|
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 18 2015 10:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 10:03 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 08:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I don't think Sanders would take a VP role, especially under Clinton. Clinton is a corporate shill, looking to feed the MIC. Even with Sanders as VP many of his supporters wouldn't vote for Clinton. On December 18 2015 08:04 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I think there is a decent chance Sanders would say no to a token VP ticket and run 3e party instead which could hurt the Democrats. Sanders wont run 3rd party save for some brokered convention type game where supedelegates take away the nomination the people gave. If Hillary wins the votes Sanders won't run. Doesn't mean millions of Democrats won't write him in though. Democrats (especially black democrats) are done voting for "the lesser of two evils". If someone doesn't earn those votes they won't get them and they will lose nationally. Hillary doesn't seem to give a shit, so expect remarkably low turnout for her among black folks as the process rolls on. Isn't this a similar logic to what inspired the government shut down? Better to damage the whole and send a message than to be compliant and help move things forward? I am assuming that writing in Sanders would be intended as a protest and that doing so, you would expect a GOP victory. Are you comfortable with a GOP victory if it means sending a message? I'd probably just vote Trump and move to a remote part of Canada and prepare for the end. If Sanders loses it wont matter who wins, it's going to hit the fan.
I feel like you aren't genuinely expressing your thoughts. You would move to Canada? You didn't really answer my question.
|
Cruz isn't the GOP. Neither Trump nor Rubio are proposing that low of a rate, or flat tax itself.
|
Well most of them seem to have their own super weird agenda. Trump apparently wants to start his own counter jihad, I don't know what Rubio is up to though. If you take Sanders statements without contrasting them with the GOP stuff there's nothing inherently crazy about them.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
trump is a pragmatist who says utterly inane shit.
cruz is a batshit insane ideologue who says whatever to get elected.
choice is pretty clear
|
On December 18 2015 10:13 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 10:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 10:03 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 08:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I don't think Sanders would take a VP role, especially under Clinton. Clinton is a corporate shill, looking to feed the MIC. Even with Sanders as VP many of his supporters wouldn't vote for Clinton. On December 18 2015 08:04 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I think there is a decent chance Sanders would say no to a token VP ticket and run 3e party instead which could hurt the Democrats. Sanders wont run 3rd party save for some brokered convention type game where supedelegates take away the nomination the people gave. If Hillary wins the votes Sanders won't run. Doesn't mean millions of Democrats won't write him in though. Democrats (especially black democrats) are done voting for "the lesser of two evils". If someone doesn't earn those votes they won't get them and they will lose nationally. Hillary doesn't seem to give a shit, so expect remarkably low turnout for her among black folks as the process rolls on. Isn't this a similar logic to what inspired the government shut down? Better to damage the whole and send a message than to be compliant and help move things forward? I am assuming that writing in Sanders would be intended as a protest and that doing so, you would expect a GOP victory. Are you comfortable with a GOP victory if it means sending a message? I'd probably just vote Trump and move to a remote part of Canada and prepare for the end. If Sanders loses it wont matter who wins, it's going to hit the fan. I feel like you aren't genuinely expressing your thoughts. You would move to Canada? You didn't really answer my question.
I view Sanders as our last hope at saving our democracy, if he doesn't win, it's survival mode in my eyes. Whether it's Hillary or Trump that wins I expect a violent revolution/global warfare to break out within a decade or so, it's just about being prepared to survive.
I just think everything happens sooner than later under Trump so I'd vote Trump just to get it over with as opposed to casting a protest vote to send a message. I'd write him in if the DNC outright stole the nomination though.
|
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history.
|
On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history.
Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol?
|
On December 18 2015 10:48 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 10:13 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 10:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 10:03 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 08:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I don't think Sanders would take a VP role, especially under Clinton. Clinton is a corporate shill, looking to feed the MIC. Even with Sanders as VP many of his supporters wouldn't vote for Clinton. On December 18 2015 08:04 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2015 08:01 Mohdoo wrote:On December 18 2015 07:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 18 2015 07:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Meanwhile, Sanders has recently passed 2,000,000 contributions. More than any candidate ever in history and is polling better than Obama was at this point nationally.
If the DNC and DWS didn't rig the debate schedule so hard, Sanders would probably be leading before the new year. The media basically ignoring Sanders (something like 50:1 Trump coverage) doesn't help either.
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Clinton implosion, though. I think Clinton could just not say a single word between now and the primary. She'd likely win 55%+ in almost all states. I won't be surprised if Sanders wins a couple states, though. Honestly, I don't think it's so bad. I think Sanders will be the VP. Clinton is just going to pimp out Sanders so all his meme fans show up to vote. I think there is a decent chance Sanders would say no to a token VP ticket and run 3e party instead which could hurt the Democrats. Sanders wont run 3rd party save for some brokered convention type game where supedelegates take away the nomination the people gave. If Hillary wins the votes Sanders won't run. Doesn't mean millions of Democrats won't write him in though. Democrats (especially black democrats) are done voting for "the lesser of two evils". If someone doesn't earn those votes they won't get them and they will lose nationally. Hillary doesn't seem to give a shit, so expect remarkably low turnout for her among black folks as the process rolls on. Isn't this a similar logic to what inspired the government shut down? Better to damage the whole and send a message than to be compliant and help move things forward? I am assuming that writing in Sanders would be intended as a protest and that doing so, you would expect a GOP victory. Are you comfortable with a GOP victory if it means sending a message? I'd probably just vote Trump and move to a remote part of Canada and prepare for the end. If Sanders loses it wont matter who wins, it's going to hit the fan. I feel like you aren't genuinely expressing your thoughts. You would move to Canada? You didn't really answer my question. I view Sanders as our last hope at saving our democracy, if he doesn't win, it's survival mode in my eyes. Whether it's Hillary or Trump that wins I expect a violent revolution/global warfare to break out within a decade or so, it's just about being prepared to survive. I just think everything happens sooner than later under Trump so I'd vote Trump just to get it over with as opposed to casting a protest vote to send a message. I'd write him in if the DNC outright stole the nomination though.
That's a pretty dickish un-Bernie like thing to do. I'm pretty sure Sanders would in no way whatsoever want that. There's a reason he's been brutal with the Republican candidates and not spat acid at Clinton: she's not nearly as bad for the country from his perspective.
There's actually almost nothing I can imagine being farther from what Sanders wants than voting for a literal casino capitalist.
|
On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol?
Dude, you're taking a single ad-libbed quote out of context. Have you even bothered reading her financial regulation plan?
|
On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol?
How is this different?
As president, Senator Bernie Sanders will reduce income and wealth inequality by:
Demanding that the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share in taxes. As president, Sen. Sanders will stop corporations from shifting their profits and jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. income taxes.
|
It's hilarious that people are actually challenging Cruz's immigration position. Absolutely no one on the pro-border control side of the debate thinks that he is anything other than one of their greatest champions. Overall, the dude's conservative credentials are absolutely unassailable. No other candidate comes close.
|
On December 18 2015 10:43 oneofthem wrote:
trump is a pragmatist who says utterly inane shit.
cruz is a batshit insane ideologue who says whatever to get elected.
choice is pretty clear
Hillary is the "third way" analogue to Cruz.
On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history.
What political history are you talking about?
|
On December 18 2015 11:47 Soap wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol? How is this different? Show nested quote +As president, Senator Bernie Sanders will reduce income and wealth inequality by:
Demanding that the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share in taxes. As president, Sen. Sanders will stop corporations from shifting their profits and jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. income taxes.
Because they know he means it as opposed to saying it just for political expediency.
There's a reason she is the favorite of wealthy people/donors and Bernie has millions of contributions, it's not because she is going to stick it to wall street (or even mount a real attempt).
|
The House overwhelmingly approved a $680 billion package of tax cuts even as the White House and House leaders in both parties scrambled to round up support for a $1.1 trillion spending bill scheduled for a vote Friday morning.
The tax package passed 318-109, with 241 Republicans — virtually the entire GOP Conference — voting yes.
But the dynamics on the spending bill are far different, and at this time, passage is far from assured.
