2016 US Presidential Election Pt. IV

[LuckyNumber7]

Gawd forbid you gotta pay a higher rate on that extra $100 you make.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

So ... Got in late and flipped on MSNBC and watching the debate, and I could be wrong, but seems like she's wiping the floor with him.

She is a really solid debater and I think she won but I also think you are a bit biased on this issue and it is showing here.

I have a lot of issues with Hillary (I'd still vote for her as a matter of disclaimer), and one of them is that she really does come across as a massive liar on a number of fronts, the e-mail one being the best example.

And no, I don't think Bernie is electable, nor do I think he thinks he is. I think his true value is to bring to the forefront some hard truths that should be debated even if, as a matter of policy, they may be 100 years away.

[LuckyNumber7]

I'd hardly call anything Hilary has done in a debate as "wiping the floor with him" in regards to Sanders.

It all depends upon the viewer, though. It's so easy to see through her Botox and bullshit fake smile scripted words. She's the least genuine candidate, behind Donald Trump.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Oregoropa

That way you don't dread getting a raise that puts you into a higher bracket only to earn less at the end of the year.

That's just bullshit.

While it's shocking sometimes just how much money gets taken out of your check when you cross into the higher tax brackets, and how little of that big raise you actually take home... You still take home more money after getting the raise. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is either misinformed and/or lying.

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by Oregoropa

That way you don't dread getting a raise that puts you into a higher bracket only to earn less at the end of the year.

I'm starting to understand why you're a Republican.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by anitram

She is a really solid debater and I think she won but I also think you are a bit biased on this issue and it is showing here.

I have a lot of issues with Hillary (I'd still vote for her as a matter of disclaimer), and one of them is that she really does come across as a massive liar on a number of fronts, the e-mail one being the best example.

And no, I don't think Bernie is electable, nor do I think he thinks he is. I think his true value is to bring to the forefront some hard truths that should be debated even if, as a matter of policy, they may be 100 years away.

To me, the vast gulf between what she knows and what he believes -- on every issue but Wall Street -- seems evident. Sanders has an issue, she simply has a much better grasp on how the world works. That's what I was reacting to, and that's what I think the rest of the country will start to realize with further debates and primaries. Big mistake on the part of the DNC. And as Sanders becomes more credible, expect his colleagues to start taking shots at him, because implicit in his claim to be a revolutionary is an implicit dismissal of the real work that has been done by congressional Democrats and Obama.

Does she come across as a "massive liar"? I suppose inauthenticity is her issue, that she's whatever her polls tell her to be and that certain rules don't apply to her. But I suppose that's my bias -- I want an executive, not a revolutionary. I'm not sure how this inauthenticity would negatively impact her performance as a president, at least any more than anyone else who has a reasonable shot at the office. There's a baked in cynicism about the system as is that I suppose I can live with.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

But I suppose that's my bias -- I want an executive, not a revolutionary. I'm not sure how this inauthenticity would negatively impact her performance as a president, at least any more than anyone else who has a reasonable shot at the office. There's a baked in cynicism about the system as is that I suppose I can live with.

I would say I want an executive and not a revolutionary as well. But just because you want an executive doesn't mean you have to be a fan of one who is not a great candidate, which is how I see her. And I didn't mean inauthentic when I meant she is a liar (though she is also inauthentic), it's that while I believe the GOP is on its usual Clinton witch hunt regarding the emails there is also the fact that I think she is a liar when it comes to them. Do you honestly mean to tell me that a Yale Law educated lawyer actually believes that because an e-mail, for example, was not labeled as "classified", therefore it means that it wasn't? Hello? Does she also believe that emails sent to clients which don't say "privileged and confidential" are neither? It's just so stupid and implausible that I can't believe she is being honest.

