| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016: Primary Season
Member Since: 7/13/2010
Posts: 11,566
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
Now sis, that's not the way to go if insurgent millennials disproportionately over-liberalize the Democratic Party's primary process, even I know that.
Vote Bloomberg!
|
Don't you study something about finances/economics? There is a clear market available for a gay republican to swoop in and let these hennies know that the Republican Party is the party of diversity. I am here, I am queer, and I stump for trump (woo lord I could already imagine myself standing at a podium at one of his rallies saying this to all those masc college frat boys and daddies). On top of that would be network coverage, articles, book deals, etc. Let 2016 be the year the Republican Party became welcoming for the rainbow flag sistrens.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 3,730
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MAKSIM
I can only hope Bernie gets the democratic nomination so I can finally vote republican, go on Fox News for starting Gays for Trump, and become a political commentator there
|
I will pray for you
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MAKSIM
Don't you study something about finances/economics? There is a clear market available for a gay republican to swoop in and let these hennies know that the Republican Party is the party of diversity. On top of that would be network coverage, articles, book deals, etc. Let 2016 be the year the Republican Party became welcoming for the rainbow flag sistrens.
|
I'm in business, but nonetheless, I... respectfully disagree.
I'm a slight fiscal constervative - really I consider myself a moderate or centrist - myself, but Republicans anymore are just not socially liberal. Whatever such a man would be considered, it wouldn't be Republican.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 59,596
|
Quote:
Originally posted by The Countess
I wonder if Jason Kander is going to be able to beat my incumbent senator Roy Blunt.
|
Young family man, a military vet inspired from the events of 9/11, new to the machines of DC but in the know as Secretary of State for Missouri. Pro-choice, good ratings with education and finance reform, strong environment backer, hated by the NRA. Sounds like someone with a good chance considering Blunt has had a few scandals recently. I should donate to him.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MAKSIM
I am here, I am queer, and I stump for Trump
|
Lord God above 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 3,730
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
Now sis, that's not the way to go if insurgent millennials disproportionately over-liberalize the Democratic Party's primary process, even I know that.
Vote Bloomberg!
|
what exactly about Bernie's policy do you hate so much?
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by hooky
So the US's downfall began with Lincoln? Because the same two parties have been in power since his presidency. Even before that, there were always two dominant parties, save for two brief periods from 1824 to 1829 when the Federalists lost support and the Democratic-Republicans split up into the Jacksonian movement (today's Democrats) and the National Republicans (never became popular and was replaced by the Whigs in the 1830s) and a bit in the 1850s when the Whigs died out and the GOP rose. Washington was the only independent president ever. Every other president has been a member of one of the two dominant political parties at the time.
Our best years economically were under the current party system. While third parties had much more support in the early 20th century, they weren't close to being as big as other countries' third parties. The two-party system worked for most of our country's life; it's only recently it's become a visible problem.
|
Actually, since you brought him up, yes, this did begin with Lincoln. No other POTUS has blatantly disregarded, ignored, and/or reviled the US Constitution as much as Lincoln. I would recommend reading Thomas DiLorenzo's The Real Lincoln and Lincoln Unmasked, and Judge Andrew Napolitano's Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. Unlike what you read about in high school and even many college history textbooks, Lincoln had no interest in ending slavery until European powers considered intervening on the CSA's side.
However, the corruption in the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) escalated substantially since it changed the rules to ensure another non-Republican or Democrat couldn't get into the debates after Ross Perot brought 13.5 million extra voters to the polls on Election Day 1992. The CPD raised the threshold for placing in polls to 15%, and only uses polls that are limited to the Democratic and Republican Candidates. You can read a LOT more about the CPD on the Our America Initiative website.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 59,596
|
I'd be fine with a Bernie presidency. I'd be worried, more than anything, of another Carter type presidency with a lot of ambition and lots of good will that falls on it's face and hurting the name of a great man.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,228
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
Hillary's been working on Democratic campaigns since before Bernie did literally anything political and worked toward her healthcare goals in particular a decade before that speech, but I guess a 1988 endorsement is cute.
 |
Why do you use Bernie's time as an independent against him? You act like he's been working with republicans or something. All of his policies have been far left, liberal policies. This argument continues to makes 0 sense. Being an independent just means you have no affiliation with the two major political parties. Bernie clearly agrees more with the ideas and policies of the democratic party (always has) hence why he's running as a democrat. Sure a big part of his decision to run as a democrat was so he'd have an actual chance at winning, that he wouldn't have had as an independent, but it's not like he's going to employ right wing policies once elected.
As usual, the Hillsters have nothing to use against Sanders so they have to make **** up.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Andres
what exactly about Bernie's policy do you hate so much?
|
The idealism, the infeasibility, the fact that it relies on voting in new people up and down the ticket when support for the policies does not exist, the potential economic implications of a $15 minimum wage
et cetera
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike91
As usual, the Hillsters have nothing to use against Sanders so they have to make **** up.
|
lmao okay
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 3,730
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
The idealism, the infeasibility, the fact that it relies on voting in new people up and down the ticket when support for the policies does not exist, the potential economic implications of a $15 minimum wage
et cetera
|
girl that's it? please tell me there's something more, there has to be more 
|
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 4/5/2014
Posts: 5,828
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Marvin
I don't see anything negative about Bernie in those articles  |
The article discussing the DNC Chair's plan to use Superdelegates to force Bernie Sanders out of the primaries will remove him from contention. The DNC Chair is heavily pro-Clinton, and her showing favoritism toward Clinton during the primary process is completely against the rules. Sanders' supporters should vote for Green Party Candidate Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton, as Sanders has far more in common with Stein than Clinton (Sanders and Stein are also both Jewish BTW).
With Rand Paul out of the running, Sanders, along with Republican Ben Carson, are likely the least evil of the duopoly's candidates, although his sudden shift from pro-gun rights to pro-gun control is quite concerning. I can't vote for a Socialist, but Sanders and non-Socialist Republican Ben Carson probably are the least corrupt and most sincere about their message. I couldn't vote for Carson either though, since we don't see eye-to-eye either (he also wants to grow government, just in a different way I don't approve of either).
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
13 more hours
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/12/2012
Posts: 7,989
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Andres
what exactly about Bernie's policy do you hate so much?
|
I'm not Retro, but I'll voice in anyway. I don't hate Bernie's policies.
However, I recognize that Hillary and Bernie overlap on most of the important issues. They're both progressive candidates. However, Hillary is a moderate and Bernie is a radical. Hillary is wanting to make incremental change because she doesn't see it viable to promise big changes and then get into a gridlock which is very likely under a Republican-led Congress. An example of this would be raising the minimum wage... I don't feel all that comfortable with a 107% raise in minimum wage when Bernie's yet to cite a single economist that agrees with him on that notion. I would rather make a small change to raise it, have economists (you know, the people that understand that issue very well) see and analyze the impact and if additional raises would be worth it and would improve the economy, and then move from there. I don't feel comfortable having a radical change and then have it cause a bigger issue. Too much too fast is never a smart approach. Further, we've never really had change happen radically. When confronted with the challenge of passing radical, progressive change in a conservative Congress, Bernie simply responds with something along the lines of "I will make it happen!" or "Political revolution!" While it's idealistic, I don't have faith in a revolution against a system led by someone who is running to be the face of the system.
I actually trust Hillary's ability to get things done with our government because she seems to have a more realistic understanding of how to work within our system, despite it being inhibited to change. Bernie simply doesn't. Further, I also realize the president does not have as much power as a lot of people think. Above all, the president is the commander-in-chief and Bernie has completely failed himself in showing himself to not only be well equipped to take on issues of foreign policy well, but he also doesn't seem interested in those issues... Despite that being something the president actually has plenty of control over.
Hillary overall has more breadth (in terms of how many policies and issues she's concerned with) and depth (in how she speaks about executing policy, details, etc.) on every single issue. Bernie is wonderful for rallying people up and sparking interest in the flaws of the establishment, the economic model, etc. But, he has yet to explain how things will work out.
I like Bernie. I think he would do a great job in a cabinet position (like Secretary of Treasury), but he simply has not proven himself to me that he has the depth or understanding of what it takes to be president. Of anyone on either side, Hillary has that knowledge and understanding more than anyone else. Having served as first lady and secretary of state, working alongside two presidents... She knows what it takes and I have faith that she can translate that into a great presidency. I don't believe Bernie is capable of that.
Also, Bernie (and his fans) trying to sell himself as the Jesus figure of American politics it the most nauseating thing I've seen in this campaign (in my opinion).
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by brianc33616
The article discussing the DNC Chair's plan to use Superdelegates to force Bernie out of the primaries will remove him from contention. His supporters should vote for Green Party Candidate Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton, as Sanders has far more in common with Stein than Clinton.
With Rand Paul out of the running, Sanders, along with Republican Ben Carson, are likely the least evil of the duopoly's candidates, although his sudden shift from pro-gun rights to pro-gun control is quite concerning. I can't vote for a Socialist, but Sanders and non-Socialist Republican Ben Carson probably are the least corrupt and most sincere about their message. I couldn't vote for Carson either though, since we don't see eye-to-eye either.
|
Superdelegates have been a thing since the 80s. It's not some new concept to force Sanders out
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/13/2010
Posts: 11,566
|
Any logic that almost leads you to voting for Carson is almost....no, let me not.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/20/2012
Posts: 27,830
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Retro
Now sis, that's not the way to go if insurgent millennials disproportionately over-liberalize the Democratic Party's primary process, even I know that.
Vote Bloomberg!
|
Young people are the largest voting bloc in the country. They just have low voter turnout. Not really disproportional!
And the Democratic Party has been moving more and more to the right over the years. It wouldn't be a bad thing to shift it back to the left.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Young people the largest voting bloc? They don't even vote 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/20/2012
Posts: 27,830
|
Quote:
Originally posted by brianc33616
The article discussing the DNC Chair's plan to use Superdelegates to force Bernie Sanders out of the primaries will remove him from contention. His supporters should vote for Green Party Candidate Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton, as Sanders has far more in common with Stein than Clinton (Sanders and Stein are also both Jewish BTW).
With Rand Paul out of the running, Sanders, along with Republican Ben Carson, are likely the least evil of the duopoly's candidates, although his sudden shift from pro-gun rights to pro-gun control is quite concerning. I can't vote for a Socialist, but Sanders and non-Socialist Republican Ben Carson probably are the least corrupt and most sincere about their message. I couldn't vote for Carson either though, since we don't see eye-to-eye either. |
He's not a socialist.
But yeah the superdelegates thing is a bit worrying. If the DNC establishment really want Hillary, they could use those to get her the nomination when she starts losing the popular vote.
I've actually seen a lot of people saying they'll vote Stein over Clinton if she wins the Democratic nomination. It'll be interesting to see what happens!
|
|
|
|
|
|
