|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 08 2015 02:41 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 02:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If we're talking questions Trump could ask Sanders, there's quite a few simple questions a monkey could ask Trump that would humiliate him. The only reason the other candidates in the primary don't is because they're scared of him and/or they're saving them as haymakers when the field narrows.
"Have you found that video of Muslims in New Jersey cheering for 9/11 yet?"
"What is your economic policy, exactly? Would you change anything about Wall Street?"
"What is your foreign policy, exactly? What would you have done differently from Obama?"
"Do you actually read any of the bills you talk about?"
"Could you name five Secretaries of State?" alternately, "Do you know who Alexander Haig is?"
"Why do you disagree with the immigration platform on your own site?"
"Why exactly do you call people ugly so much?"
I'm sure there are more. those are questions trump would smash. would probably make interviewer look incredibly bad in the process. it's a telling feature of the trump candidacy that his negatives are mostly the 'moral' sort. a lot of people though are simply tuned out from that. of course he'll get absolutely destroyed among white college educated liberal segment of the population, but those won't translate into electoral votes.
You think these are moral problems? These are competence problems. He is not competent as a policymaker because of all these things.
Every single time Trump has been asked a question like that, he has narrowly and evasively spun it (or if it's an interview blown it off entirely). This works because on the debate stages they are forced to move on to the other 7 candidates (and the audience hates the questioners) and because no one watches the interviews. It will not work when there are 3, or when there are only 2. Period. It didn't work for Romney, it didn't work for McCain, and it won't work for Trump.
Edit: If you want to know why they're competence and not morals here they are:
+ Show Spoiler +1. You are making repeated claims (which you are using to discuss policy) based on falsehoods.
2. You don't actually have an economic policy.
3. You don't actually have a foreign policy.
4. You discuss policy without understanding it.
5. You make sweeping generalizations without even understanding what you're generalizing.
6. You are inconsistent in your own policies.
7. You are incapable of intelligent discussion.
I guess that applies to lots of people, though...maybe that's why he has as much support as he does.
|
On December 08 2015 04:23 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 02:41 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If we're talking questions Trump could ask Sanders, there's quite a few simple questions a monkey could ask Trump that would humiliate him. The only reason the other candidates in the primary don't is because they're scared of him and/or they're saving them as haymakers when the field narrows.
"Have you found that video of Muslims in New Jersey cheering for 9/11 yet?"
"What is your economic policy, exactly? Would you change anything about Wall Street?"
"What is your foreign policy, exactly? What would you have done differently from Obama?"
"Do you actually read any of the bills you talk about?"
"Could you name five Secretaries of State?" alternately, "Do you know who Alexander Haig is?"
"Why do you disagree with the immigration platform on your own site?"
"Why exactly do you call people ugly so much?"
I'm sure there are more. those are questions trump would smash. would probably make interviewer look incredibly bad in the process. it's a telling feature of the trump candidacy that his negatives are mostly the 'moral' sort. a lot of people though are simply tuned out from that. of course he'll get absolutely destroyed among white college educated liberal segment of the population, but those won't translate into electoral votes. You think these are moral problems? These are competence problems. He is not competent as a policymaker because of all these things. Every single time Trump has been asked a question like that, he has narrowly and evasively spun it (or if it's an interview blown it off entirely). This works because on the debate stages they are forced to move on to the other 7 candidates and because no one watches the interviews. It will not work when there are 3, or when there are only 2. Period. It didn't work for Romney, it didn't work for McCain, and it won't work for Trump.
And a very different section of the population is engaged at that point. Attacking the person asking the question won't play as well when its not only your base watching the debates. Right now the majority of voters are trying to get through the holidays, not worry about next November.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the part about moral criticism against trump isn't related to the list of questions you posted. read
|
On December 08 2015 04:32 oneofthem wrote:
the part about moral criticism against trump isn't related to the list of questions you posted. read
Please define "moral questions" because you seemed to be moving the goal posts around when people respond.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
there is no moving of the goalpost. i could modify my comment to be something like, negative feeling resulting from the moral repugnance of a trump candidacy...
it may have been better to make a separate post but quad posting is not that good.
|
On December 08 2015 04:39 oneofthem wrote:
there is no moving of the goalpost. i could modify my comment to be something like, negative feeling resulting from the moral repugnance of a trump candidacy...
it may have been better to make a separate post but quad posting is not that good.
So your argument is that Trump will win because uneducated Americans are stupid and like to be pandered to? Even though he polls like garbage for the general election. And those uneducated Americans don't normally vote. Lets not even get into the fact that he will have a rough time winning in states with large minority populations, his worst demographic.
|
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton edged out all major Republican presidential candidates in a MSNBC/Telemundo/Marist poll published Monday. The closest margin put Clinton three points above Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and only one point ahead of political newcomer Ben Carson.
The poll, which had a Latino voter subsection, shows Clinton with a 11-point lead over the Republican frontrunner, real estate magnate Donald Trump. She led 52-41. Among Latino voters, Clinton led Trump by 42 points, 69-27.
Latinos and other minority voting blocs are seen as key pieces to winning the White House in 2016.
The poll was conducted among 2,360 registered voters from Nov. 15 to Dec. 2 with a margin of error of 2 percentage points. The poll surveyed 264 Latino voters with a margin of error of 6 percentage points.
Source
|
Now that Real Time is on winter break, are there any comparable political based humour shows?
The Daily Show is kind of meh without Jon Stewart.
|
On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon
Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles.
Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances.
Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself.
|
On December 08 2015 04:18 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 03:51 cLutZ wrote:On December 08 2015 03:17 Kickstart wrote:
Please. The fact that our universities cost so much is ridiculous, same with healthcare. The reason prices are allowed to get so high is because they are allowed to charge whatever the hell they want for things and people will pay it. Even shitty online degrees can set people back tens of thousands of dollars, its such a joke. And lets hope no one gets seriously ill, your entire family will be forced into bankruptcy to keep you from losing your life or limbs.
Some things just shouldn't be purely profit driven. Its almost like those are two of the most federally driven parts of the economy. Shocking how that happens. even without traesury backed student loans the price will still increase. maybe not to the exact magnitude but in taht situation you'll see the big money schools further separating themselves from the pack
That's exactly what should happen. There is no need for Michigan to be slightly less expensive than Harvard, Michigan State only slightly less expensive than Michigan, and crappy Michigan school #6 to only be yet again slightly less. This is a huge problem of federal loans is that they drastically reduced the influence of price as a point of competition between schools. The same is true, to a slightly lesser extent with state and federal funding of school districts which homogenizes the tax burden.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 08 2015 04:43 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 04:39 oneofthem wrote:
there is no moving of the goalpost. i could modify my comment to be something like, negative feeling resulting from the moral repugnance of a trump candidacy...
it may have been better to make a separate post but quad posting is not that good. So your argument is that Trump will win because uneducated Americans are stupid and like to be pandered to? Even though he polls like garbage for the general election. And those uneducated Americans don't normally vote. Lets not even get into the fact that he will have a rough time winning in states with large minority populations, his worst demographic.
this is a very poor reading of an argument on a specific aspect of trump. try again
|
|
|
On December 08 2015 04:54 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles. Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances. Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself.
$1.30 a year per person? that doesn't sound right, I think you got a math error somewhere.
|
Trump has 99% name recognition against a wide field of generic republicans. The generic republican field is simply too broad to compete with that name recognition. When the race starts to winnow down** to three guys, Trump's YYUUGGGEE 10% lead over the split field is going to collapse.
**Carson bubble is almost gone, going to be down the three way race: Trump, Cruz, Rubio
**The rest of the 1-3% crew will go away soon
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
my point there isn't even trump specific. was just talking about how liberal moral outrage has limited appeal.
i am not interested in a discussion about whether he'll win etc. would take up too much time and be inconclusive.
|
On December 08 2015 04:54 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles. Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances. Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself.
Even if every citizen was a taxpayer that's just false. You think everyone can goto college for free for 340,000,000?
|
On December 08 2015 05:20 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 04:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles. Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances. Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself. $1.30 a year per person? that doesn't sound right, I think you got a math error somewhere.
Fair enough, I can't seem to find where I saw it done and haven't done it myself. Might of just pulled it out of my ass, that seems to get you ahead in the polls anyway 
|
On December 08 2015 02:41 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 02:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If we're talking questions Trump could ask Sanders, there's quite a few simple questions a monkey could ask Trump that would humiliate him. The only reason the other candidates in the primary don't is because they're scared of him and/or they're saving them as haymakers when the field narrows.
"Have you found that video of Muslims in New Jersey cheering for 9/11 yet?"
"What is your economic policy, exactly? Would you change anything about Wall Street?"
"What is your foreign policy, exactly? What would you have done differently from Obama?"
"Do you actually read any of the bills you talk about?"
"Could you name five Secretaries of State?" alternately, "Do you know who Alexander Haig is?"
"Why do you disagree with the immigration platform on your own site?"
"Why exactly do you call people ugly so much?"
I'm sure there are more. those are questions trump would smash. would probably make interviewer look incredibly bad in the process. it's a telling feature of the trump candidacy that his negatives are mostly the 'moral' sort. a lot of people though are simply tuned out from that. of course he'll get absolutely destroyed among white college educated liberal segment of the population, but those won't translate into electoral votes.
Yep, this is exactly the truth. No one is going to take down Trump with these stupid gotcha questions. People have already tried and failed miserably.
|
On December 08 2015 05:20 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 04:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles. Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances. Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself. $1.30 a year per person? that doesn't sound right, I think you got a math error somewhere.
Its not right. We spend about $250 billion in federal Student aid and loans alone, per year. Treasury Dept, the same study says higher ed had ~ $497 billion in total revenues in 2009, which would put the cost at $1562 per person, which includes children and the elderly. More realistically, there are ~ 122 million Americans who pay taxes or $4073 per taxpayer.
|
United States43964 Posts
On December 08 2015 05:47 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 05:20 zlefin wrote:On December 08 2015 04:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2015 03:07 Mohdoo wrote:On December 08 2015 02:48 Plansix wrote:On December 08 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote:On December 08 2015 02:37 Plansix wrote:
Americans are willing to accept voodoo as tax policy all the time, see the Republican tax plan since 2000. Powered by black magic. If they ask Trump if he going to raise taxes and he says "no", Sanders can respond by simply saying Trump is lying and being unrealistic. Its not like the last two elections were decided on that question. Raising taxes polls poorly, but its not a deal breaker for most voters. they are fine with voodoo in two directions, tax cut and spending cut. increased spending AND tax raise is about as toxic as it comes in the fiscal policy. sanders will likely be talking about raising taxes on the rich and such, but this makes him easily caricatured as a class warrior sort of dude. again, pretty bad. The voting public tends not like the rich, especially if they are not paying taxes. Politics on the internet are not reflective of real life politics. Obama ran on a very similar platform to what Sanders is running on, raises taxes on the rich and large business, close loop holes. I think you are underestimating the desire in the US to have these issues addressed. Free college is the one thing that I have seen basically no one agreeing with Sanders on irl. It has allowed many people I know to just write him off as a loon Spread across all tax payers it works out to around $1.30 a year per person (even with inflated university costs). Even if that cost were to triple it would be one hell of a bargain for a more educated populace (almost every college kid I've mentioned it to was on board and young parents, once explained how much it would cost, thought it sounded better then paying by themselves or burdening their children with that debt). Perhaps you should expand your irl circles. Sanders has been gaining consistently especially in the early states, Bernie will in all liklihood win in New Hampshire, and has a strong chance at winning in Iowa, if he wins both I suspect people will begin to change their tune on his chances. Of course our education system needs an overhaul bottom to top also so it's certainly not a magic bullet in itself. $1.30 a year per person? that doesn't sound right, I think you got a math error somewhere. Its not right. We spend about $250 billion in federal Student aid and loans alone, per year. Treasury Dept, the same study says higher ed had ~ $497 billion in total revenues in 2009, which would put the cost at $1562 per person, which includes children and the elderly. More realistically, there are ~ 122 million Americans who pay taxes or $4073 per taxpayer.
That seems like a lot until you realize how much people pay on their student loans already. It's the same situation as health insurance where the additional taxes for single payer sound unbearable until you count in the pay increase from your work converting the health insurance benefit into a pay bump and then, for most Americans, you come out ahead.
The American public is already paying for education, it's just a question of how it is structured.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