Don't get me wrong, out of the vast field of Republicans and Democrats she is clearly the best we've got, so my vote would go to her. Would I be excited about it? No. Do I think she'll bring about any sort of meaningful change? No. But she'd be steady and probably maintain the status quo, which while it may be depressing, is also in some ways comforting in a chaotic world. Plus, the real value of the presidency is SCOTUS, and for all of Hillary's faults, she isn't going to replace the wonderful Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Alito Jr. On that I believe her 100%.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

It all depends upon the viewer, though. It's so easy to see through her Botox and bullshit fake smile scripted words. She's the least genuine candidate, behind Donald Trump.

yeah, not so sure we'd be saying this if Hillary were a 74-year old man who often doesn't remember to comb his hair. is she shrill, too?

there's a tightness and control, but honestly, wtf do we mean by genuine? is this the "want to have a beer with" standard that brought us W Bush?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by anitram

I would say I want an executive and not a revolutionary as well. But just because you want an executive doesn't mean you have to be a fan of one who is not a great candidate, which is how I see her. And I didn't mean inauthentic when I meant she is a liar (though she is also inauthentic), it's that while I believe the GOP is on its usual Clinton witch hunt regarding the emails there is also the fact that I think she is a liar when it comes to them. Do you honestly mean to tell me that a Yale Law educated lawyer actually believes that because an e-mail, for example, was not labeled as "classified", therefore it means that it wasn't? Hello? Does she also believe that emails sent to clients which don't say "privileged and confidential" are neither? It's just so stupid and implausible that I can't believe she is being honest.

Don't get me wrong, out of the vast field of Republicans and Democrats she is clearly the best we've got, so my vote would go to her. Would I be excited about it? No. Do I think she'll bring about any sort of meaningful change? No. But she'd be steady and probably maintain the status quo, which while it may be depressing, is also in some ways comforting in a chaotic world. Plus, the real value of the presidency is SCOTUS, and for all of Hillary's faults, she isn't going to replace the wonderful Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Alito Jr. On that I believe her 100%.

i think you're touching at the heart of what bothers everyone about the Clintons -- their extreme lawyer-ness, the definition of what "is" is. i agree, it's tiresome, and it would be so much easier if they could admit fault and we could all move on, but they seem incapable of doing that. they always have. but i suppose i find that neither here nor there, really. it seems a political liability insofar as it gives the opposition something else to latch onto.

i said in 2012 and i will say it again -- my two biggest concerns are 1) foreign policy, and 2) SCOTUS. Hillary knows much, much more about the world than Sanders, and her SCOTUS nominees will be solid.

almost everything else comes down to Congress. and she had a very good reputation during her tenure. she knows how it works and how to cut deals, something we could criticize Obama for (to an extent -- it can be difficult to work with jihadists).

in sum, i would like to see a continuation of the Obama presidency, because it's about the best i think this unwieldy continent is capable of.

were Biden in the race it would be a much different story.

[PhilsFan]

I don't trust Hillary with foreign policy as much as Obama, Biden, or even Sanders.

(Of course, I trust her more than any of the GOP candidates, but that should be obvious.)

[womanfish]

First time posting here, but am loving what I am reading so far.

Disclaimer, I was a huge Bernie guy for a few months, but since around the Benghazi hearings with Clinton have slowly moved to firmly supporting her.

First, the narrative that has been put out there (for decades by GOP and now even fellow Dems) is Clinton being untrustworthy, and not genuine. I have to disagree here. Just because she is serious, takes time to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding a topic, to me doesn't make her disengenuous, it makes her pragmatic and thoughtful. To me she is Obama-like in this way. How many times has Obama been criticized for certain decisions, or "stalling" things, only to a year or two later see success because he was playing the long game?

I see Bernie making knee-jerk decisions on any issue that doesn't fit the new definition of "progressive". Not always giving something middle of the road a fair shake even though it may very well be the path to a final "progressive" destination.

Ok, so my first real point about my perception of the two great Democratic candidates (IMO) is this.

I love Bernie. I can see where people can get swept up in his broad strokes and lofty goals, and even plain talk about income inequality, etc..
BUT, Bernie says himself that NONE of his ideas have any chance unless there is a political revolution. The problem with that, is our government was set up specifically to ward against revolution. It is meant to be a slow grind of change, in either direction. Can this suck sometimes? Yes. Can it be an absolute lifesaver sometimes? YES!
So I get why people get swept up in the feeling of it (like I did) but realized that the vision he sees is actually MORE probable with Clinton, followed by other Dem Presidents there-after.

I also must say that on Women's issues, repro rights, race issues, foreign policy, minimum wage, handling of emergency issues, immigration, and straight decision making, I far and away prefer Clinton.

It became very evident last night that when the heat is not on Bernie to speak to issues of race, immigration, sexism, planned parenthood, etc... He doesn't have it in his consciousness. But Hillary mentioned all of those things AND a dozen more, several times last night.

