|
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 May 05 2016 07:08 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 05 2016 06:34 CannonsNCarriers wrote:On May 05 2016 06:31 oneofthem wrote:
it would really help things if bernie has some sort of legit policy. what kind of platform does he really want to negotiate given his radically antagonistic view of reality?
the reality is that the sensible part of his platform is already in hillary's. what's he gonna want? it's not hillary the republican refusing to negotiate with bernie. a lot of his stuff would seriously harm poor americans and use up valuable resources for unproductive spending. Bernie could negotiate an end to money in Democratic-party-only politics. Right after he gets Hillary to discharge his campaign debt. That's what Obama did and Clinton went back on the getting money out of politics part. No reason to for Sanders to trust Hillary would actually keep her word this time. Pretty sure that was before citizens united blew up and ruined any plan of that for the DNC. GH, you do understand that if they don't accept the funds, they will be orders of magnitude behind the RNC when it comes to budget? By trying to remove the money from the DNC, they could cripple their ability to win seats nation wide, which means the money stays.
For Campaign Finance Reform in words: Hillary, Bernie, Trump, DNC, D Voters, R Voters
For Campaign Finance Reform in action: Bernie, Trump, D voters, R Voters
Against reforming their own campaigns: Hillary, DNC, RNC
Seems like without Hillary and the DNC the RNC would be pretty lonely thinking superPACs and the like were something that should continue.
I don't think they would be as effective as you think down ballot with both nominees actively campaigning against corrupting money in politics. I'm thinking RNC superPAC ads and similar sketchy finance stuff we all want to get rid of, being exclusively used by RNC establishment (anti-Trump) candidates, would probably be about as effective as Jeb's this election.
In other words, that excuse is unimpressive in the context of the actual situation.
|
On May 05 2016 07:17 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:13 Naracs_Duc wrote:I know, revolution, individual contributors, I get it--but if you couldn't convince liberals to vote for you how do you expect southern democrats to do it using that strategy?
If you said this to GH, what do you think his response would be? I can't tell if Bernie is legitimately the same or if it is more so an act to continue inspiring people like GH. Either way, I think it is entirely possible Bernie would say the whole election was stolen by voter suppression and that corporate interests compelled the media to silence his majority. Edit: As I understand it, the gist of GH's argument is that corporate interests, from the beginning, used the media to silence and suppress Bernie, giving him a massive disadvantage from the beginning. The fact that he is going to end up only like 150-200 delegates below Clinton is completely insane. If the DNC wasn't 100% in Clinton's pocket, and he had a "fair shot", it's entirely likely he would have swept the floor with Clinton with an early advantage and people saying "It's Obama all over again". If this was a boxing match, Sanders was only allowed to use 1 hand. Still gave Clinton a bloody nose. Got knocked out eventually, but imagine if he had both hands. The whole election is essentially seen as invalid. Then look at polls that show Bernie doing better against Trump, and you ask yourself, is there any reason for Clinton instead of Bernie? If the primary was a sham and he leads Trump, who gives a shit about Clinton? What is her actual value? I can see Bernie making a similar argument.
Counterpoint is then made that we can't overturn the will of the voters just because he's unhappy with the conclusion.
|
On May 05 2016 07:36 xDaunt wrote:
At best, Bernie is the Democrats' version of Barry Goldwater. He's arrived ahead of his time, before there are enough people who are ready to accept his message.
was anyone ever willing to accept Goldwater's ideas? I'm genuinely curious cause I know nothing about him other then his extremism in the defense of liberty speech
|
On May 05 2016 07:39 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:17 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2016 07:13 Naracs_Duc wrote:I know, revolution, individual contributors, I get it--but if you couldn't convince liberals to vote for you how do you expect southern democrats to do it using that strategy?
If you said this to GH, what do you think his response would be? I can't tell if Bernie is legitimately the same or if it is more so an act to continue inspiring people like GH. Either way, I think it is entirely possible Bernie would say the whole election was stolen by voter suppression and that corporate interests compelled the media to silence his majority. Edit: As I understand it, the gist of GH's argument is that corporate interests, from the beginning, used the media to silence and suppress Bernie, giving him a massive disadvantage from the beginning. The fact that he is going to end up only like 150-200 delegates below Clinton is completely insane. If the DNC wasn't 100% in Clinton's pocket, and he had a "fair shot", it's entirely likely he would have swept the floor with Clinton with an early advantage and people saying "It's Obama all over again". If this was a boxing match, Sanders was only allowed to use 1 hand. Still gave Clinton a bloody nose. Got knocked out eventually, but imagine if he had both hands. The whole election is essentially seen as invalid. Then look at polls that show Bernie doing better against Trump, and you ask yourself, is there any reason for Clinton instead of Bernie? If the primary was a sham and he leads Trump, who gives a shit about Clinton? What is her actual value? I can see Bernie making a similar argument. Counterpoint is then made that we can't overturn the will of the voters just because he's unhappy with the conclusion.
