Support NeoGAF

[Damerman]

Hillary has many times. She said overturning Citizens United would be a litmus test of hers for any Supreme Court nomination in fact.

just googled it... OK. Like i said before, all the way back to the debate thread, Hillary is looking better than before, but I can't help but feel a very strong bias against establishment candidates.

It's a sound strategy from her, and i hope she keeps her word. and i also hope she doesn't overturn Citizens United without some backhanded law that serves as a replacement. Bait and switch is democrats best game(Dodd-Frank is bullshit and you guys know it) and they always use "but we had to compromise with crazy republicans" as a scapegoat.

 

[Jeevesmeister]

at the risk of sounding like a Bernie stan, has any other democratic candidate, aside from Bernie of course, ever even mentioned this?

Why would Hillary turn on the same foundations that got her campaign funded? Gimme a fuckin' break.

I didn't know that Clinton wants to deport millions of Hispanics, start war in Syria with Russia and get rid of all social security

Hey, maybe then things would get bad enough the Democratic party would stop pretending that half-ass enabling is going to actually fix any of our problems. As far as a war with Russia in Syria? You just have to look at all their fuckery in the Ukraine to see that is absolutely a potential outcome now with us putting troops on the ground.

Considering how bad Obamacare is for those below the poverty line, I wouldn't expect a meaningful, sustainable approvement from Mrs. "Third Term."

 

[Cheebo]

and they always use "but we had to compromise with crazy republicans" as a scapegoat.

It isn't a scapegoat when it is true. You HAVE to compromise with them. Seeing how they control all of Congress.

 

[rjinaz]

Still rooting for Bernie until he drops out. Too early to think otherwise. Right now I'm more interested in how the Republican race is going to end up.

 

[Armaros]

just googled it... OK. Like i said before, all the way back to the debate thread, Hillary is looking better than before, but I can't help but feel a very strong bias against establishment candidates.

It's a sound strategy from her, and i hope she keeps her word. and i also hope she doesn't overturn Citizens United without some backhanded law that serves as a replacement. Bait and switch is democrats best game(Dodd-Frank is bullshit and you guys know it) and they always use "but we had to compromise with crazy republicans" as a scapegoat.

So, in your hypothetical Bernie Presidency, how does he get anything past a Republican or mostly-Republican controlled Congress if compromise is off the table completely. Or does Bernie rewrite the Constitution so that laws doing dont need a Congressional Vote to be enacted?

 

[Damerman]

So, in your hypothetical Bernie Presidency, how does he get anything past a Republican or mostly-republican controlled Congress if compromise is off the table completely.

how is obamacare still here? how did obama grant citizenship to millions of illegals? How did obama get gay marriage to pass when there are tons of assholes like Huckabee walking around? how did obama administration make it through shutdowns untarnished?

you guys overestimate the amount of tea party supporters.

 

[Armaros]

how is obamacare still there? how did obama grant citizenship to millions of illegals?

So you wont answer my question, Obamacare of itself is compromise, and Obama used Executive orders and he did not grant citizenship, what an absurd statement.

The majority of Bernie's campaign promises cannot be done with Executive Orders so he will get to interact with a GOP controlled House at the minimum.

 

[Cheebo]

Why would Hillary turn on the same foundations that got her campaign funded? Gimme a fuckin' break.

Because the Republicans benefit from it FAAAAAAAAR more than her. It is to her advantage to dismantle it. Also guess what? Hillary is a liberal with liberal views. Having over-turning it as SC litmus test fits her political positions.

 

[Foffy]

Why would Hillary turn on the same foundations that got her campaign funded? Gimme a fuckin' break.



Hey, maybe then things would get bad enough the Democratic party would stop pretending that half-ass enabling is going to actually fix any of our problems. As far as a war with Russia in Syria? You just have to look at all their fuckery in the Ukraine to see that is absolutely a potential outcome now with us putting troops on the ground.

Considering how bad Obamacare is for those below the poverty line, I wouldn't expect a meaningful, sustainable approvement from Mrs. "Third Term."

Please specify. If this is true, I doubt it's common knowledge. Wasn't Obamacare supposed to help them with Medicaid?

 

[Elfforkusu]

Bummer. I can smell the GOP supermajority already.

 

[rjinaz]

So, in your hypothetical Bernie Presidency, how does he get anything past a Republican or mostly-republican controlled Congress if compromise is off the table completely.

I hope that changes during Bernie's or Clinton's presidency. Otherwise neither get much done. Will Hillary get more done than Bernie? Maybe. Probably. Who knows. Dems need to vote during midterms dammit.

 

[LosDaddie]

There's a lot of potential 2024 candidates simply waiting this cycle out because Clinton is that formidable of an opponent this year.

Democrats have a slender field this year when compared to the wide GOP field, half of whom are simply media opportunists rather than sincere candidates.

It's a two-fold problem.

1)Shithead Dems not voting in the midterms, which would've allowed Dem politicians to build up a good resume for a run in 2016.

2) Shithead Dem politicians running away from Obama in the midterms, giving their voters no reason to vote for them other than not having GOP in office.

 

[KHarvey16]

It's always entertaining to see people with way more passion than knowledge. I would say it's a good thing that more people become interested, but unfortunately their ignorance tends to betray a very shallow commitment and interest.

 

[campfireweekend]

how is obamacare still there? how did obama grant citizenship to millions of illegals?

This makes no sense as a response to that question. And your second point never even happened.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I didn't say I used corporate whore to describe Hillary but that id avoid using it in the future to avoid arguments like this that have no bearing on why I would rather Bernie be the nominee. The oh he said bitch so he must be a sexist is fair but not at all true. I use bitches to describe the 49ers on a daily basis.

Uhh... insulting men by calling them women? How is that not sexist again?

 

[tomtom94]

Midterms being the problem reinforces my theory that if he doesn't get the nomination Sanders will be appointed to take charge of a campaign to get Democratic voters out for the midterms.

 

[rjinaz]

It's always entertaining to see people with way more passion than knowledge. I would say it's a good thing that more people become interested, but unfortunately their ignorance tends to betray a very shallow commitment and interest.

I would argue that passion and limited knowledge is better than no passion and limited knowledge which is most of the American people.

 

[Cheebo]

how is obamacare still there? how did obama grant citizenship to millions of illegals?

Obamacare was passed before Republicans controlled congress. It would NEVER pass in todays congress. And Republicans are 100% guaranteed to hold the house in the 2016 elections.

If your point is you need to hold all branches of government to pass things without compromise, then yes that is correct. But Democrats do not control all branches of government and will not control all branches of government regardless who is President.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Hey, maybe then things would get bad enough the Democratic party would stop pretending that half-ass enabling is going to actually fix any of our problems.

Yeah, fuck all those people that would be affected by a republican president. Maybe they'll finally realize what's best for them. It must be easy for you to say stuff like this if it won't affect you.

 

[Kusagari]

We haven't even seen if Sanders can get people out to vote for him directly.

 

[Holmes]

I'll have my 300 page report on your desk by 6am tomorrow.

If you're not even going to back up your candidate then why should I care?

 

[shoplifter]

It's always entertaining to see people with way more passion than knowledge. I would say it's a good thing that more people become interested, but unfortunately their ignorance tends to betray a very shallow commitment and interest.

Some of us are more interested in taking a principled stand, even if it's not in our immediate interests.

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Please specify. If this is true, I doubt it's common knowledge. Wasn't Obamacare supposed to help them with Medicaid?

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinion/atlas-obamacare-poor-middle-class/

Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ht-obamacares-five-years-of-failure/?page=all

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/31/florida-medicaid-uninsured_n_4680566.html

It's common knowledge, and should be obvious since it was originally a Republican plan in the first place.

 

[SimleuqiR]

From this reddit/politics thread from this morning:

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/3qfdl0/clinton_has_41_point_lead_over_sanders_in_iowa/



It goes on and on. There are plenty of Bernie supporters who want to see a "course correction" (i.e. elect the GOP and let the country burn to prove how shitty their politics are) if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. The only problem with their strategy is that is demonstrably doesn't work (case and point Kansas).

Well I hope they personally pay for a GOP president getting into the white house. No, seriously. They rather have a GOP president than Hillary? GTFO with this nonsense.

 

[Byakuya769]

Bernie Sanders just issued a statement on these polls.

On second thought, maybe people really do want to hear about your damn emails!

 

[shoplifter]

Uhh... insulting men by calling them women? How is that not sexist again?

Can we just call them motherfuckers instead?

 

[teruterubozu]

It's a two-fold problem.

1)Shithead Dems not voting in the midterms, which would've allowed Dem politicians to build up a good resume for a run in 2016.

2) Shithead Dem politicians running away from Obama in the midterms, giving their voters no reason to vote for them other than not having GOP in office.

Or just week local Democrats, of which there were many. Part of it is Dems also don't spend much money on midterms to put out and endorse quality local candidates. The GOP on the other hand goes full tilt.

 

[Armaros]

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinion/atlas-obamacare-poor-middle-class/

Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ht-obamacares-five-years-of-failure/?page=all

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/31/florida-medicaid-uninsured_n_4680566.html

It's common knowledge, and should be obvious since it was originally a Republican plan in the first place.

I take it this includes all of those States that refused to expand Medicaid under ObamaCare?

And then those same people turn around and call ObamaCare a failure?

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

It's always entertaining to see people with way more passion than knowledge. I would say it's a good thing that more people become interested, but unfortunately their ignorance tends to betray a very shallow commitment and interest.

And even worse, it's hard to keep your monocle from popping out when you look down your nose at the wriggling mass of ignorant fools who place conscience above fear of opposition. Disgusting, if mildly bemusing, that.

 

[dehydratedbabies]

If you're not even going to back up your candidate then why should I care?

Dog, I'm at work and posting in spare moments. I'm sorry if you're relying on me to care.

 

[Bronx-Man]

It's always entertaining to see people with way more passion than knowledge. I would say it's a good thing that more people become interested, but unfortunately their ignorance tends to betray a very shallow commitment and interest.

Passion turns into apathy very quickly when these voters go head-to-head with reality.

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Yeah, fuck all those people that would be affected by a republican president. Maybe they'll finally realize what's best for them. It must be easy for you to say stuff like this if it won't affect you.

Way to make some leaps and bounds assumptions, bud.

It actually does affect me, and millions of people around the world. This is the long game that you're too short-sighted to see - another four years of failed half-ass Democratic Party lollygagging while things get progressively worse and worse won't fix a damn thing, and the Republicans will quickly capitalize on it before you know it, and will be able to push policies that will be way worse.

When you're done guilt-tripping and insulting someone for not falling in line behind a pseudo-progressive imperialist that wants to keep us dumping billions into warzones we're not capable of making positive change in, among countless other things, let me know.

 

[gutter_trash]

Bernie voted against the Brady Bill just to not piss off farmers.

a Left winger on side with the NRA

 

[ivysaur12]

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinion/atlas-obamacare-poor-middle-class/

Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ht-obamacares-five-years-of-failure/?page=all

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/31/florida-medicaid-uninsured_n_4680566.html

It's common knowledge, and should be obvious since it was originally a Republican plan in the first place.

It's common knowledge that there's a Medicaid expansion gap that various red states have not passed, allowing people to fall into this gap. That's what the HuffPo article you linked to is about. That's not a problem with the original bill, but with the SCOTUS ruling that requiring states to expand Medicaid is unconstitutional.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Some of us are more interested in taking a principled stand, even if it's not in our immediate interests.

Your principled stand could cost you a SC with an additional Scalia and Thomas deciding most of the big issues the country will face for a lot longer than the immediate future.

 

[Kusagari]

Way to make some leaps and bounds assumptions, bud.

It actually does affect me, and millions of people around the world. This is the long game that you're too short-sighted to see - another four years of failed half-ass Democratic Party lollygagging while things get progressively worse and worse won't fix a damn thing, and the Republicans will quickly capitalize on it before you know it, and will be able to push policies that will be way worse.

When you're done guilt-tripping and insulting someone for not falling in line behind a pseudo-progressive imperialist that wants to keep us dumping billions into warzones we're not capable of making positive change in, among countless other things, let me know.

A GOP president will almost certainly get to stack the Supreme Court for decades and would be disastrous for this country.

Have fun then because a president Bernie will have no power to reverse their decisions anyway.

 

[BertramCooper]

Some of us are more interested in taking a principled stand, even if it's not in our immediate interests.

Principled stands are nice when you're in a position where you can afford to take them.

But there are a lot of people in the Democratic coalition, many of them minorities, who have too much at stake to be blindly idealistic in their selection of a presidential candidate.

 

[Bronx-Man]

Your principled stand could cost you a SC with an additional Scalia and Thomas deciding most of the big issues the country will face for a lot longer than the immediate future.

Shhhhhh, let's not talk about how goddamn important SC nominations are, we've entered a realm where those don't exist.

 

[Damerman]

And your second point never even happened.

so obama didn't offer 5 million illegals amnesty despite the GOP?

 

[Hylian7]

Sad, I would rather have had Bernie than Hillary, but I'm okay with Hillary.

 

[tomtom94]

I believe the adage "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" applies here.

 

[shoplifter]

Your principled stand could cost you a SC with an additional Scalia and Thomas deciding most of the big issues the country will face for a lot longer than the immediate future.

Like I said, we get the candidates we deserve. I'm done giving a shit about the two party system at this point.

 

[campfireweekend]

so obama didn't offer 5 million illegals amnesty despite the GOP?

He didn't offer them citizenship because that's not within his power. That was your assertion.

 

[Amentallica]

Some of us are more interested in taking a principled stand, even if it's not in our immediate interests.

Your principled stand is stupid and dangerous for the exact reason that supreme court justices can wreak havoc for decades if they are appointed by a Republican president.

Like I said, we get the candidates we deserve. I'm done giving a shit about the two party system at this point.

Okay.

 

[Damaniel]

People in this thread have got to be kidding themselves considering today's news.

Considering everyone is calling Hillary a third term Obama (supporting Obama's troop extension in Iraq) and we're now deploying troops in Syria (and sending more to Iraq when we should have been out of there a long time ago) because that worked so well the last three times we've tried to fight an enemy like ISIS, I can't help but fuckin' laugh if you think Clinton is somehow better than a Republican any way at this point. How many more innocent Arab kids does queen, yaassss Hillary need to slay before you wake up to how inexcusable, and frankly unsustainable this is.

With Clinton you're just dragging out the inevitable. The Left won't rush to the polls for this come time for the general election, regardless of how many guilt trips you try to throw out, and a Republican will take the White House come 2016, mark my words.

In the real world (and not the Bernie world), the gap between Hillary and the GOP is miles wide - far, far wider than the gap between Hillary and Bernie could ever be. If that somehow makes me a stooge for the oligarchy or a warmonger, so be it - but I know what the other side of that chasm has waiting for us, and I'd rather not have to see or experience it.

Also, while Hillary is somewhat hawkish, at least she has a foreign policy. Bernie is so solidly stuck on economic policy that I have no idea how he'd manage foreign matters. Like it or not, we're going to be stuck in the Middle East for at least a while longer (thanks, Bush), and I don't know if I trust Sanders to do the right thing. He might be more willing to pull out sooner, but would it be too soon? Would he even care all that much?

So how long until Clinton is just on a stage talking to herself?

Hopefully not until the convention, at least. Sure, she's pretty much guaranteed to win, but Bernie is helping to shape the policies of the Democrats this time around. His overall policy (which is almost purely economic) is completely unrealistic and has no defined source of funding, but the ideas are solid and can be made into something workable. If Hillary can be nudged in that direction then all the better.

Some of us are more interested in taking a principled stand, even if it's not in our immediate interests.

I'm sure all the people who have access to health care thanks to Obamacare, or access to reproductive services, or access to marriage regardless of sexual orientation, or who make use of any part of the social safety net for their well being will be really happy that you're willing to screw them over in the name of principles. It's not always about just you, or just me, but 'us', collectively. Self-centeredness is a trait of the right wing - it shouldn't be a trait of the left.

 

[Slayven]

Principled stands are nice when you're in a position where you can afford to take them.

But there are a lot of people in the Democratic coalition, many of them minorities, who have too much at stake to be blindly idealistic in their selection of a presidential candidate.

BC why are you so right, minorities have too much skin in the game to be playing with votes

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Again, let's look back at the last 8 years of Obama, of which Hillary served as secretary of state of, and is argued as Obama's "Third Term" here:

-bombed 7 countries
-record arms sales at home
-proxy wars in Yemen & Syria
-wrecked Libya
-escalated in Afghanistan, with no positive gain
-huge increase special ops/drones, killing 90% innocents

There's no argument being made that Hillary would somehow make any of these things any better, and there's certainly precedent that she would make things even worse. American exceptionalism aside, the just giving up before its even the year of the election and falling in line behind this disastrous, pointless slaughter of innocents across the globe is really quite telling.

 

[ivysaur12]

It's not just SC appointments that are on the line. There's a lot of work that the executive can do that would be absolutely undone by a Republican presidency. But take a line in the sand with a candidate that has facially similar stances to the one you're supporting.

 

[shoplifter]

Your principled stand is stupid and dangerous for the exact reason that supreme court justices can wreak havoc for decades if they are appointed by a Republican president.

If people are that pissed off by what happens, they should probably be out in the streets wrecking shit. We're probably due for a healthy uprising anyway.


\/\/ that I can agree with.

 

[Arkeband]

I dunno why Sanders would have a harder time getting laws passed than Hillary when Republicans just finished their longest witch hunt against her yet.

People expecting bipartisanism with either candidate are in for a rude awakening.