Oh snap son.
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT6| Delete your accounts
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Oh snap son.
You're correct that Sanders has always been ideology first, policy second, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. The American political system is by nature homogenizing, and a strict adherence to pragmatism prevents change. Moving the United States to the left, especially in the traditionally ignored realm of economic inequality, is absolutely necessary.
Corporations are absolutely a problem, because why should our livelihood be placed in the hands of unelected profit-seekers? A much better system would be cooperative businesses which are owned and operated by the workers, rather than a handful of lucky individuals. There's no reason why an effective estate tax needs to exist to the exclusion of regulations to limit the exploitative power of capitalists within their lifetimes.
A) Well I think that's terrible. Our political system is specifically designed to be slow to change and encourage compromise. We are also a very populous country with very diverse interests that all need to be accommodated to at least some degree. That's going to make things tricky and is part of the reason the Tea Party has been so bad for any sort of progress in the country. The system wasn't designed for one party to just straight up take their ball and go home.
Also LOL at a previous point where you say the Dems "hate the poor". You could argue they could do better but that is some weird as hell characterization of the current or potential future position of the party.
B) I'm having a hard time making out your second point. That seems a bit close to a straight "business is bad!" position. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you?
titiklabingapat
Member
Just put about $21 on Hillary, 21c a share. If I lose, it's only about 10% of what I made off Kentucky, if I win, $79 profit.
I'm in for $20 just in case. I also bought $6 in Bernie Yes KY at 6 cents just in case as well.
I think business should be democratized, and that workers ought to decide pay and resource allocation instead of giving all power to those on top. Workers deserve to earn from their labor without having to deal with profit-driven middlemen.
Best would be a socialistic system in which our lives were not completely consumed by labor. If the working class was paid properly, they'd be able to pursue their own self-expression much more freely.
Business is free to organize that way if it so chooses. In fact, it somewhat often does.
I disagree with socializing the means of production and have done so for well over a decade, based on the overwhelming evidence against it and the very basic incentive problems that it creates, so I suppose there's not much discussion to be had on this.
Your (incorrect) implicit assumption is that management and organization has no value. That's false, but when disagreeing on such a fundamental level, I don't think we can discuss this much further.
I'm sorry but after recent events we really need to dispense with this idea that the Sanders "revolution" was anything more than a racist, sexist, reactionary movement against Hillary Clinton and her minority supporters. Do you really think the West Virginia results are a coincidence? Do you think it's an accident that we're seeing so much crossover between Bernie bros and GamerGaters? Bernie was a vehicle for the worst impulses in America and the absolute dregs of the American "left" and that is how he should be remembered.
Man, you always take these things several steps too far.
C'mon.
I'm sorry but after recent events we really need to dispense with this idea that the Sanders "revolution" was anything more than a racist, sexist, reactionary movement against Hillary Clinton and her minority supporters. Do you really think the West Virginia results are a coincidence? Do you think it's an accident that we're seeing so much crossover between Bernie bros and GamerGaters? Bernie was a vehicle for the worst impulses in America and the absolute dregs of the American "left" and that is how he should be remembered.
What is with these delusions? The vast majority of Sanders supporters will back Clinton in the GE.
edit:
...a poll out from CNN on Wednesday finds [Sanders supporters] prefer Clinton to Trump by an 86-to-10 margin.
That's about the same ratio of Clinton supporters who voted for John McCain over Barack Obama in 2008, according to Emory political scientist Alan Abramowitz. And it's still early: As we move to the general election, Abramowitz says, Democrats are even more likely to swing behind their nominee.
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton
He's running for PRESIDENT. You can't be ideology first, policy second when all policy ultimately runs through your office. Goddamn man, I seriously hope you aren't sober as you type this.You're correct that Sanders has always been ideology first, policy second, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. The American political system is by nature homogenizing, and a strict adherence to pragmatism prevents change. Moving the United States to the left, especially in the traditionally ignored realm of economic inequality, is absolutely necessary.
I'm entirely for regulating corporations as the non-corporeal entities that they are, but what you're suggesting is collectivism, a model that hasn't worked in nearly two centuries, was rejected basically at the very outset of America's declaration of independence. Worker owned collectives discourage entrepreneurship and innovation as the great minds of a generation are denied great rewards for their efforts. Does it lead to some evils? Of course, but then so does collectivism. Go spend a few years pulling guys out of your local operator's or laborer's hall and see how many shit bricks you get stuck with just because they've got a card in their wallet. Neither system is ideal, but one can expedite our transition to a post-labor economy while the other actively opposes it due to the loss of jobs. One espouses globalization that rises other nations out of poverty, the other espouses isolationism. Marx was a brilliant thinker but his ideas weren't practical then and still aren't today, hence why they were so easily corrupted by Lenin and Stalin while no one has ever achieved anything meaningfully comparable to what he actually proposed.Corporations are absolutely a problem, because why should our livelihood be placed in the hands of unelected profit-seekers? A much better system would be cooperative businesses which are owned and operated by the workers, rather than a handful of lucky individuals. There's no reason why an effective estate tax needs to exist to the exclusion of regulations to limit the exploitative power of capitalists within their lifetimes.
The estate tax is how you reset the board with each successive generation so that capitalism is at least meritocratic while also preventing the un-tracked inflation that stems form large quantities of frozen wealth.
I'm sorry but after recent events we really need to dispense with this idea that the Sanders "revolution" was anything more than a racist, sexist, reactionary movement against Hillary Clinton and her minority supporters. Do you really think the West Virginia results are a coincidence? Do you think it's an accident that we're seeing so much crossover between Bernie bros and GamerGaters? Bernie was a vehicle for the worst impulses in America and the absolute dregs of the American "left" and that is how he should be remembered.
That's a great analysis here. It probably also explains why young women favor Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton also.
I'm sorry but after recent events we really need to dispense with this idea that the Sanders "revolution" was anything more than a racist, sexist, reactionary movement against Hillary Clinton and her minority supporters. Do you really think the West Virginia results are a coincidence? Do you think it's an accident that we're seeing so much crossover between Bernie bros and GamerGaters? Bernie was a vehicle for the worst impulses in America and the absolute dregs of the American "left" and that is how he should be remembered.
Sander's supporters are the youth, not a racist, sexist, reactionary movement, unless you consider the youth to be that. They are reacting to the global financial crisis, the lack of good jobs, and huge student loan debt, not a racist, sexist agenda. They are not the dregs and will only grow in numbers from here on out.
I'm sorry but after recent events we really need to dispense with this idea that the Sanders "revolution" was anything more than a racist, sexist, reactionary movement against Hillary Clinton and her minority supporters. Do you really think the West Virginia results are a coincidence? Do you think it's an accident that we're seeing so much crossover between Bernie bros and GamerGaters? Bernie was a vehicle for the worst impulses in America and the absolute dregs of the American "left" and that is how he should be remembered.
See, this is the kind of shit I'm not fond of. Bernie Sanders' success among young women and young people of color proves you wrong. People who support the perpetuation or enforcement of racism or sexism generally vote for GOP candidates, not Sanders. The GamerGate accusation is a meaningless deflection, because that commonality also exists with Craft Beer, college campuses, and any other groups made up of significant numbers of young men. How do you respond to the fact that voters who want more liberal policies than Obama were the most likely group to support Sanders in West Virginia? Or his endorsement by essentially every academic leftist in this country?
Bernie Sanders is a leftist in ways that Clinton is not, and his campaign is pretty damn important. He's been instrumental in changing the nature of discourse concerning, not the least of which is his success in removing so much of the stigma around the word "socialism". You don't need to like him, but perpetuating this narrative is dishonest.
He's running for PRESIDENT. You can't be ideology first, policy second when all policy ultimately runs through your office. Goddamn man, I seriously hope you aren't sober as you type this.
See, here we disagree. Experience means little if it won't be properly applied, and the nature of the presidency means that a lack of exact policy solutions is inconsequential. Bernie Sanders obviously cannot pass legislation, and on matters of executive policy he would defer to advisers. But because a Sanders presidency won't happen, this doesn't need to be discussed.
That's a great analysis here. It probably also explains why young women favor Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton also.
The racism, sexism, etc. is just what has pulled the less overt Ron Paul clique to Sanders. Most of those people are quite content with Donald Trump.
Free shit sans-understanding of where it comes from is what has drawn Bernie the millenial vote. I understand it. College loans are intimidating and the idea of going into the labor force without a college degree even moreso. But just because it feels good to hear doesn't mean it makes a goddamn bit of real sense and they shouldn't demonize others for having the wisdom to see what Sanders is peddling for what it truly is: false promises.
Sander's supporters are the youth, not a racist, sexist, reactionary movement, unless you consider the youth to be that.
I've got news for you: Millennials are just as racist as their parents.
See, here we disagree. Experience means little if it won't be properly applied, and the nature of the presidency means that a lack of exact policy solutions is inconsequential. Bernie Sanders obviously cannot pass legislation, and on matters of executive policy he would defer to advisers. But because a Sanders presidency won't happen, this doesn't need to be discussed.
So I guess the whole "Commander in Chief of the world's largest, most powerful military to ever exist" means absolutely nothing then?
I've got news for you: Millennials are just as racist as their parents.
And those millennials go for Trump. You're spouting nonsense.
...a poll out from CNN on Wednesday finds [Sanders supporters] prefer Clinton to Trump by an 86-to-10 margin.
That's about the same ratio of Clinton supporters who voted for John McCain over Barack Obama in 2008, according to Emory political scientist Alan Abramowitz. And it's still early: As we move to the general election, Abramowitz says, Democrats are even more likely to swing behind their nominee.
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton
edit: bonus quote
Historical precedent: In July 2008, 54 percent of Clinton voters said they wouldn't support Barack Obama in a general election. (They even had a nickname, "PUMAs" — "party unity my ass," the 2008 analog to today's "Bernie or bust-ers.")
2016 Bernie supporters are already more supportive of Clinton than 2008 Clinton supporters were of Obama.
See, here we disagree. Experience means little if it won't be properly applied, and the nature of the presidency means that a lack of exact policy solutions is inconsequential. Bernie Sanders obviously cannot pass legislation, and on matters of executive policy he would defer to advisers. But because a Sanders presidency won't happen, this doesn't need to be discussed.
What advisers?
People are sick of seeing me type this, but Sanders has shrugged off the author of the argument for increasing the minimum wage as an "establishment" type and calls basic, evidence-based economics as "establishment economics".
Instead, he championed a crap study with crap data and crap assumptions.
The problem is precisely who would advise him.
Tranqueris
Banned
Maddow showing the fucking bird
I just remembered that "Hillary's nervous, also we're gonna win New York" poster...
shinra-bansho
Member
Corporations are absolutely a problem, because why should our livelihood be placed in the hands of unelected profit-seekers? A much better system would be cooperative businesses which are owned and operated by the workers, rather than a handful of lucky individuals. There's no reason why an effective estate tax needs to exist to the exclusion of regulations to limit the exploitative power of capitalists within their lifetimes.
Umm. No thanks.I think business should be democratized, and that workers ought to decide pay and resource allocation instead of giving all power to those on top. Workers deserve to earn from their labor without having to deal with profit-driven middlemen.
Best would be a socialistic system in which our lives were not completely consumed by labor. If the working class was paid properly, they'd be able to pursue their own self-expression much more freely.
Corporations are absolutely a problem, because why should our livelihood be placed in the hands of unelected profit-seekers? A much better system would be cooperative businesses which are owned and operated by the workers, rather than a handful of lucky individuals. There's no reason why an effective estate tax needs to exist to the exclusion of regulations to limit the exploitative power of capitalists within their lifetimes.
Sorry bro, but that's a terrible idea that has been proven to be inefficient and ineffective throughout the past century. Why would I want Tesla or SpaceX to be run by the collective workers, regardless of their intelligence, rather than have the clear minded leadership of Elon Musk who has the ability and vision to make progress happen. Obviously, we need to have regulations to reign in the risk and excess of the worst corporations, but by and large, they have proven to be vehicles that have optimized their products.
Shouldn't Oregon votes come in fast because it's all mail?
First they have to mail the results to CNN. Then CNN has to mail the results to all of their viewers individually.
It's the Oregon way!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Bernie leading in Orgeon by 4% OMG OMG OMG
So I guess the whole "Commander in Chief of the world's largest, most powerful military to ever exist" means absolutely nothing then?
Would you advocate that only persons with foreign policy experience become president? It's great that Hillary's been in this position, but most candidates don't have that luxury.
Sorry bro, but that's a terrible idea that has been proven to be inefficient and ineffective throughout the past century. Why would I want Tesla or SpaceX to be run by the collective workers, regardless of their intelligence, rather than have the clear minded leadership of Elon Musk who has the ability and vision to make progress happen. Obviously, we need to have regulations to reign in the risk and excess of the worst corporations, but by and large, they have proven to be vehicles that have optimized their products.
Elon Musk is a smart dude, but he works for his own success. He isn't overly concerned with the well-being of his workers, and his pursuit of science often isn't that scientific. Just look at his pie-in-the-sky pursuit of asteroid mining, which will make him very wealthy but not efficiently enrich our understanding of space. Somebody like Elon Musk can lead a company without using it as a framework to exploit those beneath him.
Umm. No thanks.
Why should so much power be held by people we didn't elect, and who don't care about our general well-being?
Half the vote in in Portland, up 8% for bernie.
lol steve is like wat
that seems low?
I've got news for you: Millennials are just as racist as their parents.
That does not do anything for your argument except state that Sanders voters (the youth) are equally, or slightly less likely, to be racist as hillarys (the older people)
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Sander's supporters are the youth, not a racist, sexist, reactionary movement, unless you consider the youth to be that. They are reacting to the global financial crisis, the lack of good jobs, and huge student loan debt, not a racist, sexist agenda. They are not the dregs and will only grow in numbers from here on out.
I largely agree. We tend to focus on the 30% or so of Sanders supporters who have a heavy presence online, will never vote for Hillary, and are largely a bunch of idiots. I'd expect most Sanders voters to vote for Hillary.
In terms of Sanders' legacy, I'd turn the question around and ask what is Ron Paul's legacy? How has Paul shaped the GOP? The answer is very little. There has been a liberal insurgent candidate in nearly every decade of democrat primaries. I see no reason to believe Sanders will have much of any impact on the party's future, or that his voters will sustain his "movement." Like Paul, they will largely sway between a variety of candidates whose only resemblance to Paul/Sanders is their anti establishment tone.
You've got to be a complete idiot with no ideological center to support both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, or even Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders. Those people have always existed, but not in large numbers so I don't focus on them. In terms of the democrat party's future? Barrack Obama.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Wow at marion county.
Possible actual fraud. I wonder if Sanders supporters will... oh nevermind.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm all for progressive taxation, social safety nets and service provision, effectively regulated industries and workplaces, and so on and so forth.
But you're really not going to convince me that if I establish an enterprise based on personal entrepreneurial effort, you should get to turn it into a hippy commune.
But you're really not going to convince me that if I establish an enterprise based on personal entrepreneurial effort, you should get to turn it into a hippy commune.
No you. That article is out of date. Here's one from today.And those millennials go for Trump. You're spouting nonsense.
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton
The only thing that Bernie has revolutionized is political harassment. Redneck Trump supporters beat protesters with their fists, like the good old days, but it's the Bernie supporters who are bringing GamerGate style doxxing tactics into the political arena. That is Bernie's legacy.In the wake of a chaotic state convention that resulted in death threats for party officials and vandalism to party headquarters, the Democratic establishment asked Bernie Sanders for his help Tuesday in getting some of his overzealous supporters to stand down. His response: Stick it.
As fallout from Saturday’s Nevada Democratic convention expanded across Democratic circles, the Vermont senator’s defiance appeared to confirm some of the party’s worst fears: The rifts caused by the presidential primary may be deeper than anyone knew.
Possible actual fraud. I wonder if Sanders supporters will... oh nevermind.
It legitimately could be a mistake. I don't see how such a massive gap is possible?
I'm all for progressive taxation, social safety nets and service provision, effectively regulated industries and workplaces, and so on and so forth.
But you're really not going to convince me that if I establish an enterprise based on personal entrepreneurial effort, you should get to turn it into a hippy commune.
Thank you for being far more eloquent and succint than I could ever hope to be <3
I know these threads can get pretty anti-Sanders, and I am sorry to contribute to it further. But one of the moments that really made me sour on Sanders was when he called Planned Parenthood part of the "establishment" because they endorsed Hillary Clinton.
It just irritated me. Clinton has always been a strong supporter of women's access to safe, legal abortions, a supporter of women's health issues, female empowerment, and an icon in her own right. Planned Parenthood is anything but "the establishment." As an organization it is always fighting for funding, fighting against political smears, and routinely dealing with all sorts of sexist protests and threats. Some people who work for PP deal with the most unfair bs simply because they are trying to provide health services to women (and men).
When Bernie threw all of that under the bus, he lost me big time.
It just irritated me. Clinton has always been a strong supporter of women's access to safe, legal abortions, a supporter of women's health issues, female empowerment, and an icon in her own right. Planned Parenthood is anything but "the establishment." As an organization it is always fighting for funding, fighting against political smears, and routinely dealing with all sorts of sexist protests and threats. Some people who work for PP deal with the most unfair bs simply because they are trying to provide health services to women (and men).
When Bernie threw all of that under the bus, he lost me big time.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
It legitimately could be a mistake. I don't see how such a massive gap is possible?
It's not.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah there has to be a zero missing somewhere. That seems a little implausible.
RustyNails
Member
GUIS
CNN Calls Oregon for Trump!
CNN Calls Oregon for Trump!
Officerrob
Banned
98% to 2% in Salem can't be right
No you. That article is out of date. Here's one from today.
lol I clicked expecting a new poll with more up to date information and instead all you give me is a reporter's hot take. Seriously?
And again
Historical precedent: In July 2008, 54 percent of Clinton voters said they wouldn't support Barack Obama in a general election. (They even had a nickname, "PUMAs" — "party unity my ass," the 2008 analog to today's "Bernie or bust-ers.")
2016 Bernie supporters are already more supportive of Clinton than 2008 Clinton supporters were of Obama.
lol I clicked expecting a new poll with more up to date information and instead all you give me is a reporter's hot take. Seriously?
Do you want to re-litigate the West Virginia polls?
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
So the black friends who have white friends have one-sided relationships?
Black people are more likely to befriend white people than vice versa (mostly) because there are more white people in the country overall. In terms of social circles, "the black friend" is spread more thinly than "the white friend". If I recall my high school, it was about 90% white and 10% black, so just about every black person had some amount of white friends but it was pretty easy for a white person to not have any black friends.
Macho Madness
Member
Kasich is beating Cruz right now in Oregon. Lol.
~Alliance~ paying dividends
- Status
- Not open for further replies.