Page 72 of 472
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:29 pm
by Fuck You Jobu
dimejinky99 wrote:A lot of international media even seems confused about wtf is going with this campaign, particularly within the Clinton/Sanders situation..
anyone able to explain it>
oh, and this
- Spoiler: show
Gracias.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:30 pm
by Jorge
HOW ABOUT NOT QUOTING IT
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:41 pm
by The Argonaut
peepee
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:42 pm
by Rangi Guy
Just so it doesn't go away
- Spoiler: show
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:44 pm
by tommymtcom
theplatypus wrote:HOW ABOUT NOT QUOTING IT
Don't be such a prude, Plat.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 10:45 pm
by dimejinky99
the 'republican slogan' part is the best
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 11:28 pm
by Strat
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Wed February 10, 2016 11:29 pm
by tommymtcom
Who is this Fiorina woman who just dropped out of the race? I have never heard of her.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 12:02 am
by b_i_revisited
theplatypus wrote:I'd pay a good amount of money to see a Trump vs. Sanders debate.
I am anti-Sanders (*shocking, I know*), but I'd love to see Trump get destroyed and sent back to off-hour reality television where he belongs.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 12:25 am
by Jorge
I would've also liked to see him debate Rand Paul one-on-one. Or pretty much anyone who would force him to go into detail and expose the extent of his ignorance and unpreparedness.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 1:10 am
by Simple Torture
But he's going to make American great again! He's going to make sure people know he means business. He wrote The Art of the Deal, and he know that the deal America's making aren't good ones. He's going to make sure people are going to respect us. He's going to compete with China. He's going to build a wall.
I think I've convinced myself!
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 1:22 am
by LoathedVermin72
WHAT WAS IN THAT SPOILER TAG?!
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 1:24 am
by Birds in Hell
LoathedVermin72 wrote:WHAT WAS IN THAT SPOILER TAG?!
I wish I didn't know.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 4:01 am
by simple schoolboy
theplatypus wrote:I would've also liked to see him debate Rand Paul one-on-one. Or pretty much anyone who would force him to go into detail and expose the extent of his ignorance and unpreparedness.
The Senate will be substantially more boring if Rand loses his re-election.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 11:03 am
by b_i_revisited
stip wrote:b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:
That's one of the cardinal differences between these sorts of centrist democrats and the democratic populist socialism that built the welfare state. The later understood that in the United States you cannot have discussions about growth without also having conversations about distribution, and that in the US distribution is more important than growth, as we have long ago conquered the problem of scarcity (how do we make enough to provide everyone with a decent standard of living).
Not the thread for this discussion, but this is simply not true.
I beg to disagree, obviously.
We could have this one out in another thread, if you like. *tosses gauntlet*
ill participate as best i can - but a relatively light stretch at work just ended so i may be sporadic if thoughtful posts are required
Maybe what we should do is have thread about what this in particular means (I've changed what was bolded). Not necessarily a debate about it, but just get a collection of opinions on what standard of living is the responsibility of government. It's kind of a fundamental question to a person's world view and the resultant political beliefs.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 11:33 am
by Mine
I don't think how Trump does in one on one debates matters to a relevant degree. He's unlikely to lose or gain a substantial amount of votes regardless of how he does.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 12:34 pm
by stip
theplatypus wrote:I would've also liked to see him debate Rand Paul one-on-one. Or pretty much anyone who would force him to go into detail and expose the extent of his ignorance and unpreparedness.
It would be satisfying, but Trump's appeal comes from the strength and simplicity of his convictions, not their accuracy, detail, or intelligence. It would largely be irrelevant to his fan base. Ignorance doesn't hurt Trump. Weakness does.
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 12:35 pm
by stip
b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:
That's one of the cardinal differences between these sorts of centrist democrats and the democratic populist socialism that built the welfare state. The later understood that in the United States you cannot have discussions about growth without also having conversations about distribution, and that in the US distribution is more important than growth, as we have long ago conquered the problem of scarcity (how do we make enough to provide everyone with a decent standard of living).
Not the thread for this discussion, but this is simply not true.
I beg to disagree, obviously.
We could have this one out in another thread, if you like. *tosses gauntlet*
ill participate as best i can - but a relatively light stretch at work just ended so i may be sporadic if thoughtful posts are required
Maybe what we should do is have thread about what this in particular means (I've changed what was bolded). Not necessarily a debate about it, but just get a collection of opinions on what standard of living is the responsibility of government. It's kind of a fundamental question to a person's world view and the resultant political beliefs.
- Spoiler: show
- you should make that thread!
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 4:05 pm
by 4/5
On Colbert last night Sanders claimed that this generation coming up will have a lower standard of living than their parents. I wasn't familiar with that claim, but my instant thought is that can't be possible. Does anyone know what metric he could be using to make that claim true?
Re: Election 2016
Posted: Thu February 11, 2016 4:12 pm
by stip
Why can't it be possible? When you factor in debt, costs of essentials, class mobility, etc it doesn't seem far fetched.
iPhones will be better, though
