-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Democratic National Primary Debate #1 |Tokyo2016| Rise of Mecha-Godzilla
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
Angelus Errare
Banned
She spoke no lies.
But Bernie hates the banking system as is. Hillary's biggest donors are from the banking system.
Unless the Illuminati is real, I see them as ideologically incompatible. Bernie has always been concerned about the elite. For decades.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Clinton is still proposing to reel in the banks, though. At least more than any Republican would care to utter.
So are the banks playing both sides, or are they hedging their bets and only supporting Clinton, but putting hope in softening her position to preserve status quo as much as possible?
unfortunate truth. my pipedream ends here.
She'd be a great vice president
Are the banks playing both sides? What? No, not at all. Bernie Sanders is pretty clear about his postitions for these last 40 years... he's been against big banks and wants them all broken up.
Clinton said, as a representative of wallstreet, she went to the big banks before the 2008 crash and said " hey cut it out!!". "Cut it out?" That's what a parent yells to a child she can't control. She was in a position of power to do something but she told her friends who helped her campains, cut it out and then bailed them out. Make fucking legislation and stop them with policy.
You're underplaying the difference in the candidates and their positions. It doesn't make sense at all considering their history and agendas. Bernie needs Elizabeth Warren as vice. It is almost too dreamy.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
God, I love The Onion.
Bern needs his own Worm character.
Bern needs his own Worm character.
So nobody told Webb to not to kill anyone tonight?
MaddenNFL64
Member
Fucking weird having an adult debate after the circus clowns ran amok for months.
teruterubozu
Member
Curious how many people tuned in. Seemed like a total snoozer.
MaddenNFL64
Member
Guaranteed its less than the Republican debates, but that shit is for the lowest common denominator. Mud slinging, softball questions, combined with some of the most asinine candidates ever.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
If this night underscored anything it's that this forum is pretty damn isolated from what a lot of average americans believe. Some of the stuff that got the most praise in this thread is stuff that will be used for attack ads in the general election. Clinton wants to take your guns, Sanders wants to redistribute your money to illegal immigrants, etc.
MaddenNFL64
Member
Im surrounded by gun owners (AZ resident), lot of them friends and family. The people who vote just on the gun issue never vote for democrats, unless those democrats ignore the gun issue completely. If you remember, Obama scared gun owners all over the country for years, and still do. No one i know well voted for him except me. He still won by millions of votes. Sorry, but you're also out of the loop on much of the country. I know who you're referring to as "the average voter" I have the same kinds of relatives and friends as you do. People who hate Obama, and Hillary with a passion that is scary as fuck. Dems can still win the General by millions of votes.
Presidential debates, ideally, should be snoozers. The only reason we're entertained by the GOP debates is because it's a train wreck.
teruterubozu
Member
I thought Obama was exciting. Dems should be worried about enthusiasm this time around.
I don't know. This had Webb going nuts, Chafee needed a dog he can hug and Bernie and Hillary double teaming on the stupid email topics.
Black Republican
Member
Take it and run, my children.
Coli gonna take it
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...ate-winner-loser-insider-214771#ixzz3oXORWk7L
Outside of Internet 20 somethings like here at GAF this is the consistent narrative in all of media this morning, that Hillary was the clear winner and helped locked down the nomination.
Outside of Internet 20 somethings like here at GAF this is the consistent narrative in all of media this morning, that Hillary was the clear winner and helped locked down the nomination.
QuiteWhittle
Member
All the Serious People in the Beltway media are saying Clinton won the debate. Is she finally breaking free from the negative feedback loop?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
I'm not talking about the party bases. I'm talking about swing voters. The kind who saw Bush as the best choice in 2004 but then voted for Obama in 2008. That's not the kind of person who responds to far left rhetoric and you know it.
60 million people voted for the GOP in both 2008 and 2012, the margin between victory and defeat isn't as big as you think it is and if you scare people enough with "giving your money for illegals to get healthcare and college," you might just win.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Media building her back up so they can tear her back down.
2 out of 2 focus groups gave Sanders the victory. Sanders claimed more new supporters to Twitter. Google searches for Sanders skyrocket. At least one major paper claiming Sanders the winner as well.
