EPTOn March 07 2016 12:10 darthfoley wrote:
if you aim for a full loaf, you might get half a loaf
if you aim for a full loaf, you might get half a loaf
Hillary is already trying to convince people to be happy with crumbs.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3206
| 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. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24419 Posts
Hillary is already trying to convince people to be happy with crumbs. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
| ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:10 darthfoley wrote: if you aim for a full loaf, you might get half a loaf No, that's not how things work with regards to the issues he's making unrealistic promises about. On March 07 2016 12:12 GreenHorizons wrote: Hillary is already trying to convince people to be happy with crumbs. Nonsense. Even on the issue he's the most vocal about, Wall Street regulation, she offers a more comprehensive and tougher plan than he does -- and it's more realistic as well. She's simply a better candidate when it comes to having a vision and a plan to achieve success on most progressive goals. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4458 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:10 darthfoley wrote: if you aim for a full loaf, you might get half a loaf Hopefully Clinton won't get even that in prison. Anyway this debate about fracking, maybe it was relevant 3 years ago but with oil prices where they are fracking is increasingly unviable anyway. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:08 Ghanburighan wrote: Now that the debate is over and before I head to bed, here's a quick recap of why this is seen as problematic: Sanders said he doesn't support fracking, i.e., he'd ban it within 4 or 8 years. The issue with this is that it would triple fuel prices assuming no other country does anything (i.e., OPEC doesn't enact its production quotas). The nice fantasy land response is that oil will be replaced by alternative sources of fuel. But this won't happen in 4 or 8 years, so either Sanders will raise oil prices until alternative fuel sources appear sometime in the future, or he does in fact have to support fracking. It's very annoying that the moderators didn't press them on the economic and foreign policy effects of this response, as it might be single most important indicator for the global economy and it has a major effect on Russia, China and the ME. Good night. Leaps of logic hurrah. \o/ Politician for how many years? And people think he's some idiot who doesn't understand how to do things. That's the problem when you're an unknown I guess. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:15 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Hopefully Clinton won't get even that in prison. Anyway this debate about fracking, maybe it was relevant 3 years ago but with oil prices where they are fracking is increasingly unviable anyway. When I was told the other day that engaging you in an intellectual debate was a waste I thought that was overreacting but man when I see something like that I realize they were right it might be a waste of time. I do wonder how disappointed you will be when the most likely scenario happens and the FBI announces they are not filing any criminal charges and that there is zero evidence of any illegality but the decision was regardless poorly thought out and then she cruises to the nomination and is the heavy favorite in the general. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:15 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Hopefully Clinton won't get even that in prison. Anyway this debate about fracking, maybe it was relevant 3 years ago but with oil prices where they are fracking is increasingly unviable anyway. If David Petraeus didn't go to prison, there is zero chance Clinton will. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24419 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:16 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Sanders takes Maine. Looks like he'll be gaining on that delegate count from 538 Kwiz is always referring to. Always a pain in the ass having to wait days for the last reports to trickle in. Some super Tuesday states still aren't all the way in. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
The_Templar
your Country52798 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:36 ticklishmusic wrote: Bit of a wash far as a debate goes. Bernie came out on the offensive, but I doubt it really made any difference among undecideds. I'm sure his supporters like him for it, but it was a huge turn off for me. Was not expecting the transition from gruff old man to full blown rude and condescending. May ultimately hurt him among undecideds I think. Uh... (personally, I thought him going on the offensive was long overdue, not surprised) | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4458 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:36 ticklishmusic wrote: Bit of a wash far as a debate goes. Bernie came out on the offensive, but I doubt it really made any difference among undecideds. I'm sure his supporters like him for it, but it was a huge turn off for me. Was not expecting the transition from gruff old man to full blown rude and condescending. May ultimately hurt him among undecideds I think. Probably trying to make the most of it, get as many headlines as he can.It's all establishment Clinton from here. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4458 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:24 Adreme wrote: When I was told the other day that engaging you in an intellectual debate was a waste I thought that was overreacting but man when I see something like that I realize they were right it might be a waste of time. I do wonder how disappointed you will be when the most likely scenario happens and the FBI announces they are not filing any criminal charges and that there is zero evidence of any illegality but the decision was regardless poorly thought out and then she cruises to the nomination and is the heavy favorite in the general. I don't know which is more frightening.You not being able to take a joke or the fact that you seem to be a Hillary supporter. If Bush is still walking free then Hillary is OK. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4458 Posts
What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis. Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24419 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis. Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer. Shifting the conversation to how we implement free college and how much of it, is already a win. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On March 07 2016 12:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So does Sanders free college policy apply to every course? What about liberal arts courses like Gender studies, art history & philosophy.Courses with no jobs at the end of them, courses that already have far too many students enrolled on a supply/demand (for work) basis. Sanders fans, please explain to me the benefit to society and the taxpayer of putting more students through gender studies or art history at the publics expense.What is in it for the taxpayer. history & philosophy students have quite solid job prospects, apart from that isn't offering people as much self-realization as possible kind of the point of society? If someone wants to study history because he is a great history enthusiast isn't that good? | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
and yeah whats wrong with history and philosophy degrees? theres lots of things you can do with them. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 07 2016 13:04 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: I'm pretty sure npr or pbs newshour or something did a report on free college and found that in general the money you put into it is offset by the amount of money they put into the economy and taxes and stuff for the rest of their lives (or at least even out the cost). so even if their are a few careers that don't end up giving more back in the long term its at worst breaking even and yeah whats wrong with history and philosophy degrees? theres lots of things you can do with them. Nothing necessarily wrong with them, but they generally get a bad rep for being an over-saturated market (from a job-seeker's perspective), or being the go-to degrees for young adults who don't want to start working yet. | ||
| ||