But what if the will of the people is all false consciousness brought about by Corruption and Monied Interests? Don't you see? People only voted against Bernie because of Money in Politics. When Republican and Democratic voters vote for candidates, they do so because of the Money and Corrupt Influence of the Corporations. If only everyone's false consciousness was lifted, then Bernie would win all the votes. There is no valid reason to disagree with Bernie's plans, they have secret majority support. Hillary voters, Trump voters, Bush voters; they all did it because of the Riggedness of the System and the Corrupt Establishment.
Thus, Bernie should fight forever and any results of the primaries are invalid. The Supers should overturn whatever the results are because the whole thing was rigged to delude the populace with false consciousness.
EDIT: I have taken to reading the Bernie reddit. Always good to see how the other side thinks.
|
On May 05 2016 07:47 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:39 Naracs_Duc wrote:On May 05 2016 07:17 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2016 07:13 Naracs_Duc wrote:I know, revolution, individual contributors, I get it--but if you couldn't convince liberals to vote for you how do you expect southern democrats to do it using that strategy?
If you said this to GH, what do you think his response would be? I can't tell if Bernie is legitimately the same or if it is more so an act to continue inspiring people like GH. Either way, I think it is entirely possible Bernie would say the whole election was stolen by voter suppression and that corporate interests compelled the media to silence his majority. Edit: As I understand it, the gist of GH's argument is that corporate interests, from the beginning, used the media to silence and suppress Bernie, giving him a massive disadvantage from the beginning. The fact that he is going to end up only like 150-200 delegates below Clinton is completely insane. If the DNC wasn't 100% in Clinton's pocket, and he had a "fair shot", it's entirely likely he would have swept the floor with Clinton with an early advantage and people saying "It's Obama all over again". If this was a boxing match, Sanders was only allowed to use 1 hand. Still gave Clinton a bloody nose. Got knocked out eventually, but imagine if he had both hands. The whole election is essentially seen as invalid. Then look at polls that show Bernie doing better against Trump, and you ask yourself, is there any reason for Clinton instead of Bernie? If the primary was a sham and he leads Trump, who gives a shit about Clinton? What is her actual value? I can see Bernie making a similar argument. Counterpoint is then made that we can't overturn the will of the voters just because he's unhappy with the conclusion. But what if the will of the people is all false consciousness brought about by Corruption and Monied Interests? Don't you see? People only voted against Bernie because of Money in Politics. When Republican and Democratic voters vote for candidates, they do so because of the Money and Corrupt Influence of the Corporations. If only everyone's false consciousness was lifted, then Bernie would win all the votes. There is no valid reason to disagree with Bernie's plans, they have secret majority support. Hillary voters, Trump voters, Bush voters; they all did it because of the Riggedness of the System and the Corrupt Establishment. Thus, Bernie should fight forever and any results of the primaries are invalid. The Supers should overturn whatever the results are because the whole thing was rigged to delude the populace with false consciousness.
I get that your being sarcastic but the scary part is that there are actual Bernie supporters who think like that ><
|
On May 05 2016 07:47 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:39 Naracs_Duc wrote:On May 05 2016 07:17 Mohdoo wrote:On May 05 2016 07:13 Naracs_Duc wrote:I know, revolution, individual contributors, I get it--but if you couldn't convince liberals to vote for you how do you expect southern democrats to do it using that strategy?
If you said this to GH, what do you think his response would be? I can't tell if Bernie is legitimately the same or if it is more so an act to continue inspiring people like GH. Either way, I think it is entirely possible Bernie would say the whole election was stolen by voter suppression and that corporate interests compelled the media to silence his majority. Edit: As I understand it, the gist of GH's argument is that corporate interests, from the beginning, used the media to silence and suppress Bernie, giving him a massive disadvantage from the beginning. The fact that he is going to end up only like 150-200 delegates below Clinton is completely insane. If the DNC wasn't 100% in Clinton's pocket, and he had a "fair shot", it's entirely likely he would have swept the floor with Clinton with an early advantage and people saying "It's Obama all over again". If this was a boxing match, Sanders was only allowed to use 1 hand. Still gave Clinton a bloody nose. Got knocked out eventually, but imagine if he had both hands. The whole election is essentially seen as invalid. Then look at polls that show Bernie doing better against Trump, and you ask yourself, is there any reason for Clinton instead of Bernie? If the primary was a sham and he leads Trump, who gives a shit about Clinton? What is her actual value? I can see Bernie making a similar argument. Counterpoint is then made that we can't overturn the will of the voters just because he's unhappy with the conclusion. But what if the will of the people is all false consciousness brought about by Corruption and Monied Interests? Don't you see? People only voted against Bernie because of Money in Politics. When Republican and Democratic voters vote for candidates, they do so because of the Money and Corrupt Influence of the Corporations. If only everyone's false consciousness was lifted, then Bernie would win all the votes. There is no valid reason to disagree with Bernie's plans, they have secret majority support. Hillary voters, Trump voters, Bush voters; they all did it because of the Riggedness of the System and the Corrupt Establishment. Thus, Bernie should fight forever and any results of the primaries are invalid. The Supers should overturn whatever the results are because the whole thing was rigged to delude the populace with false consciousness. EDIT: I have taken to reading the Bernie reddit. Always good to see how the other side thinks.
somebodies been reading too much Chomsky
|
On May 05 2016 07:47 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:36 xDaunt wrote:
At best, Bernie is the Democrats' version of Barry Goldwater. He's arrived ahead of his time, before there are enough people who are ready to accept his message. was anyone ever willing to accept Goldwater's ideas? I'm genuinely curious cause I know nothing about him other then his extremism in the defense of liberty speech
Reagan was the direct ideological descendant of Goldwater.
|
On May 05 2016 07:08 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 05 2016 06:34 CannonsNCarriers wrote:On May 05 2016 06:31 oneofthem wrote:
it would really help things if bernie has some sort of legit policy. what kind of platform does he really want to negotiate given his radically antagonistic view of reality?
the reality is that the sensible part of his platform is already in hillary's. what's he gonna want? it's not hillary the republican refusing to negotiate with bernie. a lot of his stuff would seriously harm poor americans and use up valuable resources for unproductive spending. Bernie could negotiate an end to money in Democratic-party-only politics. Right after he gets Hillary to discharge his campaign debt. That's what Obama did and Clinton went back on the getting money out of politics part. No reason to for Sanders to trust Hillary would actually keep her word this time. Pretty sure that was before citizens united blew up and ruined any plan of that for the DNC. GH, you do understand that if they don't accept the funds, they will be orders of magnitude behind the RNC when it comes to budget? By trying to remove the money from the DNC, they could cripple their ability to win seats nation wide, which means the money stays.
The amazing thing about Sandernistas is that they don't think further than the primary. Bernie would have to accept money from big donors to win the national elections if he was nominated. Such hypocrisy there.
GH's attitude is the most destructive possible for the left: people so convinced by their position that they don't see that the most important is for their side of the spectrum to win.
I also would prefer Sanders to win everything. I sincerely like him better than Clinton. And I all for people who support him. But I think that realistically Clinton will be nominated and that for the future, not only of the USA but of the humanity, the left will need to unite behind her. On 99% of the issue the differences between Sanders and Clinton is a question of rhetoric and method.
Do we want Clinton or Trump to negociate about global warming? Do we want Clinton or Trump to dictate the geopolitical position of the US? Do we want Clinton or Trump to address the problem of deregulated finance and global capitalism?
GH, get real. It's good to be convinced, but at one point one's irresponsibility becomes criminal.
|
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars.
Aren't ads really expensive?
|
On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars.
I think it would be cool to see a campaign budget. And by cool I mean horribly depressing.
|
On May 05 2016 08:14 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Aren't ads really expensive?
Yes. And they need to hire a lot of people, fly all over the county, run ads all over the country. It's a huge amount of money.
|
On May 05 2016 08:14 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Aren't ads really expensive?
I don't think ads are that important in modern politics, at least with the Trump campaign. He has spent far less money than the other candidates and gotten so much more space. Makes you wonder what will happen when he has to spend a billion dollars.
Still, looking at how hyped this GE is going to be even two billion doesn't sound far-fetched.
edit: Wonder how much special edition GOP MAGA hats he is going to sell... can he still sell hats? (there is a Gabe pun somewhere in there)
|
On May 05 2016 08:24 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:14 The_Templar wrote:On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Aren't ads really expensive? I don't think ads are that important in modern politics, at least with the Trump campaign. He has spent far less money than the other candidates and gotten so much more space. Makes you wonder what will happen when he has to spend a billion dollars. Still, looking at how hyped this GE is going to be even two billion doesn't sound far-fetched. edit: Wonder how much special edition GOP MAGA hats he is going to sell... can he still sell hats? (there is a Gabe pun somewhere in there)
I'm buying at least 2 MAGA hats.
|
I thought Trump was self funded and wouldn't take donations since he is beholden to nobody? I mean, what's 1billion dollars with somebody who has TEN BILLION in cold hard cash sitting in the bank, right?
|
On May 05 2016 08:30 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought Trump was self funded and wouldn't take donations since he is beholden to nobody? I mean, what's 1billion dollars with somebody who has TEN BILLION in cold hard cash sitting in the bank, right?
Still a shit ton of money.
|
On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars.
Imagine you were paying people above minimum wage for a year. And you have hundreds of people per county, thousands of people per state. And since this is campaigns and not 9-5, you're paying a staff 7 days a week. You now have a team bigger than most tech companies, all needing compensation, marketing materials, office space (campaign HQ's don't just pay for themselves you know) and you need this to last the year of the primary, and then the general. As things escalate TV ads become important costing much $$, daily plane flights and last minute stops (Ever bought a plane ticket a day before your flight? Now do that 3-4 times a week on a slow week)
Everything adds up. Campaign finance is well and good but sometimes you need to get people payed.
|
On May 05 2016 08:24 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:14 The_Templar wrote:On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Aren't ads really expensive? I don't think ads are that important in modern politics, at least with the Trump campaign. He has spent far less money than the other candidates and gotten so much more space. Makes you wonder what will happen when he has to spend a billion dollars. Still, looking at how hyped this GE is going to be even two billion doesn't sound far-fetched. edit: Wonder how much special edition GOP MAGA hats he is going to sell... can he still sell hats? (there is a Gabe pun somewhere in there)
He got a lot of free publicity just by saying he'd shoot terrorists with pigs blood. He knows how to game the media and allows him to get free publicity. Sadly, saying that he wants to deport immigrants won't work so well for him outside of the GOP--so he will need a new catch phrase to use against Hilary. But with the news media now only having 2 candidates--they are not as crunched to have to stretch their airtime amongst 19-22 candidates, now it will just be 2
|
On May 05 2016 08:29 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:24 zeo wrote:On May 05 2016 08:14 The_Templar wrote:On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Aren't ads really expensive? I don't think ads are that important in modern politics, at least with the Trump campaign. He has spent far less money than the other candidates and gotten so much more space. Makes you wonder what will happen when he has to spend a billion dollars. Still, looking at how hyped this GE is going to be even two billion doesn't sound far-fetched. edit: Wonder how much special edition GOP MAGA hats he is going to sell... can he still sell hats? (there is a Gabe pun somewhere in there) I'm buying at least 2 MAGA hats.
I wanted to get one during the primaries but you need someone in the US to buy it for you so it was too much of a hassle 
Hope laws are different for the general.
On May 05 2016 08:34 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2016 08:11 zeo wrote:
I read that Trump said he is going to raise a billion dollars for the general election, so I looked up how much the parties spent in the last election... a billion dollars each...
A billion dollars each.... what the hell do they spend it on? I mean unless you go full Jeb what the hell, a billion dollars. Imagine you were paying people above minimum wage for a year. And you have hundreds of people per county, thousands of people per state. And since this is campaigns and not 9-5, you're paying a staff 7 days a week. You now have a team bigger than most tech companies, all needing compensation, marketing materials, office space (campaign HQ's don't just pay for themselves you know) and you need this to last the year of the primary, and then the general. As things escalate TV ads become important costing much $$, daily plane flights and last minute stops (Ever bought a plane ticket a day before your flight? Now do that 3-4 times a week on a slow week) Everything adds up. Campaign finance is well and good but sometimes you need to get people payed.
Yeah I can see where you are coming from with that but still... elections seem to be big business in the US.
|
On May 05 2016 08:30 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought Trump was self funded and wouldn't take donations since he is beholden to nobody? I mean, what's 1billion dollars with somebody who has TEN BILLION in cold hard cash sitting in the bank, right?
Most of that is the value of his brand which is not possible to liquidate. He loaned his campaign money in the first place so I think it'll be interesting to see if he ends up funding his own campaign or if he is going to repay himself with donations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
