Support NeoGAF

[Manmademan]

Rubio is a better candidate than Trump, but Trump is ten times the politician... If that makes sense.

Everyone except Jeb! is ten times the politician rubio is.

 

[User 463088]

Sanders said the debate between dems and reps about gun control was just about shouting instead of compromise. Clinton decided it was an attack on her condition as a woman, when Sanders clearly wasnt talking about Clinton specifically.

And mess, why losing the good will? Because he is pointing out to the actual shaky record Clinton has? Hillary has done the same with Bernie. Is it only ok when Clinton does it?

I have no qualms with Sanders going after Clinton's record.

I have issues with the ways he and his supporters continue to show disdain for the party he pretends to want to lead. His supporters continue to show they're in it only for Bernie Sanders. If Sanders wants to actually win, he has to realize that he has to get the party on his side. Which is a moot point, because he's not going to win.

I've decided, though, every time one of Sanders more...ridiculous supporters pisses me off, I'm just donating $1 to Hillary's campaign. It's the best way I can think to spite them. (And this isn't directed at you, so please don't think that.)

 

[ivysaur12]

Doesn't Vitter have a scandal brewing too? His PI was arrested for something shady wasn't he?

Yeah, and he just got into a fender bender with a woman in the car. It'll be close.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Sanders said the debate between dems and reps about gun control was just about shouting instead of compromise. Clinton decided it was an attack on her condition as a woman, when Sanders clearly wasnt talking about Clinton specifically.

And mess, why losing the good will? Because he is pointing out to the actual shaky record Clinton has? Hillary has done the same with Bernie. Is it only ok when Clinton does it?

It's over for Bernie, I'm sorry but let's just face it.

 

[teiresias]

After this election season is over . . . and if it goes the way I hope . . . then they should really do a sequel to the 1997 film "Primary Colors" and still have Travolta and Emma Thompson star in it. Would be amazing!!!

 

[brainchild]

Anyone who doesn't worship at the alter of Bernie Sanders is attacking him by their very existence. I've tried being cordial. I've moved on to pissed off. Sander's supporters leaving JJ after he spoke wasn't okay. Sanders refusing to stay after his speech was also annoying as all hell.

I agree with Ignatz about those 'attacks' being blown way out of proportion but your comments about Bernie supporters are pure hyperbole.

I'm a Bernie supporter and I don't think Hillary has even attempted a legitimate attack on Bernie (maybe a few pokes here and there) since this election season began. Your generalizations are not welcome.

It's over for Bernie, I'm sorry but let's just face it.

Let him dream.

 

[User 463088]

I agree with Ignatz about those 'attacks' being blown way out of proportion but your comments about Bernie supporters are pure hyperbole.

I'm a Bernie supporter and I don't think Hillary has even attempted a legitimate attack on Bernie (maybe a few pokes here and there) since this election season began. Your generalizations are not welcome.

My generalizations come from my experiences. Not just online but IRL as well. Our local Dem office is having to deal with one of these (possibly in the minority) Sanders supporters. This girl is turning off people from volunteering in an area where it's hard as hell to get people to volunteer anyway. I've been lectured, in real life, by Sanders supporters who felt the need to berate my bf and I when we were helping a local candidate. Dude felt the need to call us faux liberals and question our intelligence for not supporting Sanders.

It's not all of Sander's supporters, but there are quite a few. Sander's more vocal supporters have been an issue for him this entire campaign. He's done absolutely nothing to try and quiet them down. Like it or not, your supporters reflect on your campaign. Some have done everything from pretending polls are magical fictitious things invented to "get" Sanders, to arguing that Sanders will have his massive army of grassroots people march on the Supreme Court. It's maddening.

However, I will apologize for being too general in my statement. I should have said "Some Sanders supporters" because I do realize it isn't all of them. For that, I truly do apologize.

 

[Plinko]

Before the campaign season began, New Yorker had an excellent piece on Ben Carson's rabid paranoia. Since then, there have been quite a few articles detailing his insane paranoia about Democrats and liberals. He is easily the most dangerous candidate running for office. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina et al, they will all fold one way or another and become political animals once inside the White House. But Ben Carson, not so much. I'm not being hyperbolic when I say that Carson will probably be the candidate that leads America down towards good 'ol Italian style fascism fused with American religious zealotry. He will be the guy that talks to snakes while giving the order to set up internment camps for Muslims. This is because his head is filled with garbage about the fifth column, the marxists and nazi socialists from books like Manchurian Candidate and The Naked Communist by Cleon Skousen, a john birch nutter. This book was first peddled by Glenn Beck. Carson subsequently picked up on the book and has been promoting it.

He honest to goodness believes the book's completely unfounded theories, such as the communist infiltration of every echelon of American society - government, finance and media. These infiltrators are seeking to undermine the Christian society by their gay, muslim loving agenda. Now he sees the courts ruling in favor of equal rights and anti-discrimination, and he grows more paranoid. Every step by the democrats towards progress, be it Obamacare or financial regulation, is another step by the marxists towards eradicating good 'ol America. That's why you hear completely batshit responses by Carson on any topic. If you think of the paranoid world which he lives in, all his answers make complete sense.

I've always said Walker and Carson worried me the most because of their extreme views.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

Sanders is planning to shift gears. He'll be a little looser, like he was when he danced his way onto the set of Ellen's show last week and reassured reporters in Iowa this weekend that he has "an ample supply of underwear," a riff on David's impersonation.

He'll focus more on policy specifics and substance with a series of speeches, including one, he promised Sunday, explaining what Democratic Socialism means to him.

"Because I think there are people, who, when they hear the word socialist, get very, very nervous," he said. Sanders acknowledged people may not know that there are many countries globally — including Sweden and Denmark, which he references frequently on the trail — that have had Democratic Socialist governments, and may not be familiar with their policies.

"So I think that's a discussion that we have to have," he said.

Sanders' aides also believe the more intimate interactions with voters will help him overcome a perception of the candidate as prickly and cold.

Indeed, a more relaxed Sanders was on display post-debate, as he good-naturedly joked with a reporter about the frequent questions he receives on Clinton's emails; "Ber-Nae-Nae'd" on national television; and shouted back and forth to the crowd at his small-dollar fundraiser in Hollywood Wednesday.

The new Sanders is also seemingly more comfortable with traditional larger-dollar fundraisers, like the one he had last Wednesday night, at the Hollywood-area home of Syd Leibovitch, a wealthy real-estate agent and frequent donor to Democrats. The minimum donation for the event was $250, though some attendees gave up to the legal limit of $2,700, with the event expected to raise about $150,000 overall.

Sanders has made combating income inequality and breaking up the big banks a major pledge of his campaign, but he said during the fundraiser it doesn't clash with his campaign ethos.

"The truth is there are many people in this country who have money but also believe in social justice," Sanders said.

Campaign Adviser Tad Devine said they're about to "begin a phase of persuasion, as opposed to introduction," which will soon include paid television advertising and mass media interviews, like with his Ellen Degeneres sit-down.

That will also include more intimate, town-hall style events, "particularly in the early states," Devine said, where "we want to give undecided voters the opportunity to speak directly to him, and to hear directly from him."

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-begins-next-phase-2016-campaign-n447161


More at the link. I hope we can move beyond the 'Bernie has no chance' discussion and just discuss his strategy that he is currently employing. Seems like he took note of a lot of criticism he received post debate and has adapted.

 

[And_Gignac]

It's over for Bernie, I'm sorry but let's just face it.

98 days until Iowa, see you there Bam Bam! I am ready for the meltdowns tbh.

I've always said Walker and Carson worried me the most because of their extreme views.

Yeap. Carson is the most dangerous candidate in the GOP field, both because of his ideas and his potential electabilty. He is way, way worse than Trump.

 

[Konka]

I think in 6 month we'll look back and laugh that anyone though Carson was electable.

 

[User 463088]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-begins-next-phase-2016-campaign-n447161


More at the link. I hope we can move beyond the 'Bernie has no chance' discussion and just discuss his strategy that he is currently employing. Seems like he took note of a lot of criticism he received post debate and has adapted.

I think a lot of these things needed to be done during the summer if he wanted to move the needle too far. It feels like things have shifted, and I'm not sure what inroads he's hoping to make.

The Socialism, thing, still gets me. He keeps saying he's going to explain it. Just wait, I'ma get to it. I promise. This time, I'm going to explain it, I swear. Then he doesn't. I also feel like he's missing the mark on the Denmark/Norway things. Yes, the average person would be better off in one of these countries, but that's not a winning message for someone running to be President.

 

[RustyNails]

I've always said Walker and Carson worried me the most because of their extreme views.

Views can change. Walker will change views if forced to...but Carson has a mentality. He operates in a fringe 50's coldwar mentality. Everything is a function of this mentality.

 

[brainchild]

My generalizations come from my experiences. Not just online but IRL as well. Our local Dem office is having to deal with one of these (possibly in the minority) Sanders supporters. This girl is turning off people from volunteering in an area where it's hard as hell to get people to volunteer anyway. I've been lectured, in real life, by Sanders supporters who felt the need to berate my bf and I when we were helping a local candidate. Dude felt the need to call us faux liberals and question our intelligence for not supporting Sanders.

It's not all of Sander's supporters, but there are quite a few. Sander's more vocal supporters have been an issue for him this entire campaign. He's done absolutely nothing to try and quiet them down. Like it or not, your supporters reflect on your campaign. Some have done everything from pretending polls are magical fictitious things invented to "get" Sanders, to arguing that Sanders will have his massive army of grassroots people march on the Supreme Court. It's maddening.

However, I will apologize for being too general in my statement. I should have said "Some Sanders supporters" because I do realize it isn't all of them. For that, I truly do apologize.

I understand you frustration. Vocal minorities tend to have that effect on people. I just get annoyed (just like many of us are annoyed by the Bernie extremists) that people such as myself automatically get lumped in with the crazies just because we're Bernie supporters. Now you could say that I could simply ignore the generalizations, but what happens is that the moment someone finds out that I support Bernie Sanders, the preconceptions are already in play and the damage has already been done. Regardless of what I say, my comments will always be framed around the context of the most prominent characteristics of a Bernie supporter, and that's unfortunate.

The other problem arises when I try to defend my position, I'm viewed as someone with a persecution complex. The reality is that I don't feel like a victim, I just want to have my own voice.

Anyway, no hard feelings, and I appreciate your honesty.

 

[dramatis]

Attacking private prisons is easy for Democrats. That's exactly the problem.

There are a lot of people and institutions to blame for the rise of mass incarceration in America. But as my colleague German Lopez has pointed out, private prison companies just weren't one of them. Mass incarceration created the prison industry, not the other way around.

Even today, private prisons (as opposed to immigration detention centers) just aren't holding very many American prisoners. Only 16 percent of federal prisoners are in private facilities. Only 6 percent of state prisoners are.
[...]
Of course, ending private prisons isn't the first thing that criminal justice and racial justice activists are asking for from Hillary Clinton, or from anyone else. The reason it's become so prominent is that it's the request the Democratic candidates are most eager to agree to.

The reason that "end private prisons" has become Democratic candidates' leading criminal justice reform proposal isn't about its policy efficacy. It's because it appeals to a progressive view of politics: that private corporations are in control of politics, and are using their influence to make policies that are good for their profit margins but bad for human beings.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Attacking private prisons is easy for Democrats. That's exactly the problem.

Yep.

State owned prisons are just as garbage as private prisons.

And private prisons could change if the profit motives were changed to where rehabilitation was the goal. Traditional prisons are run by institutions that care about vengeance and will be hard to change.

 

[brainchild]

Attacking private prisons is easy for Democrats. That's exactly the problem.

 

[Manmademan]

Attacking private prisons is easy for Democrats. That's exactly the problem.

I've mentioned this one a few times before. Even made a thread about it. There's a perception that private prisons are way more prevalent than they actually are.

Coming out and attacking them costs democrats nothing, because few prisoners are in there in the first place, and the facilities that ARE open are scaling down operations as the prison population declines and contracts run out. Virtually no one at any level has been pleased with private prisons. They're more expensive than they were advertised to be with a stunning lack of oversight and adherence to standards. i don't expect them to be around 15-20 years from now in any meaningful sense.

Disclaimer: in prison administration.

 

[User 463088]

I understand you frustration. Vocal minorities tend to have that effect on people. I just get annoyed (just like many of us are annoyed by the Bernie extremists) that people such as myself automatically get lumped in with the crazies just because we're Bernie supporters. Now you could say that I could simply ignore the generalizations, but what happens is that the moment someone finds out that I support Bernie Sanders, the preconceptions are already in play and the damage has already been done. Regardless of what I say, my comments will always be framed around the context of the most prominent characteristics of a Bernie supporter, and that's unfortunate.

The other problem arises when I try to defend my position, I'm viewed as someone with a persecution complex. The reality is that I don't feel like a victim, I just want to have my own voice.

Anyway, no hard feelings, and I appreciate your honesty.

No worries at all.

I understand where you're coming from, and I blame Sander's campaign (not the candidate) for not trying to do something about it. They have to be aware of it. There have been op eds all over the place about it. I don't expect a candidate to control all of their supporters, but I think a "We're better than that" statement from his campaign would go a long way.

 

[NeoXChaos]

No worries at all.

I understand where you're coming from, and I blame Sander's campaign (not the candidate) for not trying to do something about it. They have to be aware of it. There have been op eds all over the place about it. I don't expect a candidate to control all of their supporters, but I think a "We're better than that" statement from his campaign would go a long way.

Rep Elijah Cummings favorite line when he is passionate and angry.

 

[B-Dubs]

Yeap. Carson is the most dangerous candidate in the GOP field, both because of his ideas and his potential electabilty. He is way, way worse than Trump.

Are you kidding me? He'd be eaten alive in the general! All they'd have to do is play an ad with him saying the dumb as fuck shit he's said up til now and it would be a blow out? How in the name of god is he even remotely electable?

 

[RustyNails]

Attacking private prisons is easy for Democrats. That's exactly the problem.

I agree, but it's a step in the right direction. State and county jails will however exist and I'm fine with keeping them open. I'm not in favor of a totally European solution where jails look like hotels and people like Anders Brievik can sit inside and play videogames. The problem this issue highlights is criminal justice reform. Fact that we send people to jail for possessing x grams of controlled substance or how police can send anyone to jail they don't like. That needs to change.

 

[Manmademan]

Are you kidding me? He'd be eaten alive in the general! All they'd have to do is play an ad with him saying the dumb as fuck shit he's said up til now and it would be a blow out? How in the name of god is he even remotely electable?

He isn't. Carson is only relevant because (like huckabee in 2008) he's consolidating the evangelical vote around himself. they're a small portion of the overall electorate, but punch above their weight in republican primary contests.

They're also very, very regional- Carson is getting blown out by trump in states where evangelicals don't have much of a presence.

I agree, but it's a step in the right direction. State and county jails will however exist and I'm fine with keeping them open. I'm not in favor of a totally European solution where jails look like hotels and people like Anders Brievik can sit inside and play videogames. The problem this issue highlights is criminal justice reform. Fact that we send people to jail for possessing x grams of controlled substance or how police can send anyone to jail they don't like. That needs to change.

This is less a criminal justice issue than it is a legislative issue. Good luck getting state legislatures to pass laws or repeal existing ones that make them look "soft on drugs" or "soft on crime." Edit: police flat out making up charges that don't exist i.e. resisting arrest is definitely a criminal justice issue though.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

He isn't. Carson is only relevant because (like huckabee in 2008) he's consolidating the evangelical vote around himself. they're a small portion of the overall electorate, but punch above their weight in republican primary contests.

They're also very, very regional- Carson is getting blown out by trump in states where evangelicals don't have much of a presence.

Doesn't explain why he's doing well in GE polling.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I wonder if Trump is actually preparing for this debate.

He hasn't done as well as he should have in the prior debates and Fiorina and Jeb! are in dire straits and could be crushed if Trump comes prepared to this debate.

From a political strategy perspective, I'm not a fan of him going after Carson. An attack on Carson requires more precision than Trump can provide. Carson would get destroyed by someone like Hillary or Nixon or LBJ, but Trump doesn't have the tools to do it. He's a bully with a club, not a ratfucker with a knife.

 

[Manmademan]

Doesn't explain why he's doing well in GE polling.

covered this one a few pages back. Carson's actual positions aren't well known enough by the general public to make his polling anything other than "Generic Republican."

"Generic Republican" ALWAYS overperforms, since people get to fill in the blanks with what their fantasy candidate would be in favor of. If Carson ACTUALLY got the nomination and his positions were put under more scrutiny, his numbers would tank.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Doesn't explain why he's doing well in GE polling.

He is polling as a generic R like the rest of the field.

 

[Manmademan]

He is polling as a generic R like the rest of the field.

there's some exceptions. Trump is polling as Trump right now. He's been under some pretty intense scrutiny since he announced, and most people can tell you where he stands on most policies- he makes an effort to keep himself in the headlines so often everyone is about as well informed on Trump as they're going to be.

Jeb! has baggage from his brother's administration, which isn't necessarily a good thing. He's running as GWB v. 2.0 with less personality.

Everyone else hasn't gotten enough media coverage to stand out from "Generic Republican" though.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I agree, but it's a step in the right direction. State and county jails will however exist and I'm fine with keeping them open. I'm not in favor of a totally European solution where jails look like hotels and people like Anders Brievik can sit inside and play videogames. The problem this issue highlights is criminal justice reform. Fact that we send people to jail for possessing x grams of controlled substance or how police can send anyone to jail they don't like. That needs to change.

I used to be like you with the "Swedish prisons" but then I thought, why? why should we be against a model that's works.

 

[Manmademan]

I used to be like you with the "Swedish prisons" but then I thought, why? why should we be against a model that's works.

because obviously if prisons were more like country clubs, then people would all just choose to be murderers instead of getting real jobs.

 

[Yellowtail]

No worries at all.

I understand where you're coming from, and I blame Sander's campaign (not the candidate) for not trying to do something about it. They have to be aware of it. There have been op eds all over the place about it. I don't expect a candidate to control all of their supporters, but I think a "We're better than that" statement from his campaign would go a long way.

One of Iowa's foremost activists/bloggers (a Nader/Dean voter at that) wrote about this in relation to the JJ dinner last night. It's worth a read.

The image that sticks with me from last night is of Sanders supporters leaving after his speech, through O'Malley's and into Clinton's.

Sanders leaders are aware it was a bad optic, especially since Press Row was a peninsula surrounded on three sides by Team Bernie while the Clinton sections were on the other side. They're trying to get word out that the early departure was forced by transportation, as the crowd was largely students who bused over. (A problem solved by paying the bus drivers whatever overtime was needed.) And fingers are pointed at the security check in, which pushed the start time back an hour. But walking out on the other speakers is very telling, especially when your candidate has yet to actually say he is a Democrat.

....

The John Kerry campaign never really seemed to make an effort to get the Deaniacs on board; it was just assumed we would go along to Beat Bush. And while we pretty much all VOTED for Kerry - the Nader vote dwindled to a tenth of its 2000 share - a lot of folks did nothing BUT vote. And Clinton may have work to do to get even that.

She's carefully not attacking, which may not be helping but at least isn't deepening the wound. Positions on issues aren't doing it, because Sanders just keeps saying he was right on DOMA or the Iraq War or whatever FIRST. For now, she's carefully aiming at the left of the general electorate, embracing the median of the Obama era Democratic Party where it's understood that the white male South is gone forever.

Over my 25ish years in politics, I've seen literally dozens of campaigns, local and national, center their strategy around getting non-voters to vote. Only two have ever succeeded: Barack Obama, and the first 19 Bar campaign here in Iowa City in 2007 that got students out for a city election. (The second effort, in 2010, also successfully implemented the strategy, but fell just short.)

Sanders is trying that strategy, and while I wish him well, in the new zero-sum dynamic of the Democratic race, he also need to convince some of the kinds of folks who care about control of the state Senate, folks who are largely in the Clinton camp now, that he can be a team player. Because having a Democratic president didn't do jack for the teachers and public employees of Wisconsin.

I think the supporter walk out and Bernie's refusal to stick around afterwards did real damage to his chances in the caucuses. It's the big night to win over activists, and there were hundreds of Democratic activists there last night, many partial to his message, who are going to be resistant to getting behind a guy and a movement that seemingly gives no fucks about the health of the Democratic party, up and down the ticket.

 

[Manmademan]

One of Iowa's foremost activists/bloggers (a Nader/Dean voter at that) wrote about this in relation to the JJ dinner last night. It's worth a read..

Can't say I disagree. Though he glosses over the fact that Hillary's campaign in 2008 ALSO brought a shit ton of first time and non voters to polls. Whether that was because they were coming out for "first woman president" or Hillary specifically is up for debate- but she actually won the popular vote over Obama that year- she just got out strategized with the caucus states.

This is a big part of the reason why i've been backing Hillary this round. I still think that given the opportunity she can get close to her 2008 numbers and have an affect on the down ballot races. Sanders doesn't have a prayer of doing the same thing, his appeal is far, FAR too narrow and basically nonexistent with moderates.

If the republicans nominate a Carson or a Trump to run against her that causes moderate republicans to stay the hell home it just makes all of this a lot easier.

 

[User 463088]

One of Iowa's foremost activists/bloggers (a Nader/Dean voter at that) wrote about this in relation to the JJ dinner last night. It's worth a read.



I think the supporter walk out and Bernie's refusal to stick around afterwards did real damage to his chances in the caucuses. It's the big night to win over activists, and there were hundreds of Democratic activists there last night, many partial to his message, who are going to be resistant to getting behind a guy and a movement that seemingly gives no fucks about the health of the Democratic party, up and down the ticket.

This has been, and will continue to be, one of the reasons I never would supporter Bernie Sanders in the primary. Some have made this thing all about him. While the top of the ticket is important, it's the bottom of the ticket that actually helps govern and get stuff done. Hillary talked about this on Rachel Maddow the other night. Put simply, no one in the Democratic party is going to line up behind Sanders because he's never, ever been there for us. But now, he slaps a D behind his name and we're just supposed to ignore the people who have been there for the party, in the good and bad years?

This is one of the ways some of Sander's supporters are hurting his chances. Some act as though they don't need the rest of the party. They'll do it all on their own. They can't keep alienating the majority of the party and hope to win. (And, again, I'm not referring to every single Sanders supporter. Just the ones who love to call Hillraisers corporate shrills, and seem to hate the fact that moderate Democrats do, in fact, exist.)

 

[Plinko]

Are you kidding me? He'd be eaten alive in the general! All they'd have to do is play an ad with him saying the dumb as fuck shit he's said up til now and it would be a blow out? How in the name of god is he even remotely electable?

His crazy statements have been out in the public for months and his favorables are still through the roof.

 

[NeoXChaos]

One of Iowa's foremost activists/bloggers (a Nader/Dean voter at that) wrote about this in relation to the JJ dinner last night. It's worth a read.



I think the supporter walk out and Bernie's refusal to stick around afterwards did real damage to his chances in the caucuses. It's the big night to win over activists, and there were hundreds of Democratic activists there last night, many partial to his message, who are going to be resistant to getting behind a guy and a movement that seemingly gives no fucks about the health of the Democratic party, up and down the ticket.

He is certainly hinting at statewide races with the WI slight.

His crazy statements have been out in the public for months and his favorables are still through the roof.

We are in primary season right now.

 

[B-Dubs]

His crazy statements have been out in the public for months and his favorables are still through the roof.

It's early in the primary, no one is paying attention yet.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Doesn't explain why he's doing well in GE polling.

His entire public persona up until his run for president has been as a successful neurosurgeon and his craziness hasn't been highlighted by a coordinated Democratic campaign yet.

 

[Manmademan]

His crazy statements have been out in the public for months and his favorables are still through the roof.

no one but political junkies are really paying attention. He's made a few unforced errors, but no one is actually attacking Carson. The average voter knows carson has said some crazy things, but they'd be hard pressed to tell you what those things actually ARE.

You can also throw in Trump constantly hijacking media cycles with his insanity- nothing really sticks because of it.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

Every political campaign is going to have supporters doing all sorts of things, good or bad. Internet media being ever more prevalent means even the most isolated crazy can get unfairly treated as representative of the larger group. However, campaigns still actively and passively encourage certain types of behavior and engagement from their supporters by the way they conduct themselves (see Trump for most obvious example).

All that said, I have yet to meet a Sanders supporter in real life who didn't already strongly agree with his positions or identify themselves on the socialist spectrum as opposed to Democrat. Like Sanders the man is almost irrelevant to them because he's just a vehicle for their preexisting beliefs. That's not necessarily a bad thing, it would be good to get more socialist candidates elected via untapped populations of voters.

But Sanders seems to think he's building acceptance of socialism and starting a new political movement. That's not my impression of his campaign or his supporters. He's just catching the interest of people who would have voted for a socialist candidate. Occupy Wall Street didn't convince anyone to change their minds and I don't see Sanders doing it either.

 

[Retromelon]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/10/25/jindal-threatens-to-skip-next-presidential-debate/?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=lovejoyfeminism&ref_post=authoritarian-parenting

Bobby Jindal might withdraw from the undercard debate next week in Colorado.
The Louisiana governor is lobbying the Republican National Committee and cable television network host CNBC to alter the eligibility criteria for the prime time debate. Jindal wants early state primary polling to count, versus just an average of national surveys. Jindal barely registers with voters nationally but is in the top 10 and rising in Iowa, and he could forgo the GOP’s third televised debate in favor of campaigning there if changes aren’t made

“The biggest disappointment is that the RNC and network have outsourced their power to Donald Trump, who believes in national health care and that George W. Bush is responsible for 9/11,” Jindal campaign spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said. “They completely caved to his demands.”

Ok you jackals can start the please proceed governor chorus now

 

[dramatis]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

Ok you jackals can start the please proceed governor chorus now

Who does he think he is, Donald Trump?

 

[Manmademan]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/10/25/jindal-threatens-to-skip-next-presidential-debate/?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=lovejoyfeminism&ref_post=authoritarian-parenting


Ok you jackals can start the please proceed governor chorus now

If a tree falls in the woods...

 

[RustyNails]

I used to be like you with the "Swedish prisons" but then I thought, why? why should we be against a model that's works.

It comes down to your definition of justice. I think the liberals get too caught up in "for greater good" rather than addressing the wronged individuals/victims. It's easy to sit in ivory towers and say murderers and rapists just need a rehabilitation and the society will be good, while the victims' families are told to sit tight while the murderer of your son will be attending some therapy sessions. I personally believe choices have consequences. Sure if you were a schizo or mentally not there, I can see the rehab option. But cold blooded killers and rapists, they consciously made choices to hurt, damage and disrupt the society they live in. To see their choices be practically rewarded with therapy sessions and zero accountability for their actions while at the same time the families not receiving any consolation, I see as a flaw. Humans are not robots. We can't just go "whoops, that robot needs an AI reboot" and simply swap it out.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/10/25/jindal-threatens-to-skip-next-presidential-debate/?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=lovejoyfeminism&ref_post=authoritarian-parenting


Ok you jackals can start the please proceed governor chorus now

What's the debate going to be now then, Graham talking to himself? Who else would be there, Huckabee? Santorum?

 

[Konka]

It comes down to your definition of justice. I think the liberals get too caught up in "for greater good" rather than addressing the wronged individuals/victims. It's easy to sit in ivory towers and say murderers and rapists just need a rehabilitation and the society will be good, while the victims' families are told to sit tight while the murderer of your son will be attending some therapy sessions. I personally believe choices have consequences. Sure if you were a schizo or mentally not there, I can see the rehab option. But cold blooded killers and rapists, they consciously made choices to hurt, damage and disrupt the society they live in. To see their choices be practically rewarded with therapy sessions and zero accountability for their actions while at the same time the families not receiving any consolation, I see as a flaw. Humans are not robots. We can't just go "whoops, that robot needs an AI reboot" and simply swap it out.

I really disagree with this statement. I think you severely underestimate how punishing it is to not be allowed to leave somewhere, regardless of the conditions inside.

 

[RustyNails]

I really disagree with this statement. I think you severely underestimate how punishing it is to not be allowed to leave somewhere, regardless of the conditions inside.

Well, what if they were shut-ins in the first place, as most of these mass murdering lunatics are?

 

[Manmademan]

It comes down to your definition of justice. I think the liberals get too caught up in "for greater good" rather than addressing the wronged individuals/victims. It's easy to sit in ivory towers and say murderers and rapists just need a rehabilitation and the society will be good, while the victims' families are told to sit tight while the murderer of your son will be attending some therapy sessions. I personally believe choices have consequences. Sure if you were a schizo or mentally not there, I can see the rehab option. But cold blooded killers and rapists, they consciously made choices to hurt, damage and disrupt the society they live in. To see their choices be practically rewarded with therapy sessions and zero accountability for their actions while at the same time the families not receiving any consolation, I see as a flaw. Humans are not robots. We can't just go "whoops, that robot needs an AI reboot" and simply swap it out.

no it doesn't.

Justice is served the second that individual is removed from society for 10, 20, or 30 years. there's your justice, and there's your consequences.

Further "punishing" the convicted beyond that isn't justice, it's just vengeance and no one has the "right" to that. Making the convicted miserable on top of his loss of freedom does absolutely nothing to "right wrongs" or bring back the dead. The feelings of victims families is not sufficient justification for physical or psychological torture- which solitary confinement pretty much is.

The business of corrections facilities is CORRECTIONS, not punishment. If therapy and rehabilitation mean that the convicted become productive members of society after their term, then that's what they should be doing. Every study that's ever been conducted says the "bread and water" route for inmates does the exact opposite of making them ready to reintegrate into society on release.

 

[Black Republican]

Bobby Jindal may decline to attend republican debate due to unfair treatment

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2015/10/25/jindal-threatens-to-skip-next-presidential-debate/?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=lovejoyfeminism&ref_post=authoritarian-parenting


Ok you jackals can start the please proceed governor chorus now

bye

 

[RustyNails]

no it doesn't.

Justice is served the second that individual is removed from society for 10, 20, or 30 years. there's your justice, and there's your consequences.

Further "punishing" the convicted beyond that isn't justice, it's just vengeance and no one has the "right" to that. Making the convicted miserable on top of his loss of freedom does absolutely nothing to "right wrongs" or bring back the dead. The feelings of victims families is not sufficient justification for physical or psychological torture- which solitary confinement pretty much is.

The business of corrections facilities is CORRECTIONS, not punishment. If therapy and rehabilitation mean that the convicted become productive members of society after their term, then that's what they should be doing. Every study that's ever been conducted says the "bread and water" route for inmates does the exact opposite of making them ready to reintegrate into society on release.

How do you define exclusion as justice? What if hypothetically 100 years from now we create a system/program that "rehabilitates" a convict within 10 minutes? Will you be ok if that person is let out after 10 minutes? I think we need to obtain a balance between the wronged individual's grievances and the order of a society. I'm not saying make the family judge, jury and executioner or bring back public executions. But they should have a closure to their loss. I'm saying we need not go overboard by having the convict continue to enjoy the life's comforts like playing PS3 inside their jails.