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 February 12 2016 13:54 xDaunt wrote: I disagree with Bernie on damned near everything, but I genuinely respect the man for being so damned honest about his positions and beliefs. It's incredibly refreshing, and it stands in stark contrast to Hillary, who is the embodiment of political duplicity. Frankly, I suspect that she would be better served standing her ground on her more moderate platform instead of faux-chasing Bernie down the far left rabbit hole. It's not like she's going to be fooling any Bernie supporters into thinking that she's like him. People know what the score is.
Maybe, maybe not.
Part of the problem is that support isn't really binary, there are degrees to it. While there are certainly die hard Bernie supporters, there are plenty of people who stand on a spectrum between him and hypothetical-moderate-Clinton. So if Clinton stays moderate then she cedes a lot of less moderate voters without a fight.
It's basically the same thing that drives moderate Republican candidates right. Moderate voters will typically still vote for you so long as you're still noticeably more moderate than your opponents, so strategically it's better to shift toward the extreme during primaries and try to shift back during the general election.
If Clinton had stuck to her moderate positions she'd be more authentic, but authenticity isn't going to sell moderate positions to leftists with an authentic leftist to vote for.
I'm so glad there's excitement on both sides of the aisle. It wouldn't be the same if Clinton ran away with it and all we had was the GOP candidates duking it out.
On February 12 2016 12:45 Introvert wrote: Am I being too cynical in thinking Bernie didn't have an answer for the foreign leader portion? He just picked someone everyone likes.
On February 12 2016 12:44 LegalLord wrote: Churchill and FDR. Easiest two to predict because they're basically the obvious non-controversial Dem choices.
If you like Churchill you probably aren't voting D.
I mean, it's pretty hard to pick a good foreign leader who is not an enemy of the US who you could talk about, especially when you're put on the spot. He's the least controversial choice since he's a war hero and US ally.
Adenauer was way better than Churchill for that time period....Of course though his classical liberalism and anti-communism is anathema to Sanders :p If Sanders was honest he'd mention Mao or someone like him.
Why not Clement Attlee? You don't have to go full Mao. Attlee took a country that was still fighting WWII and built a modern socialist system within a free market economy.
On February 12 2016 14:50 Danglars wrote: I'm so glad there's excitement on both sides of the aisle. It wouldn't be the same if Clinton ran away with it and all we had was the GOP candidates duking it out.
Glad you don't think Sanders is a Ron Paul anymore, gotta take the progress where you get it.
On February 12 2016 14:54 Hexe wrote: theres not much bernie can do vs superdelegates. even if he wins the popular vote with 55% or something she will probably get 65%> supers
It seems unlikely that the DNC will allow superdelegates to change the outcome. It's not impossible since Sanders, unlike Obama, is an outsider, but I'm pretty sure they recognize that overturning the outcome via superdelegates will alienate Sanders' base and likely cost them the election with significant effects downstream.
Democractic leadership is frequently incompetent but they're not that incompetent.
IDK people are talking up Bernie's performance but unless he was pointing out Hillary's hilariousness with the banks, he didn't sound so great. At least to me. Maybe that's because I got tired of "millionaires and billionaires" really fast.
A lot of people were watching for the first time, especially Bernie. Bernie has always beaten her everywhere else, pulling FP to anywhere near a draw is a huge win and I suspect the polls and votes will continue to reflect such.
Also random factoid from NH; Bernie beat Jim Gilmore and Rick Santorum on the Republican side (from write-ins), just a little shy of Huckabee and earning a delegate. He might have beat Paul and Fiorina if he was actually on the ballot.
Trump actually signed a baby. No shit, he autographed a baby. Trump/Ricky Bobby 2016!
Not sold on the free college idea.Govt subsidies may be useful for STEM courses, such studies do benefit society, but what about courses like Philosophy, Gender studies, Photography, Art history etc?
These courses already have almost no jobs at the end of them so what exactly is the benefit to taxpayers paying for these folks to study them?
BTW between Sanders and Clinton i vastly prefer Sanders.Cannot stand Clinton.Just some of Sanders policies i cannot understand.
Was good to see Sanders call out Kissinger on TV.Kissy is one of the most evil men on this earth, why can't him, D Rockefeller, Soros and Brezinski just freaking die already?
On February 12 2016 12:59 ticklishmusic wrote: Hillary did pretty good IMO, she's figuring out angles that work.
The "ran against him line" was dumb. Come on, she ran against him for president when he was a senator, not when he was an incumbent.
Sanders has improved somewhat on foreign policy which is good. Apart from that, I remain unimpressed with his platform.
You notice the Hillary camp is already trying to downplay Nevada, claiming it's 80% white (it's not)?
Good reason they haven't polled there either. Basically, Hillary's claims in Nevada was mostly bluster. It's generational like the rest of her support.
It's going to be close which is not what Hillary needs.
Without polls we don't know but in NH Clinton and Sanders were tied 49-49 among registered dems.Sanders cleaned up with indys but NV primary is registered dems only, no indys.
I'd be interested to see some recent polls but it favours Hillary by far from what we know.
a lot of people dont appreciate how deep the global economy goes now. with bernie's populism on that front i see a really grave downside of not only unraveling of free trade but also our current international alliance particularly germany, without. which europe is all but lost to further division.
Nevada allows indys to change affiliation at the caucus but it also starts at 11 AM so it's going to be people who have been paying attention, big supporters, and old people. What the Culinary union does could dramatically change the outcome.
Are people seeing the ads in SC? They are amazing.
On February 12 2016 21:56 oneofthem wrote: a lot of people dont appreciate how deep the global economy goes now. with bernie's populism on that front i see a really grave downside of not only unraveling of free trade but also our current international alliance particularly germany, without. which europe is all but lost to further division.
and no it will not lead to more american jobs.
How is that supposed to work? Can you clarify in any way? What you said makes no sense at all from a german perspective.
EPT
