• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 01:30
CEST 07:30
KST 14:30
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202548RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams4Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread RSL Season 1 - Final Week The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [Update] ShieldBattery: 1v1 Fastest Support! Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series ASL20 Preliminary Maps BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams
Tourneys
CSL Xiamen International Invitational [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 691 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3648

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 10093 Next
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
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
April 20 2016 16:56 GMT
#72941
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
April 20 2016 17:02 GMT
#72942
On April 21 2016 01:24 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 01:18 Gorsameth wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:10 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:00 Kipsate wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:26 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:23 Mohdoo wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:19 Djzapz wrote:
I felt like the discussions about viability were more relevant before the voting started. It would have been weird if in 2008, people had started saying Hillary was nonviable when Obama started pulling away with the victory. At that point it's no longer about viability.

I initially thought Sanders was nonviable, then he built up and he turned out to be obviously viable, like Hillary in 2008. Ended up losing, but not without making significant waves. Even if Sanders is defeated, it's no longer about viability.


Clinton in 2008 ran a very different campaign from Sanders in 2016. Sanders has always been about building hype ASAP and hoping to gain enough momentum to close it out before too much scrutiny. Too late. His views are shallow at best and a lot of people realize that now. People like him but won't vote for him. That's his issue. Basically the opposite of 2008 Clinton.

Seems like that's rhetoric coming from his opponents, and not actually something potential supporters are saying. A lot of people voted for him. The content of the campaign is not relevant here, I don't know that viability has anything to do with that.

His views are only considered shallow by Americans who are still traumatized by big bad socialism. To me it's amazing because most of those arguments have this weird vibe of "well EVERYBODY KNOWS that Sanders sucks at X Y and Z". It's such a cheap argument... admittedly I probably use it myself when I'm shitfaced, nothing to be proud of.

Sanders is tame by the standards of my also-multicultural social democratic country so when people say his views are shallow, well that's patently just their opinion, man

His views are considered shallow by some because he propegates rhetoric aimed at solving problems the way we do in Europe, except he is American and this is America. Money doesn't come from thin air, comprises have to be made, Congress is a thing etc. Interestingly you generalize Hillary supporters/nonBernie supporters the same way right now that other people do to Berniebros.

People would want to live in his world but unfortunately that is not the world that you live in. He is an idealist rather then a pragmatist (you can even see Clinton positioning herself as someone who wants to get "shit done" to capitalize on this problem). Its not really a suprise that Sanders is really popular among younger people (as Clinton has in general been unable to win that vote). I think there is great value in him running to make (some) of his ideas more acceptable in the longterm but he is ahead of his time right now.

Your argument is essentially America =/= Europe, which is fine, there are cultural and economic differences between America and Europe and it's great that people understand that. So, we've determined that two geographical locations are different and the conversation is over, right? Well, no... Why would it be? Proposing European politics in America isn't other-worldly, it's different. There is nothing to suggest that these things cannot work at all.

Calling it idealistic or shallow is nothing but a cop out. Pointing at the political and cultural differences of Europe and the US is also a cop out.

The conversation doesn't end at "It's different therefore it's impossible". The US and Canada are two very different countries in many ways, but we're very similar in many others. The US could gradually become more European and I think its people would benefit greatly. IMO, Sanders is no where near as shallow as the people who dismiss it because "America is different and that's the end of this discussion". I maintain that this is a cheap argument when it's used like this. Sure, there are differences and it would be difficult to convert a nation which is terrified of socialism because of cold war propaganda to a more social democratic way of doing politics. It's a discussion which must take place. But the second you say the US is different from Europe therefore these principles are impossible, you're simplifying something. And I think you're doing it maliciously, too, because if you're capable of reasoning this out, you also know that it's not that simple. At least I would think so.

Sigh, again no we are not saying it is impossible but it is considerably more difficult because of the American culture and so he has to come up with more then just "we will do it", "how?" "I don't know. we just will".

One of his major campaign points is breaking up the banks, to fight wall street but he has not a single clue how or what he will do to break up those banks. He has nothing but empty air and hope.

You need more then fairy tales if you want to revolutionize a country.
You need a plan.

Here, Trudeau's plan was called fairy tales by the conservatives who, like you, called his plan fairytales and other things high and loud as if it was a basic fact of life. You know why you keep asking for a plan? Because you heard someone ask for it and now you think it's a good argument. It may very well convince people, but let's be honest. Sanders right now is campaigning, just like Justin Trudeau here in Canada. He utters general principles, like Trudeau and thousands of politicians before him. Now that Trudeau is in office, his impossible plans seem much less impossible.

And we're looking back at the conservative rhetoric. Impossible they said. And we laugh, even though we don't particularly like Trudeau.

Yes, it's hard. Do you think the men who built all this had it easy? You think the politicians had elaborate plans before they got elected?

"You got no plan" is the oldest argument in the fucking book. No shit, campaigning candidates ACROSS THE WORLD get accused of having no plan before taking office and drawing up elaborate plans there. And sometimes they take office and get accused of failing to put their ideal dream world into practice. At the end of the day, no one has yet forged world peace despite repeatedly calling for it. No one has fixed everything as they've promised during their campaign. "Give us the plan" they say even though they'd say the plan wouldn't work if they could see it. Yet when elected, regardless of whether the utopia is created, the country is still generally nudged in the desired direction.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that Trudeau campaigned with "no plan", or even that it was a major criticism of his platform.

He had a quite detailed budget (even if it turned out to be greatly understated), he campaigned on some very specific tax/pension/income changes, and had several major policy goals with very defined end goals. His campaign was very hyperbolic on what those changes would actually bring to the country, but you could still review his platform and campaign promises and (mostly) have a collection of very tangible points, with a budget plan to make it happen (which, again, turned out to be massively understated).

The biggest thing you can really criticize his campaign not having a plan for is legalizing marijuana, but at the end of the day the vagueness is all in the end regulations and the ambiguity of the current situation. There's no real confusion on how he would make marijuana legal, or what the end state would look like (it's a very simple comparison with alcohol or tobacco).
Average means I'm better than half of you.
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:09:27
April 20 2016 17:07 GMT
#72943
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb

unless you really want to destroy small towns and whatnot i suppose
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:11:21
April 20 2016 17:07 GMT
#72944
On April 21 2016 02:02 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 01:24 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:18 Gorsameth wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:10 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:00 Kipsate wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:26 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:23 Mohdoo wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:19 Djzapz wrote:
I felt like the discussions about viability were more relevant before the voting started. It would have been weird if in 2008, people had started saying Hillary was nonviable when Obama started pulling away with the victory. At that point it's no longer about viability.

I initially thought Sanders was nonviable, then he built up and he turned out to be obviously viable, like Hillary in 2008. Ended up losing, but not without making significant waves. Even if Sanders is defeated, it's no longer about viability.


Clinton in 2008 ran a very different campaign from Sanders in 2016. Sanders has always been about building hype ASAP and hoping to gain enough momentum to close it out before too much scrutiny. Too late. His views are shallow at best and a lot of people realize that now. People like him but won't vote for him. That's his issue. Basically the opposite of 2008 Clinton.

Seems like that's rhetoric coming from his opponents, and not actually something potential supporters are saying. A lot of people voted for him. The content of the campaign is not relevant here, I don't know that viability has anything to do with that.

His views are only considered shallow by Americans who are still traumatized by big bad socialism. To me it's amazing because most of those arguments have this weird vibe of "well EVERYBODY KNOWS that Sanders sucks at X Y and Z". It's such a cheap argument... admittedly I probably use it myself when I'm shitfaced, nothing to be proud of.

Sanders is tame by the standards of my also-multicultural social democratic country so when people say his views are shallow, well that's patently just their opinion, man

His views are considered shallow by some because he propegates rhetoric aimed at solving problems the way we do in Europe, except he is American and this is America. Money doesn't come from thin air, comprises have to be made, Congress is a thing etc. Interestingly you generalize Hillary supporters/nonBernie supporters the same way right now that other people do to Berniebros.

People would want to live in his world but unfortunately that is not the world that you live in. He is an idealist rather then a pragmatist (you can even see Clinton positioning herself as someone who wants to get "shit done" to capitalize on this problem). Its not really a suprise that Sanders is really popular among younger people (as Clinton has in general been unable to win that vote). I think there is great value in him running to make (some) of his ideas more acceptable in the longterm but he is ahead of his time right now.

Your argument is essentially America =/= Europe, which is fine, there are cultural and economic differences between America and Europe and it's great that people understand that. So, we've determined that two geographical locations are different and the conversation is over, right? Well, no... Why would it be? Proposing European politics in America isn't other-worldly, it's different. There is nothing to suggest that these things cannot work at all.

Calling it idealistic or shallow is nothing but a cop out. Pointing at the political and cultural differences of Europe and the US is also a cop out.

The conversation doesn't end at "It's different therefore it's impossible". The US and Canada are two very different countries in many ways, but we're very similar in many others. The US could gradually become more European and I think its people would benefit greatly. IMO, Sanders is no where near as shallow as the people who dismiss it because "America is different and that's the end of this discussion". I maintain that this is a cheap argument when it's used like this. Sure, there are differences and it would be difficult to convert a nation which is terrified of socialism because of cold war propaganda to a more social democratic way of doing politics. It's a discussion which must take place. But the second you say the US is different from Europe therefore these principles are impossible, you're simplifying something. And I think you're doing it maliciously, too, because if you're capable of reasoning this out, you also know that it's not that simple. At least I would think so.

Sigh, again no we are not saying it is impossible but it is considerably more difficult because of the American culture and so he has to come up with more then just "we will do it", "how?" "I don't know. we just will".

One of his major campaign points is breaking up the banks, to fight wall street but he has not a single clue how or what he will do to break up those banks. He has nothing but empty air and hope.

You need more then fairy tales if you want to revolutionize a country.
You need a plan.

Here, Trudeau's plan was called fairy tales by the conservatives who, like you, called his plan fairytales and other things high and loud as if it was a basic fact of life. You know why you keep asking for a plan? Because you heard someone ask for it and now you think it's a good argument. It may very well convince people, but let's be honest. Sanders right now is campaigning, just like Justin Trudeau here in Canada. He utters general principles, like Trudeau and thousands of politicians before him. Now that Trudeau is in office, his impossible plans seem much less impossible.

And we're looking back at the conservative rhetoric. Impossible they said. And we laugh, even though we don't particularly like Trudeau.

Yes, it's hard. Do you think the men who built all this had it easy? You think the politicians had elaborate plans before they got elected?

"You got no plan" is the oldest argument in the fucking book. No shit, campaigning candidates ACROSS THE WORLD get accused of having no plan before taking office and drawing up elaborate plans there. And sometimes they take office and get accused of failing to put their ideal dream world into practice. At the end of the day, no one has yet forged world peace despite repeatedly calling for it. No one has fixed everything as they've promised during their campaign. "Give us the plan" they say even though they'd say the plan wouldn't work if they could see it. Yet when elected, regardless of whether the utopia is created, the country is still generally nudged in the desired direction.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that Trudeau campaigned with "no plan", or even that it was a major criticism of his platform.

He had a quite detailed budget (even if it turned out to be greatly understated), he campaigned on some very specific tax/pension/income changes, and had several major policy goals with very defined end goals. His campaign was very hyperbolic on what those changes would actually bring to the country, but you could still review his platform and campaign promises and (mostly) have a collection of very tangible points, with a budget plan to make it happen (which, again, turned out to be massively understated).

The biggest thing you can really criticize his campaign not having a plan for is legalizing marijuana, but at the end of the day the vagueness is all in the end regulations and the ambiguity of the current situation. There's no real confusion on how he would make marijuana legal, or what the end state would look like (it's a very simple comparison with alcohol or tobacco).

I recall quite clearly his opponents repeatedly saying that what he brought to the table was completely out of the realm of possibility and his political opponents would repeat that line ad nauseum. As for his detailed budget, it was criticized as being vague and impossible to put into action given the conjuncture.

Anyway, needless to say that Canadian politicians are a lot more prepared despite the electoral cycle that is a tiny fraction of the length of even the US primaries (let alone the entire electoral cycle). Still get shit on.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
Naracs_Duc
Profile Joined August 2015
746 Posts
April 20 2016 17:07 GMT
#72945
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.


It would be great if there was as much emphasis and excitement in local elections (that helps define what the president can do) instead of simply focusing on the executive office (who mainly appoints judges and vetos scary shit).
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:10:02
April 20 2016 17:08 GMT
#72946
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb

Are you arguing with fictional people now? Because no one is talking about $15 minimum wage.

On April 21 2016 02:07 Naracs_Duc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.


It would be great if there was as much emphasis and excitement in local elections (that helps define what the president can do) instead of simply focusing on the executive office (who mainly appoints judges and vetos scary shit).


The GOP figured that out in the 90s and the democrats have not caught up. Its sort of irritating, since it is the main reason why we get all these bullshit LGBT bathroom scare bills and voter ID non-sense that are all doomed to be thrown out.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
DickMcFanny
Profile Blog Joined September 2015
Ireland1076 Posts
April 20 2016 17:09 GMT
#72947
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb


Yeah, people just don't learn from history.

Look how the New Deal destroyed the American middle class until finally our lord and savior Reagan descended from heaven to give us the gift of capitalism.
| (• ◡•)|╯ ╰(❍ᴥ❍ʋ)
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
April 20 2016 17:10 GMT
#72948
On April 21 2016 02:08 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb

Are you arguing with fictional people now? Because no one is talking about $15 minimum wage.

discussion was framed as sanders is more left and it's a better negotiation position.

15$ federal minimum wage is a sanders talking point.


anyway look at it this way, is sanders more of a liberal than barney frank?
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13924 Posts
April 20 2016 17:11 GMT
#72949
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.

I don't think so they've actualy gotten a budget through the house and have shown bipartisanship through a few things. Its not like the government is in perpetual shutdown/default.

Its comments like yours is causeing the problem. Saying what your are saying deflects any responsibility Obama has to working with congress and just blames all the problems on one side of the isle making the divide further. Doubling down on gridlock doesn't help anyone.
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
April 20 2016 17:17 GMT
#72950
On April 21 2016 02:09 DickMcFanny wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb


Yeah, people just don't learn from history.

Look how the New Deal destroyed the American middle class until finally our lord and savior Reagan descended from heaven to give us the gift of capitalism.

i too refer to the new deal to defend every dumb policy
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:18:33
April 20 2016 17:18 GMT
#72951
On April 21 2016 02:09 DickMcFanny wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb


Yeah, people just don't learn from history.

Look how the New Deal destroyed the American middle class until finally our lord and savior Reagan descended from heaven to give us the gift of capitalism.

+ Show Spoiler +
Yep also let's ignore the part where Reagan rolled back the tax cuts when trickle down economics turned out to not actually be a thing. + Show Spoiler +
I know you were being sarcastic
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
April 20 2016 17:18 GMT
#72952
On April 21 2016 02:11 Sermokala wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.

I don't think so they've actualy gotten a budget through the house and have shown bipartisanship through a few things. Its not like the government is in perpetual shutdown/default.

Its comments like yours is causeing the problem. Saying what your are saying deflects any responsibility Obama has to working with congress and just blames all the problems on one side of the isle making the divide further. Doubling down on gridlock doesn't help anyone.

I believe Obama is willing to work with the moderate and reasonable members of the GOP. Sadly, those people are not in power and the Freedom Caucus refuses work unless it is filled with budget cuts they know the Democrats will never accept. The point of compromise is meeting in the middle. On standing on your line and waiting for the other side to show up.

And this congress has been one of the least productive in history. Only rivaled by the previous sessions, all since the rise of the tea party and their loathing for goverment.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/29/in-late-spurt-of-activity-congress-avoids-least-productive-title/
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Naracs_Duc
Profile Joined August 2015
746 Posts
April 20 2016 17:19 GMT
#72953
On April 21 2016 02:07 Djzapz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:02 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:24 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:18 Gorsameth wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:10 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:00 Kipsate wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:26 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:23 Mohdoo wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:19 Djzapz wrote:
I felt like the discussions about viability were more relevant before the voting started. It would have been weird if in 2008, people had started saying Hillary was nonviable when Obama started pulling away with the victory. At that point it's no longer about viability.

I initially thought Sanders was nonviable, then he built up and he turned out to be obviously viable, like Hillary in 2008. Ended up losing, but not without making significant waves. Even if Sanders is defeated, it's no longer about viability.


Clinton in 2008 ran a very different campaign from Sanders in 2016. Sanders has always been about building hype ASAP and hoping to gain enough momentum to close it out before too much scrutiny. Too late. His views are shallow at best and a lot of people realize that now. People like him but won't vote for him. That's his issue. Basically the opposite of 2008 Clinton.

Seems like that's rhetoric coming from his opponents, and not actually something potential supporters are saying. A lot of people voted for him. The content of the campaign is not relevant here, I don't know that viability has anything to do with that.

His views are only considered shallow by Americans who are still traumatized by big bad socialism. To me it's amazing because most of those arguments have this weird vibe of "well EVERYBODY KNOWS that Sanders sucks at X Y and Z". It's such a cheap argument... admittedly I probably use it myself when I'm shitfaced, nothing to be proud of.