The Capitol isn't in full panic yet, but there does appear to be a rising level of concern on the Democratic side of the aisle that they will be short the votes needed to pass the omnibus spending bill. Liberals are angry that the bill includes language to lift the longstanding ban to export U.S. oil, and is silent on the debt crisis in Puerto Rico and other Democratic priorities. House Democrats used a Thursday afternoon vote series to whip the measure, aware that they need to provide somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 votes to send the bill to the Senate. Democratic aides suggested that their side was far from reaching that target at this point.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who announced her intention to support the bill Thursday morning in a closed party meeting, said she wasn't confident she had the votes locked up to pass the bill.
"No, we’re talking it through," Pelosi told reporters. "There is concern about how this all came together…. I feel that what we did in the bill…10 times offsets that damage we did."
Late on Thursday, Pelosi sent a letter to fellow Democrats urging them to support the measure.
Source
|
On December 18 2015 11:44 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol? Dude, you're taking a single ad-libbed quote out of context. Have you even bothered reading her financial regulation plan?
Now you're being naive. If Hillary comes into power, what reason is there for her to actually set in place regulations that go against what her donors want. That's not how it works. Right now she's not in power so she'll say what it takes to get your vote and then once in power, she'll follow an road map created by her donors.
Financial regulation plan? What basis do you have that she'll follow through? She's not a credible candidate. At all.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
hillary isn't that popular on wall street. i dno't know where you guys get that from
keep in mind a lot of traditional support from finance industry is just political alignment. in that light the democrat party is not as popular as it was with wall street, because of the threat of regulation from democrats. hillary's regulatory approach will add a lot of cost to banks and hedge funds.
as far as supporting hillary for political results, it's a matter of hedging against the real radicals. compared to republicans hillary is still worse.
|
On December 18 2015 12:06 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:44 ticklishmusic wrote:On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol? Dude, you're taking a single ad-libbed quote out of context. Have you even bothered reading her financial regulation plan? Now you're being naive. If Hillary comes into power, what reason is there for her to actually set in place regulations that go against what her donors want. That's not how it works. Right now she's not in power so she'll say what it takes to get your vote and then once in power, she'll follow an road map created by her donors. Financial regulation plan? What basis do you have that she'll follow through? She's not a credible candidate. At all.
lmao
calling me naive
my god it's so hard not to shitpost sometimes
anyways, so you're okay with the details outlined in hillary's platform (or you're ignoring it).yes, bernie is a super consistent and moral guy. it doesn't mean he's the only one who has a platform he'll attempt to carry out.
i suggest you guys read about hillary. going back to when she was in arkansas, then her tenure as first lady and then as a senator. it's so easy to buy into one narrative or another about bernie vs. hillary and right vs. wrong.
|
On December 18 2015 10:16 Nyxisto wrote:
Well most of them seem to have their own super weird agenda. Trump apparently wants to start his own counter jihad, I don't know what Rubio is up to though. If you take Sanders statements without contrasting them with the GOP stuff there's nothing inherently crazy about them.
Yes, there is. Even the Danish PM rebuked Sanders calling them socialist lmao.
http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/110915-779664-denmark-tells-bernie-sanders-to-stop-calling-it-socialist.htm
That's just recent statements. Sanders has some good positions, but let's not overstate things.
|
On December 18 2015 11:47 Soap wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2015 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 18 2015 11:19 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm sorry, but proclaiming Hillary is just a corporate shill, etc. need to actually bother learning some political history. Such as? Telling wall street to "cut it out" lol? How is this different? Show nested quote +As president, Senator Bernie Sanders will reduce income and wealth inequality by:
Demanding that the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share in taxes. As president, Sen. Sanders will stop corporations from shifting their profits and jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. income taxes.
State control of money transfers...worked so wonderfully for Venezuela, Cuba, Argentina and every other shit hole socialist state. Of course, they'll never take away the State-power that Corporations live and thrive on. I could name 30 corporations that would either cease to exist, or be a shell of itself if we followed Lockean property rights. There is a large bi-partisan coalition that could be formed to abolish corporate welfare, subsidies, etc., but then again, the DNC is as bad as the GOP, they just choose to give our money to "green" "union" "too big too fail" companies.
|
United States43539 Posts
On December 18 2015 12:07 oneofthem wrote:
hillary isn't that popular on wall street. i dno't know where you guys get that from
Are you sure? Because Wall Street is in New York and you know what else happened in New York? Nine Eleven. Nine Eleven.
- Hillary 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
