it may not be, depending on the wording of tax reform, that will be tough. Medicare-for-all I suspect we’ll win but we may not.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:15 PM   #354
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:27 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
And it's about white privilege too since it's a debate that minorities can afford to allow to happen!


Don't forget their unearned sense of entitlement (Bernie's demands! Donald's rich so he's right!) and hermetically sealed certitude (math!).

It really would be nice to watch two shouty men try to mainsplain their vague, nonspecific plans/slogans and total lack/interest in foreign policy to one another.

IMMA BUILD A WALL!
IMMA MAKE WALL STREET PAY FOR THAT WALL!

Maybe a grand compromise can be reached? The two of them live in unicorn and puppy land, so why not?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:16 PM   #355
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
The very idea of this potential debate is sexist


I can't wait for them to debate abortion policy! What else is an all-male panel for!
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:31 PM   #356
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,594
Local Time: 05:27 AM
[QUOTE=

I think a contentious issue which we have a shot to win is whether or not we break up the large financial institutions and we create a new financial system not based on a handful of giant Wall Street banks. That will be contentious. If I were a betting guy, I’d think we’d win that. But we may not.

.[/QUOTE]


Granted this is just what he wants in the platform, which is fine and dandy

I just have yet to see how this is implemented. What are the effects on the economy for breaking up the banks? Is there a short term dip in the economy followed by long term benefit and growth?

How many jobs are lost breaking them up? How many are gained. What are the down stream effects to people's accounts, mortgages, IRA, 401ks?

I agree the system is set up in a way that favors the companies / Wall St, but they are an important part of our economy too. This would need to be a very delicate, slow change....something that doesn't happen in one term, or potentially two terms.

And this goes for all of Bernies proposals. It's just not that simple and his website basically makes it seem like we just need to raise taxes on income, raise taxes on corporations, and somehow jumpstart a 2% GDP to 5.3% and sustain it

I want to see more details from Bernie (and All politicians). We've seen the effects of extreme right wing policies "trickle down", I don't see the opposite of that working either.

We can improve the program's we have, and still reach a "New Deal" America

I listen (or read) what Bernie has to say and I come away thinking, man the USA really sucks. We're just the worst

In reality, despite all the shortcomings, we are living in the golden age of society. Always improvements, but we have never had it better


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BEAL is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 07:47 PM   #357
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 12:27 AM
We have not "never had it better"...especially in terms of middle class income, income inequality, the unemployed and underemployed and rising poverty. Things have not become better economically than they have been in the recent past although the economy has made substantial improvement from the depths of the recession.

I also don't understand why Clinton's "solutions" are thought of as sensible a lot of the time. You're just making the assumption that they're nuanced and about "slow change" because they don't go as far, when in reality, they are the simple nudges in the direction of the big banks (for example) that you would expect from someone who was beholden to them due to campaign contributions. This isn't rocket science. Look at campaign contributions and how certain industries or unions funded a given candidate in the past and you'll always see them show the most unwillingness to go after those particular groups. That's always the case.

If you really think the bankers on Wall Street are dumb enough to just give her money without already knowing they'll get what they want in return, then I have a bridge to sell you. Like Obama in 2008 over McCain, they were certain he would win and wanted to get listened to by the future President who once elected appointed a bunch of their Wall Street cronies to key posts.

We can talk all we want about how best to implement left-leaning policies and such and disagreeing with Sanders or the vagueness of some of his proposals is certainly fine. But to act at all like Clinton's economic and foreign affairs proposals are anything close to what the left truly wants is just plain bonkers. The problem isn't Clinton's implementation of change being too weak, it's the fact that it's often not enough change to begin with...it's like said industry is always putting the thumb on her proposals and saying, "Well, wait a minute. We don't want that."

And again, Clinton will accomplish nothing through the House anyway to actually try and put limits on shadow banking or bring about a $12 minimum wage, so you still end up with jack in that regard whether you elect her or Sanders. Republican House = No dice. To me, I'd rather see real liberalism be stonewalled then have your demands watered down for no reason. It likely won't be until well into the 2020s that Democrats can elect a President with the full wind of Congress in their sails. Until then, it's going to be a lot of talk and no action thanks to the Republican House.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 09:28 PM   #358
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,464
Local Time: 12:27 AM
If you think you're ever getting true, uncompromised liberalism on a national level, you're as diluted as Sanders and Trump
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 09:50 PM   #359
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 33,002
Local Time: 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
I can't wait for them to debate abortion policy! What else is an all-male panel for!
Yeah, that.
Same old, same old.
__________________
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 05-26-2016, 09:53 PM   #360
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,464
Local Time: 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Don't forget their unearned sense of entitlement (Bernie's demands! Donald's rich so he's right!) and hermetically sealed certitude (math!).

It really would be nice to watch two shouty men try to mainsplain their vague, nonspecific plans/slogans and total lack/interest in foreign policy to one another.

IMMA BUILD A WALL!
IMMA MAKE WALL STREET PAY FOR THAT WALL!

Maybe a grand compromise can be reached? The two of them live in unicorn and puppy land, so why not?
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com