Sanders is tame by the standards of my also-multicultural social democratic country so when people say his views are shallow, well that's patently just their opinion, man

His views are considered shallow by some because he propegates rhetoric aimed at solving problems the way we do in Europe, except he is American and this is America. Money doesn't come from thin air, comprises have to be made, Congress is a thing etc. Interestingly you generalize Hillary supporters/nonBernie supporters the same way right now that other people do to Berniebros.

People would want to live in his world but unfortunately that is not the world that you live in. He is an idealist rather then a pragmatist (you can even see Clinton positioning herself as someone who wants to get "shit done" to capitalize on this problem). Its not really a suprise that Sanders is really popular among younger people (as Clinton has in general been unable to win that vote). I think there is great value in him running to make (some) of his ideas more acceptable in the longterm but he is ahead of his time right now.

Your argument is essentially America =/= Europe, which is fine, there are cultural and economic differences between America and Europe and it's great that people understand that. So, we've determined that two geographical locations are different and the conversation is over, right? Well, no... Why would it be? Proposing European politics in America isn't other-worldly, it's different. There is nothing to suggest that these things cannot work at all.

Calling it idealistic or shallow is nothing but a cop out. Pointing at the political and cultural differences of Europe and the US is also a cop out.

The conversation doesn't end at "It's different therefore it's impossible". The US and Canada are two very different countries in many ways, but we're very similar in many others. The US could gradually become more European and I think its people would benefit greatly. IMO, Sanders is no where near as shallow as the people who dismiss it because "America is different and that's the end of this discussion". I maintain that this is a cheap argument when it's used like this. Sure, there are differences and it would be difficult to convert a nation which is terrified of socialism because of cold war propaganda to a more social democratic way of doing politics. It's a discussion which must take place. But the second you say the US is different from Europe therefore these principles are impossible, you're simplifying something. And I think you're doing it maliciously, too, because if you're capable of reasoning this out, you also know that it's not that simple. At least I would think so.

Sigh, again no we are not saying it is impossible but it is considerably more difficult because of the American culture and so he has to come up with more then just "we will do it", "how?" "I don't know. we just will".

One of his major campaign points is breaking up the banks, to fight wall street but he has not a single clue how or what he will do to break up those banks. He has nothing but empty air and hope.

You need more then fairy tales if you want to revolutionize a country.
You need a plan.

Here, Trudeau's plan was called fairy tales by the conservatives who, like you, called his plan fairytales and other things high and loud as if it was a basic fact of life. You know why you keep asking for a plan? Because you heard someone ask for it and now you think it's a good argument. It may very well convince people, but let's be honest. Sanders right now is campaigning, just like Justin Trudeau here in Canada. He utters general principles, like Trudeau and thousands of politicians before him. Now that Trudeau is in office, his impossible plans seem much less impossible.

And we're looking back at the conservative rhetoric. Impossible they said. And we laugh, even though we don't particularly like Trudeau.

Yes, it's hard. Do you think the men who built all this had it easy? You think the politicians had elaborate plans before they got elected?

"You got no plan" is the oldest argument in the fucking book. No shit, campaigning candidates ACROSS THE WORLD get accused of having no plan before taking office and drawing up elaborate plans there. And sometimes they take office and get accused of failing to put their ideal dream world into practice. At the end of the day, no one has yet forged world peace despite repeatedly calling for it. No one has fixed everything as they've promised during their campaign. "Give us the plan" they say even though they'd say the plan wouldn't work if they could see it. Yet when elected, regardless of whether the utopia is created, the country is still generally nudged in the desired direction.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that Trudeau campaigned with "no plan", or even that it was a major criticism of his platform.

He had a quite detailed budget (even if it turned out to be greatly understated), he campaigned on some very specific tax/pension/income changes, and had several major policy goals with very defined end goals. His campaign was very hyperbolic on what those changes would actually bring to the country, but you could still review his platform and campaign promises and (mostly) have a collection of very tangible points, with a budget plan to make it happen (which, again, turned out to be massively understated).

The biggest thing you can really criticize his campaign not having a plan for is legalizing marijuana, but at the end of the day the vagueness is all in the end regulations and the ambiguity of the current situation. There's no real confusion on how he would make marijuana legal, or what the end state would look like (it's a very simple comparison with alcohol or tobacco).

I recall quite clearly his opponents repeatedly saying that what he brought to the table was completely out of the realm of possibility and his political opponents would repeat that line ad nauseum. As for his detailed budget, it was criticized as being vague and impossible to put into action given the conjuncture.


Wait--so he had a plan, a budget for that plan, and a way to implement that plan, and the complaint was on the validity of that plan or scale of the plan?

On the Bernie side, he couldn't even answer if the US could already do or not do what he wants the US to do (break up big banks) when asked point blanks. Couldn't even say "I am unsure yet, let me talk to experts and we will develop a better plan for later." He cracked like a fragile flower when questioned by a liberal news outlet giving him.

There's a very big difference between your opponents disagreeing with your plan and not having a plan.
Naracs_Duc
Profile Joined August 2015
746 Posts
April 20 2016 17:27 GMT
#72954
On April 21 2016 02:08 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 oneofthem wrote:
some of the sanders policies like 15$ federal minimum wage isn't even properly characterized as 'more left.' it is simply dumb

Are you arguing with fictional people now? Because no one is talking about $15 minimum wage.

Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 Naracs_Duc wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.


It would be great if there was as much emphasis and excitement in local elections (that helps define what the president can do) instead of simply focusing on the executive office (who mainly appoints judges and vetos scary shit).


The GOP figured that out in the 90s and the democrats have not caught up. Its sort of irritating, since it is the main reason why we get all these bullshit LGBT bathroom scare bills and voter ID non-sense that are all doomed to be thrown out.


I wouldn't mind the LGBT/Immigration bullshit from the Republicans if there were as much blatant things being thrown around by liberal senators and congressmen. Right now all we get are democratic presidents who either have to become more conservative (because of the makeup of their team) or who get caught in gridlock (because they draw a line they won't cross).

But midterms are expensive, and Sanders attacking the DNC will not help things further.
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:44:14
April 20 2016 17:38 GMT
#72955
On April 21 2016 02:19 Naracs_Duc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:07 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 02:02 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:24 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:18 Gorsameth wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:10 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:00 Kipsate wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:26 Djzapz wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:23 Mohdoo wrote:
On April 21 2016 00:19 Djzapz wrote:
I felt like the discussions about viability were more relevant before the voting started. It would have been weird if in 2008, people had started saying Hillary was nonviable when Obama started pulling away with the victory. At that point it's no longer about viability.

I initially thought Sanders was nonviable, then he built up and he turned out to be obviously viable, like Hillary in 2008. Ended up losing, but not without making significant waves. Even if Sanders is defeated, it's no longer about viability.


Clinton in 2008 ran a very different campaign from Sanders in 2016. Sanders has always been about building hype ASAP and hoping to gain enough momentum to close it out before too much scrutiny. Too late. His views are shallow at best and a lot of people realize that now. People like him but won't vote for him. That's his issue. Basically the opposite of 2008 Clinton.

Seems like that's rhetoric coming from his opponents, and not actually something potential supporters are saying. A lot of people voted for him. The content of the campaign is not relevant here, I don't know that viability has anything to do with that.

His views are only considered shallow by Americans who are still traumatized by big bad socialism. To me it's amazing because most of those arguments have this weird vibe of "well EVERYBODY KNOWS that Sanders sucks at X Y and Z". It's such a cheap argument... admittedly I probably use it myself when I'm shitfaced, nothing to be proud of.

Sanders is tame by the standards of my also-multicultural social democratic country so when people say his views are shallow, well that's patently just their opinion, man

His views are considered shallow by some because he propegates rhetoric aimed at solving problems the way we do in Europe, except he is American and this is America. Money doesn't come from thin air, comprises have to be made, Congress is a thing etc. Interestingly you generalize Hillary supporters/nonBernie supporters the same way right now that other people do to Berniebros.

People would want to live in his world but unfortunately that is not the world that you live in. He is an idealist rather then a pragmatist (you can even see Clinton positioning herself as someone who wants to get "shit done" to capitalize on this problem). Its not really a suprise that Sanders is really popular among younger people (as Clinton has in general been unable to win that vote). I think there is great value in him running to make (some) of his ideas more acceptable in the longterm but he is ahead of his time right now.

Your argument is essentially America =/= Europe, which is fine, there are cultural and economic differences between America and Europe and it's great that people understand that. So, we've determined that two geographical locations are different and the conversation is over, right? Well, no... Why would it be? Proposing European politics in America isn't other-worldly, it's different. There is nothing to suggest that these things cannot work at all.

Calling it idealistic or shallow is nothing but a cop out. Pointing at the political and cultural differences of Europe and the US is also a cop out.

The conversation doesn't end at "It's different therefore it's impossible". The US and Canada are two very different countries in many ways, but we're very similar in many others. The US could gradually become more European and I think its people would benefit greatly. IMO, Sanders is no where near as shallow as the people who dismiss it because "America is different and that's the end of this discussion". I maintain that this is a cheap argument when it's used like this. Sure, there are differences and it would be difficult to convert a nation which is terrified of socialism because of cold war propaganda to a more social democratic way of doing politics. It's a discussion which must take place. But the second you say the US is different from Europe therefore these principles are impossible, you're simplifying something. And I think you're doing it maliciously, too, because if you're capable of reasoning this out, you also know that it's not that simple. At least I would think so.

Sigh, again no we are not saying it is impossible but it is considerably more difficult because of the American culture and so he has to come up with more then just "we will do it", "how?" "I don't know. we just will".

One of his major campaign points is breaking up the banks, to fight wall street but he has not a single clue how or what he will do to break up those banks. He has nothing but empty air and hope.

You need more then fairy tales if you want to revolutionize a country.
You need a plan.

Here, Trudeau's plan was called fairy tales by the conservatives who, like you, called his plan fairytales and other things high and loud as if it was a basic fact of life. You know why you keep asking for a plan? Because you heard someone ask for it and now you think it's a good argument. It may very well convince people, but let's be honest. Sanders right now is campaigning, just like Justin Trudeau here in Canada. He utters general principles, like Trudeau and thousands of politicians before him. Now that Trudeau is in office, his impossible plans seem much less impossible.

And we're looking back at the conservative rhetoric. Impossible they said. And we laugh, even though we don't particularly like Trudeau.

Yes, it's hard. Do you think the men who built all this had it easy? You think the politicians had elaborate plans before they got elected?

"You got no plan" is the oldest argument in the fucking book. No shit, campaigning candidates ACROSS THE WORLD get accused of having no plan before taking office and drawing up elaborate plans there. And sometimes they take office and get accused of failing to put their ideal dream world into practice. At the end of the day, no one has yet forged world peace despite repeatedly calling for it. No one has fixed everything as they've promised during their campaign. "Give us the plan" they say even though they'd say the plan wouldn't work if they could see it. Yet when elected, regardless of whether the utopia is created, the country is still generally nudged in the desired direction.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that Trudeau campaigned with "no plan", or even that it was a major criticism of his platform.

He had a quite detailed budget (even if it turned out to be greatly understated), he campaigned on some very specific tax/pension/income changes, and had several major policy goals with very defined end goals. His campaign was very hyperbolic on what those changes would actually bring to the country, but you could still review his platform and campaign promises and (mostly) have a collection of very tangible points, with a budget plan to make it happen (which, again, turned out to be massively understated).

The biggest thing you can really criticize his campaign not having a plan for is legalizing marijuana, but at the end of the day the vagueness is all in the end regulations and the ambiguity of the current situation. There's no real confusion on how he would make marijuana legal, or what the end state would look like (it's a very simple comparison with alcohol or tobacco).

I recall quite clearly his opponents repeatedly saying that what he brought to the table was completely out of the realm of possibility and his political opponents would repeat that line ad nauseum. As for his detailed budget, it was criticized as being vague and impossible to put into action given the conjuncture.


Wait--so he had a plan, a budget for that plan, and a way to implement that plan, and the complaint was on the validity of that plan or scale of the plan?

On the Bernie side, he couldn't even answer if the US could already do or not do what he wants the US to do (break up big banks) when asked point blanks. Couldn't even say "I am unsure yet, let me talk to experts and we will develop a better plan for later." He cracked like a fragile flower when questioned by a liberal news outlet giving him.

There's a very big difference between your opponents disagreeing with your plan and not having a plan.

I mean what you're saying is fair and true but let's not forget that the initial plan that was proposed by Trudeau is a thing of the past and it turns out that only some of the principles that were raised are actually turning up in reality. Fact is it's an electoral campaign, they say a lot of shit. Like, Trudeau had a plan, now many of his promises aren't being met but he's still stirring Canada in the direction he wanted. That's how electoral campaigns work, systematically.

Candidate says they'll do X, your reaction is, understandably, how will Candidate do exactly X. In reality, it's more likely that X won't happen but we'll go toward it. If you want a detailed plan for doing exactly X, what you'll get is a false prophecy more likely than not. Which is what Trudeau's plan turned out to be.

Fact is regardless of who you vote for you're largely voting for a certain set of principles. If you want an elaborate plan of how to implement any substantial specific policy, you're getting bullshit.
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:42:32
April 20 2016 17:40 GMT
#72956
btw if anyone wants to see how sanders' pointless palestinian comment got him rekt check out the votes in boro park. that's the blue region west of flatbush

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/04/19/us/elections/new-york-city-democratic-primary-results.html#11/40.7100/-73.9800

i mean who is advising him on these things? not denoucning castro in miami and complaining about israel in new york.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-04-20 17:49:29
April 20 2016 17:43 GMT
#72957
Hmm, a lot of questionable republican stuff in the house right now; watching cspan coverage of several iffy IRS bills that are mostly about hating on the IRS rather than sound policy.
e.g. current bill would bar the IRS from hiring anybody if there is a single IRS employee with a seriously delinquent tax bill.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1206/text?q={"search":["IRS"]}&resultIndex=4

of course they won't let the same rule cover congress itself and its employees.
Also IRS has far lower tax delinquency than other federal government agencies (and congress itself).


So many people that should just be barred from serving in congress.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
April 20 2016 17:45 GMT
#72958
Hating on the IRS is what gets those clowns re-elected, so, yeah, business as usual
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
April 20 2016 17:50 GMT
#72959
LANSING, Mich. — Two state regulators and a Flint employee are charged with evidence tampering and several other felony and misdemeanor counts related to the Michigan city’s lead-tainted water crisis.

The charges, filed Wednesday in a state court, stem from an investigation by the Michigan attorney general’s office.

Michael Prysby, a district engineer for the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, and Stephen Busch, who is a supervisor with the DEQ’s Office of Drinking Water, are both charged with misconduct in office, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, tampering with evidence and violations of water treatment and monitoring laws.

Flint utilities administrator Michael Glasgow is charged with tampering with evidence for changing lead water-testing results and willful neglect of duty as a public servant.


Link

I'm sure they were in no way pressured to tamper with evidence by the Snyder administration...
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13924 Posts
April 20 2016 17:56 GMT
#72960
On April 21 2016 02:18 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2016 02:11 Sermokala wrote:
On April 21 2016 01:56 Plansix wrote:
This is the congress who announced they would block Obama's nominee to the bench hours after the spot opened up. There is literally nothing he can do to make the GOP work with him unless their backs are against the wall and the government will shut down if they don't.

I don't think so they've actualy gotten a budget through the house and have shown bipartisanship through a few things. Its not like the government is in perpetual shutdown/default.

Its comments like yours is causeing the problem. Saying what your are saying deflects any responsibility Obama has to working with congress and just blames all the problems on one side of the isle making the divide further. Doubling down on gridlock doesn't help anyone.

I believe Obama is willing to work with the moderate and reasonable members of the GOP. Sadly, those people are not in power and the Freedom Caucus refuses work unless it is filled with budget cuts they know the Democrats will never accept. The point of compromise is meeting in the middle. On standing on your line and waiting for the other side to show up.

And this congress has been one of the least productive in history. Only rivaled by the previous sessions, all since the rise of the tea party and their loathing for goverment.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/29/in-late-spurt-of-activity-congress-avoids-least-productive-title/

But intransigence like that can only work for so long. If one side refused to work you could easily tell the electorate to throw them out for not doing their job. But instead the tea party has thrived in this atmosphere of hostility. At some point you have to honestly consider if Obama is the problem. Taking executive action because the other side doesn't want to work with you sounds good to your base but it opens up so many thing to hit obama on that they've been saying about him from the moment he got elected.

Compromise only works when both sides have something to gain from it and if Obama is only going to feed the tea party if they don't work with him then they have no reason to. this isn't a fantasy world where the people genuinely give a shit about the country its a bunch of people trying to keep their jobs and solidify their position in that job.
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
Prev 1 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 4h 30m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft569
StarCraft: Brood War
firebathero 847
Leta 593
ggaemo 281
Noble 79
Zeus 35
Icarus 7
Britney 0
League of Legends
JimRising 826
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K808
Other Games
summit1g11260
hungrybox275
ViBE202
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1467
BasetradeTV53
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• practicex 51
• Sammyuel 14
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki34
• iopq 1
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Scarra2426
• Stunt498
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
4h 30m
Reynor vs Zoun
Solar vs SHIN
Classic vs ShoWTimE
Cure vs Rogue
Esports World Cup
1d 5h
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
5 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.