Hillary did not throw a haymaker and Sanders is still very much alive. This is a marathon not a sprint. If this was people's first exposure to Bernie he might even have flipped some Hillary supporters. I expect the Sanders to rise in the polls and Hillary to drop off. I'd be shocked if that was not the case in the after the debate polls.
Black Republican
Member
Funny how Clinton was way more comfortable in front of millions of people in a debate stage compared to interviews and questions from the press
The narrative also was Trump lost every debate by a landslide.
Souldriver
Member
From what I've seen of the debate (highlights), it seems like Hillary did a great job. She presented herself well and gave good answers. Sanders gave good answers as well, but his presentation is lacking. I know that's superficial, but it's an important factor in this charade.
My local media (Belgium) also seem to give the win to Hillary.
I'm curious about polling numbers and viewercount of the debate.
My local media (Belgium) also seem to give the win to Hillary.
I'm curious about polling numbers and viewercount of the debate.
--> was pretty funny though.
Other than the fact you know, you made that up. The narrative after the first debate was "wow! Trump actually didn't do bad and sucked all the attention out of the room!" Debate 1 coverage was all Trump. And his polls went up. Second debate narrative was he lost to Fiorina and Rubio. and what happened in polls? He went dos and Fiorina and Rubio went up.
Polling has matched the media narrative both times so far.
This time media narrative was Clinton wiped the floor with everyone else and crushed it.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Biden will probably be removed from the polls imminently, so make sure you've grounded yourself.
Souldriver
Member
The narrative after the first debate was most definitely "Trump surprisingly stood his ground and dominated", not that he lost.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Even in polls where Biden was already removed...I expect Sanders to rise.
You said the exact same thing nearly word for word about Kucinich in the 2008 primary threads. I am not sure your track record on picking debate winners is really something to hold firm on here sir.
They tried that against Obama. Twice. It didn't work.
Going down that same path again will actually sound even emptier given the world didn't collapse like they said it would. The first 7 years of 1,000 years of darkness has been pretty cruisy so far even.
Republicans need to bring something substantive to the table rather than just their failed fear mongering strategy. And right now no Republican candidate is stepping up with anything.
QuiteWhittle
Member
The way Hillary took it to Republicans should get you pumped for the general at least. It's clear she has your back and is going to take it to the GOP. All liberals will be united to take them down, that was the take away from the debate. Bernie will be out there on the trail stumping for Hillary next fall.
Yeah, methinks that Kusagari missed out on the actual post-debate narrative
shinra-bansho
Member
It feels like Biden is the biggest loser out of this (other than Lincoln Chafee) for not being in the debate at all.
Clinton seems to have won, insomuch as she basically managed to do everything that was expected of her. She didn't need a breakout moment from this. She looked "presidential" and deflected aptly enough when she needed to. She sent a pretty good "you're not needed here" message to the Biden camp.
There was no real breakout moment for the other candidates. And that was what they needed (alongside getting her to stumble, which she didn't really.)
Clinton seems to have won, insomuch as she basically managed to do everything that was expected of her. She didn't need a breakout moment from this. She looked "presidential" and deflected aptly enough when she needed to. She sent a pretty good "you're not needed here" message to the Biden camp.
There was no real breakout moment for the other candidates. And that was what they needed (alongside getting her to stumble, which she didn't really.)
benicillin
Banned
Debate turned out kind of how I expected it to. Hillary had a great night and most media is (rightfully) giving the first debate to her. But Sanders is up there doing exactly what I wanted him to do and why I support him - sticking to his message, making people aware of his ideas, keeping a focus on policy and not playing the usual politics game. More than anything this was a straight win for the democratic party regardless of which candidate you support - they all came out looking better (Punished Webb excluded.)
Vicetrailia
Member
It was a good debate, but I'm really looking forward till when they really deep dive into policies.
zero shift
Banned
Bernie is going to lose. It is a one in a million shot. What he is doing is laying the nest of what is (hopefully) going to be the new left for the country. He seems to be doing well in sticking to his guns without letting others label him as some type of dangerous Marxist revolutionary.
Unfortunately much of Europe is trending toward the left. They seem to be very afraid of all the new migrants coming in. The most popular (or what is quickly becoming the most popular) party in Sweden is a former neo-nazi party (Swedish Democrats). Similar things seem to be happening in other Nordic countries. Traditional "right-leaning" European countries such as Germany and the U.K. youth seems to be moving further rightward.