Bernie plays one or two notes VERY well. But you will never get a full orchestral performance out of him.

I think they both did well last night, and above all, I will vote for the Dem nominee, no matter which one it is.

thanks for listening to my ramble. would love to hear thoughts.

[womanfish]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

yeah, not so sure we'd be saying this if Hillary were a 74-year old man who often doesn't remember to comb his hair. is she shrill, too?

there's a tightness and control, but honestly, wtf do we mean by genuine? is this the "want to have a beer with" standard that brought us W Bush?

I SO agree with this. Someone can be genuinely controlled and serious. I think she showed a lot of personal side during the town, hall. But her being tough, focused, and no-nonsense to me is genuinely her.

[digitize]

Originally Posted by anitram

Don't get me wrong, out of the vast field of Republicans and Democrats she is clearly the best we've got, so my vote would go to her. Would I be excited about it? No. Do I think she'll bring about any sort of meaningful change? No. But she'd be steady and probably maintain the status quo, which while it may be depressing, is also in some ways comforting in a chaotic world. Plus, the real value of the presidency is SCOTUS, and for all of Hillary's faults, she isn't going to replace the wonderful Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Alito Jr. On that I believe her 100%.

This is exactly where I am, too. I have zero enthusiasm about voting for Hillary, but she's the only acceptable candidate for me.

I wish I could just vote for Obama again.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[womanfish]

Originally Posted by digitize

This is exactly where I am, too. I have zero enthusiasm about voting for Hillary, but she's the only acceptable candidate for me.

I wish I could just vote for Obama again.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

While I'm not bouncing off the walls for getting the voting booth to vote for Hillary. When i stop and think about a woman being in office, and what sort of change of vision that might bring, it actually is pretty exciting.

[digitize]

Originally Posted by womanfish

While I'm not bouncing off the walls for getting the voting booth to vote for Hillary. When i stop and think about a woman being in office, and what sort of change of vision that might bring, it actually is pretty exciting.

Yeah, that's the one thing that excites me about her campaign.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[bobsaget77]

This is still one of the best political ads of all time.
http://youtu.be/lwawPMSJins


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by womanfish

First, the narrative that has been put out there (for decades by GOP and now even fellow Dems) is Clinton being untrustworthy, and not genuine. I have to disagree here. Just because she is serious, takes time to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding a topic, to me doesn't make her disengenuous, it makes her pragmatic and thoughtful. To me she is Obama-like in this way. How many times has Obama been criticized for certain decisions, or "stalling" things, only to a year or two later see success because he was playing the long game?

It's not that she is serious and takes time to make decisions, it's that she seems content to dismiss criticisms of her record and of some of her stances with nothing more than a wave of the hand. She does not feel the need to defend her questionable record on economics and foreign policy because she "gets things done." And she's happy to let identity politics take the wheel when it's convenient for her, which is usually when she's getting grilled on those sorts of things. When Bernie (correctly) pointed out that she's not a progressive, she basically said "I'm trying to be the first woman president, what's more progressive than that!" That's a cheap out when there are very real issues with her stances.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

That's just bullshit.

While it's shocking sometimes just how much money gets taken out of your check when you cross into the higher tax brackets, and how little of that big raise you actually take home... You still take home more money after getting the raise. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is either misinformed and/or lying.

This is how we get republicans to pay more taxes. By not letting them think whatever they want. Hush.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

yeah, not so sure we'd be saying this if Hillary were a 74-year old man who often doesn't remember to comb his hair. is she shrill, too?

there's a tightness and control, but honestly, wtf do we mean by genuine? is this the "want to have a beer with" standard that brought us W Bush?

Oh hooray. Another stomp of the heel, deflecting criticism as mere sexism. I'm so done with people drawing that card.

The only thing I was implying was that she was a sleazy politician who is so well polished in her "just tell them what they want to hear even if I don't really believe it" attitude. It's done by many politicians and businesspeople. Male and female.

I mean, go ahead and look at her historical stance on gay marriage and gay rights. She's a straight populist. She doesn't stand for it. She doesn't even like gay people. She puts on her stupid smile and pretends like she gives a damn in order to appease her base.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have a snake who slithers for all the right reasons than a dog who will likely shit the floor too many times. But this election just really isn't enticing with any candidate. Not even an exciting third party candidate to protest to.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

She doesn't stand for it. She doesn't even like gay people.

What are you basing this on?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference