Page 60 of 472

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Fri January 29, 2016 5:28 pm
by Green Habit
4/5 wrote:This just in, Bernie's healthcare plan is probably a lot more expensive than he says.
This will do more to keep me as a single payer skeptic. I think there's room for both public and private insurance.

On another note, I absolutely love the usage of Skinner rubbing his fingers. Sanders's retort should simply be, "C'mooooonnnn!"

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Fri January 29, 2016 5:30 pm
by nyquillyn
McParadigm wrote:
tommymtcom wrote:Why is Jeb even in the race anymore? Nobody wants him to be President.
Repub RM's N&D establishment fantasies that all this insanity will just go away and it'll be business as usual

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Fri January 29, 2016 5:40 pm
by stip
4/5 wrote:This just in, Bernie's healthcare plan is probably a lot more expensive than he says.
I'm in no position to wade in on this debate, other than to say that the details of a president's plans, at this stage, are not super relevant, because no plan will survive its first contact with the legislative apparatus that will write it and the executive apparatus that will implement it. The policy goals that a president has sends a signal about the kinds of outcomes they will pursue, the various groups and interests they will be attempting to empower/serve/restrict, and the priorities they will make in terms of how to spend their political capital.

Obviously something that is a complete and utter pipe dream that people truly buy into is a problem. But Donald Trump's particular immigration plan doesn't matter as much as the direction he will attempt to take immigration. Sanders on health care, hilary on whatever issue she cares the most about, etc.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Fri January 29, 2016 6:17 pm
by Electromatic
Green Habit wrote:
4/5 wrote:This just in, Bernie's healthcare plan is probably a lot more expensive than he says.
This will do more to keep me as a single payer skeptic. I think there's room for both public and private insurance.

On another note, I absolutely love the usage of Skinner rubbing his fingers. Sanders's retort should simply be, "C'mooooonnnn!"

As long as we are paying 10 times what the rest of the world is for healthcare though it's going to remain a problem. Though, the people making all that money are a lot better connected politically than most of us too.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 9:53 am
by dimejinky99

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 2:05 pm
by Dev

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 2:24 pm
by stip
He's right

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 4:07 pm
by Mine
Reich referenced a Princeton survey that included analysis of 1,799 policy issues from 1981 to 2002, and which ultimately concluded that “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically insignificant impact upon public policy.”
No shit.
Therefore: “This election is about changing the parameters of what’s feasible and ending the choke hold of big money on our political system… The upcoming election isn’t about detailed policy proposals. It’s about power – whether those who have it will keep it, or whether average Americans will get some as well.”
This seems to be an argument most people would turn in favour of the candidate they endorse. It's not all that different from a standard Sarah Palin rant.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 4:43 pm
by nyquillyn
Reich was undoubtedly one of the best cabinet members this country has ever seen, but his post-Clinton commentary has left a lot to be desired. Even though I agree with about %75 of what he says, he comes across as a smarmy little shit who just spits out cliches. His commentary is rarely insightful.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 6:11 pm
by Stickman

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sat January 30, 2016 7:16 pm
by stip
turned2black wrote:Reich was undoubtedly one of the best cabinet members this country has ever seen, but his post-Clinton commentary has left a lot to be desired. Even though I agree with about %75 of what he says, he comes across as a smarmy little shit who just spits out cliches. His commentary is rarely insightful.
i agree, but that was a pretty good piece

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 1:51 am
by 96583UP
BREAKING NEWS:

DONALD J. TRUMP ANNOUNCES ROGER CLINTON JR. AS VICE PRESIDENTIAL RUNNING MATE


Image

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 1:57 am
by 96583UP
BREAKING NEWS:

HILLARY E-MAIL SCANDAL WORSENS AS HARD DRIVE REVEALS HIGH-END NIGERIAN-STYLE DONATION PHISHING SCHEME
"I just thought she needed a few thousand bucks to hop a NetJets back to Chappaqua after her Yacht got stranded" -Elderly Martha's Vineyard Elitist

Image

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 4:45 am
by BurtReynolds
Image

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 7:16 am
by Stickman
To the surprise of no one.
Image

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 12:45 pm
by stip
the suspense is over - the NY Times has endorsed Hilary Clinton

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 9:50 pm
by BurtReynolds
Its interesting that both sides of the establishment are losing ground to candidates that would have never been seriously considered in the past. Even if Hillary wins, I wonder if we are just a few elections away from a real break. I hope its a trend. Embrace the chaos.

I think people have been called fascist, communist, racist and a multitude of other "ists" so much that people aren't affected by the labels anymore. In the past, the attacks on Trump would have ended most candidates, but now it has so little effect.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 10:56 pm
by McParadigm
BurtReynolds wrote:Its interesting that both sides of the establishment are losing ground to candidates that would have never been seriously considered in the past. Even if Hillary wins, I wonder if we are just a few elections away from a real break. I hope its a trend. Embrace the chaos.

I think people have been called fascist, communist, racist and a multitude of other "ists" so much that people aren't affected by the labels anymore. In the past, the attacks on Trump would have ended most candidates, but now it has so little effect.
I was actually just thinking about how McCain's "this one" gaffe...clearly not intended to be racist but temporarily headlined that way...would just earn Trump extra bonus points for being direct. And would also probably be meant in a racist way.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun January 31, 2016 11:17 pm
by dimejinky99
Doco online called The Mad World of Donald Trump. Basically it's impossible to imagine on US tv cos it's SO blatantly condescending. Essentially "look at these idiots and this actual madman" but worth a look up.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon February 01, 2016 2:03 am
by 96583UP
Stickman wrote:To the surprise of no one.
Image

He's a Hindu ?