The future of the left seems to lay in the Western hemisphere such as the U.S. is moving leftward and South America has been on a leftward much since the turn of the millennium with Bolivia, Ecuador, Brasil, Venezuela (unfortunate turnout), and Argentina.
Unfortunately much of Europe is trending toward the left. They seem to be very afraid of all the new migrants coming in. The most popular (or what is quickly becoming the most popular) party in Sweden is a former neo-nazi party (Swedish Democrats). Similar things seem to be happening in other Nordic countries. Traditional "right-leaning" European countries such as Germany and the U.K. youth seems to be moving further rightward.
The future of the left seems to lay in the Western hemisphere such as the U.S. is moving leftward and South America has been on a leftward much since the turn of the millennium with Bolivia, Ecuador, Brasil, Venezuela (unfortunate turnout), and Argentina.
So I watched the debate and here is my "European" perspective.
-Both Sanders and Clinton are solid progressives who have common sense solutions for the current problems in America. Be it tuition fees, parental leave or reforming the criminal system.
-Sanders is not really relatable. He doesn't crack any jokes, doesn't really smile and does not radiate optimism. He comes across as one of those university professor-types. He also looks old as hell.
-Hillary's closing statement was something that you would expect from the front runner and I think more people will like her message: America is great and I will fight for you to make it even better. She also showed some fighting spirit and attacked republicans several times. I think a lot of women liked what they saw (Planned parenthood, maternity leave etc).
-Why were all these substantive policy questions not in the picture during the CNN republican debate? I was surprised to see that it wasn't a circus show but actual policy ideas were discussed.
-Both Sanders and Clinton are solid progressives who have common sense solutions for the current problems in America. Be it tuition fees, parental leave or reforming the criminal system.
-Sanders is not really relatable. He doesn't crack any jokes, doesn't really smile and does not radiate optimism. He comes across as one of those university professor-types. He also looks old as hell.
-Hillary's closing statement was something that you would expect from the front runner and I think more people will like her message: America is great and I will fight for you to make it even better. She also showed some fighting spirit and attacked republicans several times. I think a lot of women liked what they saw (Planned parenthood, maternity leave etc).
-Why were all these substantive policy questions not in the picture during the CNN republican debate? I was surprised to see that it wasn't a circus show but actual policy ideas were discussed.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Because none of the republican candidates had any policies. Just God, Small Government, Trickle Down, Bootstraps, Immigrants.
But you need to ask those questions and challenge the candidates instead of doing a reality tv show where you pit them against one another with "X said this about you, what is your response?" - statements.
I think Clinton was the big winner tonight, because asking these tough questions meant that she had to provide policy solutions. And she did. The whole "work 10 hours during your studies" is a really solid proposal. This is something that Scandinavian countries should use. Combining free tuition with specific requirements that help people gain work experience is common sense.
Clinton says free but her own proposal is the opposite. Her Proposal is to "make schools lower costs". Maybe she can tell schools to cut it out like she did wall street.Students would work 10 hours a week and all money made would go to the school for tuition. Parents would be expected to pay a portion and "when cheap enough" maybe it would be free. Of course if the family doesn't chip in that's more on the student to pay.
Clinton won because frankly she said nothing. Which when you are the front runner that is what matters. As others said she was there presenting for the general election not to waste her time with the people on stage.
Wha? Have you been watching these long?
Well, read that Jim Webb Vietnam "Fiction" to kill an enemy story. It wasn't bad, and was a pretty good piece on how some people can't empathize with the "it just is" nature of combat.
But the war's been over for 50 or so years now, using it as a political platform in 2015 isn't really the way to go.
But the war's been over for 50 or so years now, using it as a political platform in 2015 isn't really the way to go.
Yes, parents would be expected to make "realistic contributions" while students would have to work around 10 hours every week. The total cost would be around 350 billion.
I think it is a reasonable proposal and not pie-in-the-sky stuff that would never pass the legislature. You can criticize Clinton for not being a purist but she has many good proposals and she has stated how to finance these programs (tuition plan via capping deductions that wealthy families can take on their tax returns etc) .
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked