There's nothing to talk about, if only Trump would start hitting Cruz with the affair thing we'd need a new thread already.
-
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.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
There's nothing to talk about, if only Trump would start hitting Cruz with the affair thing we'd need a new thread already.
Mrs. Manky
Banned
I'll tell you once
I won't tell you twice
You'd better wise up, Janet Weiss
Your apple pie don't taste too nice
You'd better wise up, Janet Weiss
Youtube?
Basileus777
Member
Until Hillary's campaign looks at his approval ratings and asks de Blasio to stay lowkey anyway.
I hope they put up a video ASAP.
He's sitting at about 50% these days, and has even higher numbers among Dems and he has insane numbers among African-american and Hispanic voters. It's basically white people that don't like him.
And_Gignac
Member
There was this recent poll with the Libertarian candidate getting into double digits considering a presidential of Hillary vs Trump. I don't remember if there was an analysis about his numbers being boosted by enraged GOPers or Sanderistas. Let me look for it.
FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
Well, why don't you support Sanders? Or rather, why do you support Hillary over Sanders? Not trying to be hostile or inflammatory. As I become more involved in politics(thanks to Bernie Sanders) I'm trying to move away from the constant support I see on FB and seeing peoples support of Hillary Clinton(Since I'll probably have to vote for her anyways). Curious what policies of hers people here prefer.
Box of Kittens
Banned
When I was a kid (probably some time during the 1992 campaign) I remember asking my mom why Bush beat Dukakis. Not because I thought anything of the result, I just knew President Bush had run against someone named Mike Dukakis in 1988 and I was curious why people would vote for one person over another. She proceeded to try and explain the tank thing to me. I'm pretty sure what I took out of it was that presidential elections were decided by silly things.
RastaMentality
Banned
Where do y'all watch race for the White House? I can't find it on cnn's site?
I know just the artist to make an image for this. Where's ZombiePlatypus...
I won't pretend to answer for him, but for me it's quite simple. The policy differences are fairly small across many dimensions, so you can freely assume that I agree with those across the board, including increasing taxes on the rich. For me, it's more about the differences in implementation and specifics of policies rather than large ones, with one major exception: Trade.
- I see being anti-trade as a disastrous step back for our economy and the way the democratic party reacts to empirical evidence. We should be past the point of starting trade wars and imposing tariffs. This is a settled question as a generality, that requires discussing the specifics of how to tackle the effects of free trade. Sanders wants us to roll back the clock to the generality, and it's a big mistake.
- Sanders' tax plan is confusing and potentially disastrous. The positive effects of the tax revenue (health care, higher education) are not distributed evenly across time and often require long-run effects, but it still potentially involves significant tax increases for the lower rungs of the distribution in the short-run. I've seen no evidence that he has a plan to resolve the time dimension of the issue, and no evidence that he has the right people to do so by his side.
- I am completely unconvinced by the argument for free college, because there has been little to no practical discussion on how to resolve the supply side issues of faculty and student positions once the price drops to zero. Second, I am not convinced that incentive-compatible college debt is necessarily inferior to non-incentive-compatible tax increases for everyone. Targeted subsidies and the ease of the debt burden, along with a plan to decrease high education costs, is a much better approach to the education debt problem in the country.
- His dismissal of the technocrat tradition of the democratic party is concerning. The major warning sign was the dismissal of critiques from the left of his economic plan by the likes of Krueger and Krugman, and the embracing of the braindead (and now thoroughly dismissed) economic analysis of the Friedman study instead. I see it as a giant warning sign of his capability of delegating on things that he does not understand, especially when coupled with the anti-trade rhetoric.
RustyNails
Member
I have basic cable, and just watch it on Xfinity.
Mrs. Manky
Banned
Does this man have teeth? He looks like he partakes of chewing tobacco.
NYC doesn't know how good they got it with the dude.
RustyNails
Member
Of course. Since the invention of television, there is a sense of pageantry involved with US presidential elections in particular (optics!). The fact that US decides elections based on candidates rather than parties (like rest of the world) makes the country all the more attuned to the presentations. Sweaty Nixon is another example.
ugaboga232
Member
Some of those technocrats aren't exactly all knowing (like the stupid thorpe analysis). His stance on trade is dumb and needs a lot more nuance, I think the college problem is relatively minor and is definitely up for debate. His tax plan is not the best but all these Vox articles are way off the mark.
I never said anyone is all-knowing, but when his campaign starts dismissing common sense, my ears perk up.
Regarding college, I'm willing to expand more on that if you wish. I don't think it's a minor issue at all to drop something's price to zero when increasing the supply is hard and time-consuming.
That leads to rationing. How do you ration college? How do you keep rich kids from taking the spots by parents shifting expenditures even more to early education instead?
There's been close to zero discussion on the timing, and the timing is absolutely crucial.
User 463088
Banned
I also won't speak for Holmes, but I'm happy to explain why I support Hillary over Bernie.
1) As a gay man, I don't believe that Bernie has a true understanding of intersectionality. While he is amazingly focused on income inequality, that doesn't really get to the root of the issues that I, personally face. (Although I'm definitely not well off). Hillary's plans on LGBT are more specific, more diverse and more robust that Bernie's.
2) While I want to move towards universal healthcare, I don't believe Bernie's plan is workable. It's too expensive, it puts too much burden on the middle class and working poor. It's politically unfeasible, and it has zero chance of passing. So, I'm left with no actual idea of what Bernie would then do with healthcare. I don't think he'd work to overturn Obamacare, because that's silly, but I don't know what he'd do specifically. Maybe it would be like what Hillary is proposing, but, again, I don't know. I want specific policy examples of where the President would put his or her political capital. I get that with Hillary.
3) I support raising the minimum wage but I do not support $15 an hour nationwide.
4) I have question marks when it comes to Bernie on foreign policy. His entire policy platform on this is "I didn't vote for Iraq" and "We need a coalition." While I agree with the last statement, I don't believe he's the one to build it. He's never shown interest in foreign policy until he decided to run for President. It's his weakest area, and he's just recently hired someone to try and help him bone up on it. Not a good look.
5) Free college vs debt free college. I'm not sold on either, to be honest, but I prefer Hillary's plan to Bernie's. Hillary's plan works on bringing the costs of higher education down, not just throwing money at the state. It requires that the student and their family put some skin in the game. Her plan to refinance current student loan debt is (slightly) better, as is her focus on income sensitive payment plans for everyone. As someone who already has a ton of debt, the way to deal with existing debt is more important to me from a purely selfish perspective.
6) I like her better. I've said it before, but it's as simple as that. I genuinely like Hillary. Bernie is very abrasive. Some people go for that. I don't. I don't know that I trust his temperament to be President. I can't imagine him sitting through something like the Benghazi committee without losing his shit. Hell, I'd have lost mine the sixth time they asked me the same damn question. Hillary knows how to push, but she knows when to be diplomatic too. She's not an ideologue. She gets the need to build consensus. I don't see that same personality in Bernie, I just don't.
7) The socialism thing. There's a reason the GOP wants to run against Bernie, and it's not because they like him better. He would be beaten over the head with some of the things he's said in the past. He recently stood by his comments of defending Fidel Castro....in Miami! On live television! The times he supported nationalizing the television networks, visiting the Sandinista, going to the USSR for his honeymoon. This type of thing is gold to someone like Rove and GOP operatives. It would be damning.
8) Finally, his campaign is full of idiots. I don't just mean like normal idiots who are involved in politics. These people are just effing stupid. I don't believe he could run an effective General campaign. I just don't. He has demographic problems, as evidence through the primary. He didn't invest time and resources to fix those problems, and I sure as hell don't want to send the guy to the general who managed to lose Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Iowa, and Nevada. That shit scares me bad.
There is a huge gap between believing they might be wrong.
And throwing them all under the bus because they disagree with you.
His campaign has done the latter.
ugaboga232
Member
Common sense to me is different than common sense to you. You better have a good reason to challenge the experts in the field but economics isn't as unified as say climate change. I think college is a similar problem to healthcare in the sense that its a service that improves the general populace that is being abused by a middle man. Gonna need a lot of nitty gritty policy work to regulate. Plus private colleges exist for rich kids (and the education arms race is only getting worse sadly).
His campaign is god awful, I think we can agree on that.
And_Gignac
Member
Free trade sucks. Economical colonialism passed by as "freedom". It creates concentration of wealth, slavery-like jobs in underdeveloped countries and stunts the internal markets of such countries due to depredatory American and European transnationals.
It is good for America, I guess.
It is good for America, I guess.
My preference isn't really policy-specific so much as considering the sum total of her experience and past actions compared to Bernie's, I believe she would make a better president. I think Obama has been a good president, and she is campaigning to continue his legacy. I think, or hope at least, that her experience campaigning against him in 2008 and working with/for him as Secretary of State, has better informed her about systemic racism. I know she is informed of sexism. And I think those are valuable. I appreciate her support and pressure on the SCOTUS pick.
After I cast my vote, another factor PoliGAF/Twitter has brought to my attention is where each politician has been the past several decades. Clinton, for all the criticism she has endured, has continued in public service, visibly working for the people in this country and with other politicians. Sanders, meanwhile, has lower visibility and action to a lot of people in the country as a whole. The most prominent example is how black people in the south know Clinton and her work. Some may resent and criticize what that work was, but others believe her efforts were sincere or at least following in their expressed interests. Meanwhile, Sanders tried to collect on his showing up for a civil rights march in the 60s, but they had not seen or heard much, if any at all, since.
I'd vote for either and wish them well in the general, but after seeing the beginning of their campaigns and weighing what I knew or learned of them both, I eventually went with Hillary.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
When someone asks me "Why are you voting for Hillary, over Bernie, when you call yourself a Socialist?"
A few reasons. I don't think someone with my views on military spending, public spending, or taxation has a shot in hell at getting elected. Hillary won't rock the boat, but I have faith it won't make the situation any worse than it is. And then we get into the social progress aspect of it. Less than 100 years ago, women didn't even have the right to vote.
This should be a moment social progressives should be all for.
I've voted my entire life for Democrats that run on tax cuts, fairly conservative military policy, and notches away from conservative views on social inequities. Even having someone like Bernie running, has moved the conversation a few notches to the left... as Trumps rhetoric brings the competition into completely unpalatable extremes.
I mean she's as left I think the majority of Silent Gen, Boomers, and Gen X can handle.
And we're just a decade away from our generation becoming the Washington power brokers. When that happens, Bernie style candidates will become much closer to the norm on the Dem side.
A few reasons. I don't think someone with my views on military spending, public spending, or taxation has a shot in hell at getting elected. Hillary won't rock the boat, but I have faith it won't make the situation any worse than it is. And then we get into the social progress aspect of it. Less than 100 years ago, women didn't even have the right to vote.
This should be a moment social progressives should be all for.
I've voted my entire life for Democrats that run on tax cuts, fairly conservative military policy, and notches away from conservative views on social inequities. Even having someone like Bernie running, has moved the conversation a few notches to the left... as Trumps rhetoric brings the competition into completely unpalatable extremes.
I mean she's as left I think the majority of Silent Gen, Boomers, and Gen X can handle.
And we're just a decade away from our generation becoming the Washington power brokers. When that happens, Bernie style candidates will become much closer to the norm on the Dem side.
ugaboga232
Member
To be fair, the situation is pretty shitty for a lot of people in and out of america (those without good healthcare access, various developing nations embroiled in what are essentially geopolitical conflicts) which is why some people dislike clinton (status quo isn't all that great for most people).
Growth rates being below 8% a year for the foreseeable future is well beyond the benchmark for common sense.
What do you mean that private colleges exist for rich kids? How do you make rich kids self-select exclusively into private colleges?
Gotta consider the reality though, many of Bernie's more extreme stances (free college, single payer, $15/hr) wouldn't actually happen. He'd fight for them, sure, but results matter.
ugaboga232
Member
Pretty sure that wasn't what the friedman analysis was really about (a big bump to 5/6% growth for a year or two as the absurd amount of government spending is implemented which is still very very very out there but at least somewhat plausible).
I was more commenting that there will always be an alternative to public state schools for rich kids should they be overrun due to increase in college going students (hiring more faculty was never the problem).
LOL I found a precinct map for the 2012 election and OF COURSE the residential part of Beverly Hills went for Romney. Fucking LOL:
http://graphics.latimes.com/how-la-voted-2012/#12/34.0822/-118.2955
http://graphics.latimes.com/how-la-voted-2012/#12/34.0822/-118.2955
ugaboga232
Member
Oh of course but Clinton has come out against any large status quo changes so even if republicans all achieve nirvana, nothing will be happening on that front. At some point, small pragmatic changes will not be enough to make the big switches (unless you want to wait 100 years when humanity will almost assuredly not be recognizable, heck even 50 years and you are gonna see some crazy sci fi shit).
I'm more trying to give a perspective from the sanders side, I am pretty cool with clinton and just wanted to provide some of the views as I see/understand them (plus that way you have someone to debate
)FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
I'm sorry, I thought I was reading a post by an American not an American't
Sorry, I get what you're saying, I just really wish people would use that line in any context. It's god damn gold. but I don't actually think they're impossible. Maybe impossible tomorrow, but a long term goals?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I understand that.
I'm actually in such a situation.
My particular health care plan was going to costs around $270 a month this year. I don't have consistent enough work to pay that. When it started it was around $125, it'd squeeze me a bit, but it was possible. I had to file for an exemption this year. Thank you Kansas. I was under the poverty line, but too far under the minimum to qualify for tax credits.
Bernies policies would likely help me more than any politician in my 32 years. I don't have faith that he'd get elected, let alone get anything passed.
Now sorry to go guys, I'm a nursemaid to an ailing mother. And she demands chicken and waffles!
shinra-bansho
Member
Trade liberalisation has brought like a billion people out of abject poverty over the last 20 years.
ugaboga232
Member
That sucks, as someone entering the healthcare area, I see way too much preventable and controllable diseases not being controlled. This is part of why I find Clinton's new health care plan a bit lacking. It's got some cool detailed parts but they are very minor in fixing the problems that states that reject the expansion and have crappy poverty line adjustments for medicaid. Luckily NYC is pretty good at doing its best to provide healthcare but Clinton's plan for a state-based public option may not be the best when it comes to stats like kansas.
At the end of the day, clinton is the heavy heavy favorite to be the nominee and president, so this is more musing than any serious attempt to prop up sanders. Pretty awesome he moved the conversation. Maybe if hillary didn't have her burn list, more of the establishment would have ralleid around him.
There's no evidence of any of this. Trade has been an incredible boon for hundreds of millions of people in countries in deep poverty.
You want to make the (erroneous) anti-Trade argument for the US to protect manufacturing jobs here, by all means, go for it. But this idea that not buying stuff from poor countries actually helps them won't stick.
Macho Madness
Member
It would take your average household 16 years to earn what Devine did last month from the Bernie campaign.
Lucky for him he's earning it before Bernie's tax rates kick in.
shinra-bansho
Member
Also in some ways Sanders tax plan is preferable. The TPC wrote recently in a blog about it. It's streamlined while still progressive as opposed to being laden with credits for this and that and rules here and there.
I also don't get the aversion to the idea that the middle class shouldn't have to also contribute. A 2.2% on taxable income is perfectly reasonable. The amount of increase in other taxes though that will ultimately be borne by employees is more contentious.
It just isn't palatable to the general public.
I also don't get the aversion to the idea that the middle class shouldn't have to also contribute. A 2.2% on taxable income is perfectly reasonable. The amount of increase in other taxes though that will ultimately be borne by employees is more contentious.
It just isn't palatable to the general public.
ugaboga232
Member
Devine made ~800k in 1 month from the campaign? Is this true
There is also a lot of contention on free trade vs fair trade (aka all the stuff they sneak into/want to sneak into Nafta/TPP) that I wish sanders had talked about. The genie of globalization is out of the bottle, 0% chance you can ever coax him back in.
User 463088
Banned
Long term goals are fine. Hillary has them too.
They both have the goal of universal access to healthcare. They just have different ways of getting there. But, there's something intellectually....I don't want to say dishonest but problematic, about offering people things that you know will simply not happen. Bernie will never, ever get his healthcare plan through congress. The Democratic leadership has already said it's dead. There's no will there to go through another battle on this when we just did it 6 years ago.
So, we're left with incremental change, which is how our system of government works, or doing nothing until we get exactly what we want. The latter is not an option, and the former is what Hillary is offering. We have a way to get to not-for-profit healthcare, It's through the ACA. Let's use what we have instead of starting over from the beginning.
Something I've mentioned before. That old expression "You run in poetry you govern in prose." Hillary is the prose candidate. She's wonky. She's policy driven. She'll tell you, not what you want to hear, but what she thinks she can deliver. Like she said, she'd like to under promise and over deliver. I sincerely doubt that there isn't a single more liberal policy of Bernie's Hillary wouldn't support. If a single payer bill crossed her desk, she'd sign it in a heart beat. She'd sing a $15 minimum wage too. But, she knows how ,when and how much political capital she can expend.
FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
Honestly, I've been chalking up most of Sanders setbacks to his lack of mass media coverage. Before, i didn't really put much faith in the "News is corrupt, they have agendas they are pushing" but these primaries have kinda been making me question a lot of things. It's tough not to see a bias in CNN once you pay attention to the way things are worded.
I ESPECIALLY chalk up Trump's rise to prominence due to media coverage. More people have seen Trump on national television than Sanders and I think it shows with the difference in climate towards each party outlier.
Oh of course but Clinton has come out against any large status quo changes so even if republicans all achieve nirvana, nothing will be happening on that front. At some point, small pragmatic changes will not be enough to make the big switches (unless you want to wait 100 years when humanity will almost assuredly not be recognizable, heck even 50 years and you are gonna see some crazy sci fi shit).
I'm more trying to give a perspective from the sanders side, I am pretty cool with clinton and just wanted to provide some of the views as I see/understand them (plus that way you have someone to debate
All good, debating is cool. I actually voted for Bernie, but I think there are advantages to Hillary and I came to terms with Bernie being done after the first Super Tuesday.
They are good long term goals. I think you'll find that a lot of posters here want a Bernie-like candidate (as in, more of a socialist) to run again in the future. I actually love a lot of Bernie's policy stances, and if they were absolutely possible to implement in the next 4/8 years I'd be all for them.
It's tough not to see a bias for anyone that has a preference, because of our own cognitive bias.
Consider this: Following your logic, why is Trump getting all this media coverage? Do you believe that they are biased towards him?
User 463088
Banned
He did, ya.
http://docquery.fec.gov/pres/2016/M3/C00577130/B_PAYEE_C00577130.html
I mean, that's normal on the Dem side. He makes money off of the ad buys.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked