Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2016 - 06:48pm PT
|
Daresay, sounds a tad self righteous. c'mon man...if you outlawed self-righteousness on SuperTaco, the # of posts would take a serious nose dive ;-)
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 04:27am PT
|
From Politifact
False/Mostly False/Pants on fire:
Clinton: 29% Sanders 30%
People keep insisting that Sanders is the "authentic" candidate. The one willing to say it like it is. He speaks in broad platitudes, rarely with policy details. He evokes passion using emotional, inclusive language and this has allowed him to connect to a large number of passionate people, especially younger voters. Nobody cares that most of his policy ideas are dead on arrival.
Clinton is supposed to be the corrupt, deceitful establishment candidate who changes her views to fit what people want to hear. She speaks in considerably more detail than Sanders and any emotion in her policy often gets buried beneath wonky details and attempts to maintain nuance. Sanders has no problem brushing aside the petty details to make grand, bold statements where Clinton balks, not wanting to ignore the complexity.
Has anyone considered that maybe Sanders isn't more authentic, he's just better at telling liberals what they want to hear? He is, in fact, a better politician than Clinton? Don't liberals typically pride themselves on being better informed, more concerned with detail, more interested in the complex realities of policy and real world consequence of government than the ignorant Republicans they scoff at? And yet now liberals are all too happy to accept 25 years of Republican scandal propaganda because it suits their immediate political mood. They rush to cry "foul" at the delegate count, more than happy to ignore the rules and structures that grossly favor their candidate.
I began this election eager for Sanders to do well but knowing that Clinton was ultimately the right choice despite my disagreements with her. All things point to this coming to pass but I did not realize that in the process I would become so skeptical of fellow liberals.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 06:12am PT
|
I'm not the one comparing him to Lenin,TT, which is absurd, nor am I calling you names.
Were you throwing dollar bills at Hillary's motorcade in SF last night? Because she's raising $$ for the Democrat Party, so we take back congress? Do you know that to get any of his or Hillary's agendas actually enacted into law it would mean Democrats making big gains in Nov? Rallies and protests are fine, but the hard facts are that with our currents laws in place it takes $$ to win elections.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 06:25am PT
|
Comparing Bernie to Lenin...now that's Hyperbole Crankman. I don't mind Bernie being criticized. He's not perfect. There are plenty of reasons to take issue with some of his proposals but the idea that Bernie plans to establish an authoritarian communist regime is ludicrous.
Well, that's the main problem with Bernie's candidacy: he's ripe for such attacks.
Is it fair? NO. Is it ignorant? YES. That doesn't matter. Much of the masses would beieve these smears anyway. He would be linked to every fringey lefty group from the last 50 years.
Remember the Bill Ayers attacks Obama had to endure 8 years ago? Kids stuff.
Besides, the country, politically, is much more moderate than Sanders.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 06:45am PT
|
Love SNL last night...on breaking up the big banks, ala Seinfeld...
"“Once I’m elected president, I’ll have a nice schvitz in the White House gym, I’ll sit them down and yada yada yada, they’ll be broken up."
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 08:28am PT
|
Bernie people...answer two questions...how is Bernie going to pay for free college to all and what congress is going to pass the bill?
Answer #1: How Bernie pays for his proposals
Answer #2: Is that a serious question, because I think you know the answer (even before you asked it).
How about this: How is any candidate going to pass legislation during the next term, be it Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Kasich. You think Clinton is going to walk into office and Bingo, all her campaign proposals will instantly get bills approved in congress?
On the last Dem debate: Man, that was Fireworks! There were times when I hated to see Sanders dip into the attack bucket, but then again, I think he knew this was the last chance he'd get to air is anti-establishment message. Sure, his campaign will linger, but once Clinton takes NY, I doubt she'll agree to any more debates--and Sanders knows this. And that's my belief why he brought a shotgun to the fight.
In any case, he got very important messages out there. Hitting Israel on over-responding, climate change needing more than incremental steps, Hillary's coziness with the banks, and so on.
Highly unlikely that Clinton will not get the nod, and also very unlikely she will lose the general. And the Koch's know this--they've pull all their contributions out of the general and are now focusing on state and local elections. It's time we turn our attention to these races, where there is a lot to win/lose.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 08:39am PT
|
K-man wrote: How about this: How is any candidate going to pass legislation during the next term, be it Trump, Cruz, Clinton, Kasich. You think Clinton is going to walk into office and Bingo, all her campaign proposals will instantly get bills approved in congress?
No I don't think she will, I think she has the better chance of getting a democrat senate elected.
I think Bernie is "pie in the sky".
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 08:49am PT
|
Highly unlikely that Clinton will not get the nod, and also very unlikely she will lose the general. And the Koch's know this--they've pull all their contributions out of the general and are now focusing on state and local elections. It's time we turn our attention to these races, where there is a lot to win/lose.
Agreed, especially some traditional republican strongholds such as Georgia, Texas, and North Carolina may be winnable in the coming years.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 09:03am PT
|
think about the people at your local gear shop...
they make $20,000 a year, many can't afford health insurance,
they are your friends right? People you interact with, maybe even respect?
So Dan the shop guy is walking down the street, no health insurance, not because he doesn't want it, but simply can't afford it after rent, bills, gas, car payment...
Dan the shop guy gets hit by a deadbeat driver with no car insurance and breaks his legs.
Now Dan is in debt for the rest of his life, will never be able to own a house, never be able to afford college, can't buy a car, loses his job because he cant get to work etc..
You think that is ok? that in america in 2016, the land of the free, someone should be trapped in a false debt for decades?
I ran the numbers for a 26 year old, earning 20k. Found a Bronze with premiums would be $5.97/mo.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2016 - 10:16am PT
|
What k-man posted ^^^
Has anyone considered that maybe Sanders isn't more authentic, he's just better at telling liberals what they want to hear? Sanders has consistently championed the cause of working class people his entire career. How you could consider Bernie to be less authentic than Hillary, is beyond me.
I'm not the one comparing him to Lenin,TT, which is absurd, nor am I calling you names Glad to see you consider the Lenin-Bernie comparison ridiculous. I was responding to you accusing me of resorting to hyperbole on the Hillary thread. Not sure what you're referring to there. I couldn't resist pointing out the hyperbolic absurdity of comparing Bernie to Lenin in this thread. Meant no disrespect RE name-callling.
Rallies and protests are fine, but the hard facts are that with our currents laws in place it takes $$ to win elections. Too much $$ in politics is the problem not the answer.
Even George Clooney, who was fundraising for Hillary in California this weekend, said “I think it’s an obscene amount of money. I think – you know that we had some protesters last night when we pulled up in San Francisco and they’re right to protest, they’re absolutely right, it is an obscene amount of money." Tickets to the fund raiser cost $33,400 to sit at a table in the room but $353,400 to sit at the same table as the Clintons. Sander's campaign gave Clooney credit for being honest and upfront on this issue.
Yes "rallies and protests are fine." In this article Chris Hedges makes the case that grass roots movements, including anti-war and labor movements during the Nixon administration, helped end the Vietnam war and resulted in the creation of the Mine and Safety Act, Clean Air and Water Acts, establishment of the EPA.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/revolution_is_in_the_air_20160416
For you diehard Hillary supporters, here's an unbiased assessment of Bernie's career. I'm not afraid to post a less than flattering appraisal of Bernie. He's not perfect, however, he appears to be winning the war of ideas even though he faces overwhelming odds and the powerful Clinton machine. Neo-liberals overwhelmingly support Hillary because they know she will preserve corporate interests and their stock portfolios.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_best_reporting_on_bernie_sanders_over_the_years_20160417
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 05:59am PT
|
tuolumne posted Sanders has consistently championed the cause of working class people his entire career. How you could consider Bernie to be less authentic than Hillary, is beyond me.
Perhaps because running on policy ideas that you have no hope of enacting during your presidency is inauthentic? Maybe because he lies just like everyone else running for President? Possibly because his "payfors" fail to add up just like most other politicians? Because he is running to be the leader of a party that he actually has no interest in leading?
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 06:41am PT
|
TT, the rhetoric is getting heated because the election is close and coming to a head. I know it's hard for you to grasp, but Hillary supporters are as committed to her as you and others are to Bernie.
You want the U.S. political and economic systems turned on their heads. 180 degrees. Big, big change, not small increment change. Bank broken up, income redistributed, campaign laws completely rewritten, college tuition and healthcare socialized...(small list, there's more, I know). Bernie promises all this. Just storm the DC gates with him and it's all possible. Details? Well, he'll figure out that once the revolutionaries take their seats in the congressional seats they've won. In all states. Utah, Ohio, Florida, Louisiana, Oregon...the revolution will be everywhere, wiping out the objectionist Republican majority that want not one thing to do with this revolution, in fact, one that will oppose it with the same passion.
Bernie is promising things he knows have no chance of becoming law. He's not even remotely close to having the votes.
Your analysis of Hillary's record has no basis in fact. She was an effective vote for issues important to liberals while in the senate. Yeah, I know about the Iraq war vote.
The Clooney event raised $$ for the Democrat Party. Sorta key to getting a Dem majority in congress in order to have any possibility for progressive change. After electing a Dem president in Nov.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 07:21am PT
|
To me he is like Trump, just on the other extreme side, promising things he know he can never get done (built a wall, deport 11 million Trump/free college free healthcare Sanders) so my vote is with Hillary.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 08:45am PT
|
Wow you Hillaryphiles must be getting nervous. Lets see what happens tomorrow in New York. Look I'm NOT Bernie or Bust. If Hillary gets the nomination I'll vote for her but it will be a vote against the Repubs more than a vote for Hillary.
I'm still struggling with what it is you guys find so appealing about a Hillary presidency...at least, it's not a Republican?
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 08:53am PT
|
TT, a 3rd Obama term would be OK with me.
Add in Dem congressional gains, the expansion of Obamacare, the 2-3 Supreme Court nominations in the next 4 years (remember Citizens United?).
Congress enacts laws, without congressional gains it's more of the status quo. Send in those checks, billionaires!!
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 09:04am PT
|
TT wrote: I'm still struggling with what it is you guys find so appealing about a Hillary presidency...at least, it's not a Republican?
She is the most qualified. Pretty simple.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 09:12am PT
|
Crankster wrote: Congress enacts laws, without congressional gains it's more of the status quo. Send in those checks, billionaires!!
And Hillary is doing way more to get democrats elected than Bernie, she understand the process, he doesn't get it.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 09:23am PT
|
OK...I agree Obama was an infinitely better president than any of the Republican offerings. Things might be OK for you & me, but for a large segment of the population, mainly working class people, their standard of living continued to decline under Obama.
And lets not get too crazy about the ACA....this was a Heritage Foundation, Conservative Think Tank, idea. It is a big boom for the Health Care insurance companies. As you point out Hillary will preserve the status quo and opportunities for working class people will continue to decline.
Here are the numbers...
-38 percent of all American workers made less than $20,000 last year.
-51 percent of all American workers made less than $30,000 last year.
-62 percent of all American workers made less than $40,000 last year.
-71 percent of all American workers made less than $50,000 last year.
That first number is truly staggering. The federal poverty level for a family of five is $28,410, and yet almost 40 percent of all American workers do not even bring in $20,000 a year.
https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2014
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year.html
Additional info regarding growing income inequality...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/11/21-facts-about-the-explosive-growth-of-poverty-in-america-that-will-blow-your-mind.html
In case you missed this one...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Citizens United ?? I think we all agree that needs to be abolished.
Gotta get back to work now...;-)
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 10:21am PT
|
tuolumne posted Wow you Hillaryphiles must be getting nervous.
Anyone who cares about the consequences of the election is nervous. Clinton wouldn't be my first choice if there was another eligible candidate. Unfortunately, Clinton and Trump are the only ones not running on a purely ideological platform.
tuolumne posted OK...I agree Obama was an infinitely better president than any of the Republican offerings. Things might be OK for you & me, but for a large segment of the population, mainly working class people, their standard of living continued to decline under Obama.
Something which the President alone has very little control over. What do you think Sanders is going to do if he takes the White House? There isn't a big dial on it in the Oval Office with "Middle Class Income" scribbled on it that Obama has just been refusing to turn up out of deference to his corporate overlords.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!