[D_Man3379]

Originally posted by RatedG²

Facebook?

Her bark thing is a local event. No new station, publication, etc really covered that in depth. No one is gonna care after Nevada lol

Yahoo has apparently:

https://gma.yahoo.com/hillary-clinto...opstories.html

I don't see what the big deal is anyway.

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by ClarksonSlays

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...e_SC_21616.pdf



Crying

DEAD @ that and not sure

[Marvin]

Originally posted by King Maxx

This is media talk. No one who cares about their futures and problems care. They just want the best candidate for them. You're so gullible. Guess Bernie stans are like that.

We're gullible but you're the one supporting someone who used her private email to send top secret information? Okay lol

[RihRihGirrrl]

it's not like she was calling the Republicans dogs or even carnival barkers (although people have said that about Trump lol)

[Benzene]

Originally posted by ClarksonSlays

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...e_SC_21616.pdf



Crying

...how are you not sure though?

[King Maxx]

Originally posted by Marvin

We're gullible but you're the one supporting someone who used her private email to send top secret information? Okay lol

But I've admitted this. I just don't care. She's a better candidate than any other person. Politics and Washington is a evil place, but if it ensures a better future for me and my family then I don't care.

Hillary panders a lot, she changes her views too often, etc. Yet I'll still vote for her Nov 8, 2016 because she's an effective politician and can get the things that I want implemented done.

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by Benzene

...how are you not sure though?

!!!

[RihRihGirrrl]

Trump having more support amongst white supremacist than any other candidate is not surprising although it may just be a case of his supporters being more blunt and dumb enough to raise voice to their bigotry

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by RihRihGirrrl

Trump having more support amongst white supremacist than any other candidate is not surprising although it may just be a case of his supporters being more blunt and dumb enough to raise voice to their bigotry

I was thinking the same lol.

[Marvin]

Originally posted by King Maxx

But I've admitted this. I just don't care. She's a better candidate than any other person. Politics and Washington is a evil place, but if it ensures a better future for me and my family then I don't care.

Hillary panders a lot, she changes her views too often, etc. Yet I'll still vote for her Nov 8, 2016 because she's an effective politician and can get the things that I want implemented done.

She has to win the primary first.

-

Also something I've been wondering - why would Congress want to work with Hillary any more than Obama/Sanders? They hate her more than Obama. She gets called realistic but if she's really as progressive as she says, why would conservative Congress help her out to pass these progressive ideas?

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by Marvin

She has to win the primary first.

-

Also something I've been wondering - why would Congress want to work with Hillary any more than Obama/Sanders? They hate her more than Obama. She gets called realistic but if she's really as progressive as she says, why would conservative Congress help her out to pass these progressive ideas?

A few reasons

1) Her at the top of the ticket helps greatly down ticket, something she could use to her advantage. Democrats would get decimated with Sanders at the top of the ticket

2) Her ideas, while progressive, can actually get supported by republicans with talks. You'll never get republicans to vote for single payer. Ever

3) Shes a better negotiator in general, their records prove it

[King Maxx]

Well in my mind Hillary already won the nomination. So I'll always say "when" not "if"

[Marvin]

Originally posted by RatedG²

A few reasons

1) Her at the top of the ticket helps greatly down ticket, something she could use to her advantage. Democrats would get decimated with Sanders at the top of the ticket

2) Her ideas, while progressive, can actually get supported by republicans with talks. You'll never get republicans to vote for single payer. Ever

3) Shes a better negotiator in general, their records prove it

1) Proof? This sounds like an assumption based on the "Hillary is pragmatic" argument
2) Proof? Because according to this she doesn't have much bipartisan support
3) I was trying to leave Bernie out of it

[Marvin]

Originally posted by King Maxx

Well in my mind Hillary already won the nomination. So I'll always say "when" not "if"

She probably thought the same thing in 2008

[RatedG²]

Originally posted by Marvin

1) Proof? This sounds like an assumption based on the "Hillary is pragmatic" argument
2) Proof? Because according to this she doesn't have much bipartisan support
3) I was trying to leave Bernie out of it

1) Many Dems who are in red/purple states agree with that. You need conservative independent support and a democratic socialist at the top of the ticket will doom them all. This talks more about it
2) She sponsored a few bills which had bipartisan support. This was one bill passed with unanimous consent. And like I stated before as First Lady she lead the passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program, which even has republican co sponsors.
3)

[Marvin]

Originally posted by RatedG²

1) Many Dems who are in red/purple states agree with that. You need conservative independent support and a democratic socialist at the top of the ticket will doom them all. This talks more about it
2) She sponsored a few bills which had bipartisan support. This was one bill passed with unanimous consent. And like I stated before as First Lady she lead the passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program, which even has republican co sponsors.
3)

1) Eh anything could happen. “What’s more clear is Senator Clinton,” he said, “does better with key Democratic constituencies.” She does better with the establishment - shocker! Bernie has shown to do better with Independent and Republican voters than Hillary so this is still a bit confusing to me.

2) Why would anyone vote against that bill? Not the best example But the CHIP was a great bill. Bernie has bills like this also so again I don't see where she has an advantage.

Hillary might be a very great negotiator and speaker but I just don't see any reason why they would be any more excited to work Hillary than Bernie.

[MAKSIM]

Nnn at Bernie supporters using email thing now straight out of the Rush Limbaugh handbook

[iamvladd]

Finally a poll from Nevada:

Clinton 48%
Sanders 47%

CNN/ORC

[ABEL-o-matic]

Pull through Hillary!

[foxaylove]

While the Danes are flattered by all the attention, they want to ensure that the love coming from Sanders doesn't confuse people into thinking they describe themselves "socialists," too. Sanders has clarified that his democratic socialism is not the same as "socialist" in the traditional sense of a purely government-controlled economy. But that hasn't stopped Danish leaders from ensuring there is no misconception about their own system.

"I would like to make one thing clear," Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said recently in a speech at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. "Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy."

But it is a market with many differences from the United States. All Danish citizens have access to child care, state-guaranteed medical and parental leave from work, free college tuition in which students receive a paycheck from the government during enrollment, free health care and a generous pension, all of which Sanders supports.

"Free" is actually the wrong word to describe these services. Danes pay some of the highest taxes in the world, including a 25% tax on all goods and services, a top marginal tax rate hovering near 60%. The top tax rate in the U.S., by comparison, is less than 40%.

But there are aspects to the Danish model that you would never see on Sanders' policy platform. As a small country heavily reliant on trade, Denmark imposes minimal tariffs on foreign goods. Businesses here are only lightly regulated. The corporate tax rate is much lower than in the United States, which has one of the highest in the world. There's not even a minimum wage in Denmark, although most workers are paid high salaries in large part due to the strength of labor unions. And in the past few years, Danish voters elected a right-of-center government, which has been instituting reforms that have put tighter restrictions on access to the long-held safety net.

The Scandinavian region sure do have some interesting political practices. I like how CNN traveled to Denmark to see what the press, public, and politicians are saying over there, when a leading American Presidential candidate is referencing to their successful healthcare and education model. It's a good read for all sides.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politi...tic-socialism/