EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2844
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18864 Posts
On February 05 2016 04:39 kwizach wrote: farva, according to you who between Sanders and Hillary would have the best shot against the Republican nominee, whomever he ends up being? Do you see Sanders winning against Marco Rubio, for example? I sincerely think that 2016 is going to have some pretty interesting turnout numbers in terms of demographics that are going to categorically reject the Republican platform regardless of who the candidate is. As darth and jcarl said, Rubio would definitely be Sanders' toughest matchup, but I also think that Sanders has the unique ability to tap into some mid-line, libertarian minded moderates who will pretty readily buy into the "Rubio is a slick Washington insider" schtick that Sanders can play because of his pretty outstanding ideological track record. Now that Iowa has shaken off some of the "Sanders doesn't have a chance in hell" dust, I think folks will begin to see that Sanders has a pretty good hand ti play against every Republican candidate. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On February 05 2016 05:39 Plansix wrote: That is fine that you don't trust them. But it doesn't change my opinion that your standard is unreasonable and unlikely to bring about the change you are looking for. And you are going to have to ditch supporting Sanders if he become the nominee, because he is going to take the help from the Democratic party, who does accept funds from large banks. I'm happy to cross that bridge if/when we come to it  Out of curiosity (open question), what would the political process be to make a change so that bill cover one topic? Rider/last minute bill changes/additions seem to be a common and perpetual problem. On February 05 2016 05:47 oneofthem wrote: dude libertarians would not touch sanders The recent influx (however anecdotal and potentially minuscule) of ex-Paul supporters to Sanders begs to differ. Granted, I'm not sure if those particular supporters were non-libertarian Paul supporters. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
I don't think a lot of them are libertarian in a way that makes them compatible with Sanders | ||
|
farvacola
United States18864 Posts
On February 05 2016 05:47 oneofthem wrote: dude libertarians would not touch sanders It's funny that as you say that, a friend of mine who moved out to Colorado who now plays a prominent role in the state's Libertarian party peppers facebook with Sanders memes. Vermont has its fair share of libertarian minded folk who like Sanders just fine, even with his "socialist" background. "Anti-establishment" is a highly accessible and rurally popular mindset that Sanders can play up easily enough, particularly if his opponent is someone like Rubio. It's fun when you show off the drawbacks in regarding politics or the economy as an information system. Edit: Nyxisto makes a good point, I should call them "self-described" libertarians because yes, there are abundant category errors in self-regarded political affiliation :D | ||
|
Introvert
United States4999 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6284 Posts
On February 05 2016 05:46 farvacola wrote: I sincerely think that 2016 is going to have some pretty interesting turnout numbers in terms of demographics that are going to categorically reject the Republican platform regardless of who the candidate is. As darth and jcarl said, Rubio would definitely be Sanders' toughest matchup, but I also think that Sanders has the unique ability to tap into some mid-line, libertarian minded moderates who will pretty readily buy into the "Rubio is a slick Washington insider" schtick that Sanders can play because of his pretty outstanding ideological track record. Now that Iowa has shaken off some of the "Sanders doesn't have a chance in hell" dust, I think folks will begin to see that Sanders has a pretty good hand ti play against every Republican candidate. What demographic do you expect will turn out for Sanders or Clinton? I know Sanders is relatively popular with young people but that's about it. They're not Obama who can fire up the black populace. I think only Rubio can do something similar with hispanics givrn his background and the fact that a lot of them are conservative on issues like abortion as well like the republicans. I also don't see how a libertarian can vote for Sanders. Yes he js anti establishment but he's also obviously for a bigger government and I don't think any libertarian is for that. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
Soap
Brazil1546 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18864 Posts
On February 05 2016 06:04 RvB wrote: What demographic do you expect will turn out for Sanders or Clinton? I know Sanders is relatively popular with young people but that's about it. They're not Obama who can fire up the black populace. I think only Rubio can do something similar with hispanics givrn his background and the fact that a lot of them are conservative on issues like abortion as well like the republicans. I also don't see how a libertarian can vote for Sanders. Yes he js anti establishment but he's also obviously for a bigger government and I don't think any libertarian is for that. I'll tell you one thing: hispanics are just as likely to not vote for another hispanic as they are likely to vote for another hispanic, particularly when Cubans are involved. Take this from the son of a naturalized citizen from Mexico. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
Its a schism that happens whenever libertarians-of-convenience (who like the rhetorical stance of freedom) realize mere freedom no longer serves their ends. If I were to shoehorn this into "no true Scotsman" they would be the French or some other nation fighting with the Scots with the purpose of weakening the English, but then after the war is over they try to take over and tax all of Scotland's ports. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
On February 05 2016 05:56 Introvert wrote: Well I doubt many Paul supporters, for example, are going to Sanders. If Reason.com is any indication, most of that crowd isn't going to him either (they were very pro Paul). The ones I know (who are all over Rand Paul and love Ayn Rand novels) think Sanders is the worst case scenario out of all the candidates from both sides, with maybe Trump being as equally bad. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24051 Posts
It's so early to give up on radical change. Just so much defeatism it's sad. Also Hillary charging a public college, she represented as a senator, $275k for a 30 min speech (even if it funneled into her foundation) is just not what we're looking for in a President. And no, I wouldn't do that, and Bernie wouldn't either. Hillary should just run as the moderate centrist she is. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6284 Posts
On February 05 2016 06:14 farvacola wrote: I'll tell you one thing: hispanics are just as likely to not vote for another hispanic as they are likely to vote for another hispanic, particularly when Cubans are involved. Take this from the son of a naturalized citizen from Mexico. Alright I'll take your word for it. Still though I wonder what demographic trends you see in the next election which will reject the Repiblican platform? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24051 Posts
On February 05 2016 06:34 RvB wrote: Alright I'll take your word for it. Still though I wonder what demographic trends you see in the next election which will reject the Repiblican platform? They've polled it and from their elections neither Rubio or Cruz got more Hispanic support than Republicans typically do. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
WASHINGTON -- Close to 13 million people enrolled into private health insurance plans via the Affordable Care Act's exchange marketplaces, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell announced Thursday. The sign-up period closed Sunday, and by the end, 12.7 million individuals had chosen plans through HealthCare.gov and the 13 state-run exchanges, Burwell said on a conference call with reporters. About 4 million of the 9.6 million who signed up in the states using the federal exchanges are new to the system, according to the HHS. "Open enrollment for 2016 is over and we are happy to report it was a success," Burwell said in a news release. "The marketplace is growing and getting stronger and the ACA has become a crucial part of healthcare in America.” The results made public Thursday show that sign-ups met the federal government's expectations for the year. Prior to the beginning of this open enrollment period last fall, Health and Human Services projected that 11 million to 14.1 million people would select health insurance plans on the exchanges by Feb. 1. The department predicts about 10 million people will have this type of coverage by the end of the year, as some consumers drop their plans either to switch to other forms of benefits, like from a job or Medicare, or to become uninsured. Health insurance companies like UnitedHealth Group, Aetna and Anthem have cautioned they were losing money or making only modest profits in this part of the market, heightening concern that too few healthy consumers were getting covered and contributing premiums to offset the costs of sicker customers. Source | ||
| ||
