Presidential Election 2016

[Tiller]

When the first Republican ad airs juxtaposing Bernie quotes with Mao and Stalin quotes, I'm sure "but I'm a social democrat" will be a real effective counter in suburban Ohio.

First, this is a separate subject, as at40 actually said Bernie was an "international socialist". Are you saying you agree with him?

Secondly, nice hypothetical there. It's too bad they've been wasting the "aaahh a socialist!" card for the last 8 years on a right-of-center politician. And I can guarantee you, if there weren't already SO MANY JUICY THINGS they can hit Clinton on, they'd also air ads about her flagrant "socialism".

Thirdly, we don't even need Ohio anymore (though we can still take it) according to "Mr Data" himself. While I don't have the article on hand, states like Colorado and Iowa have moved to the left of the Ohio, moving the electoral "tipping point".

Fourthly, last time I recalled, it was the talk of the town about how ads aren't working like they used to. As it turns out, a simple google search can dispell that notion.

[EOst]

First, this is a separate subject, as at40 actually said Bernie was an "international socialist". Are you saying you agree with him?

Secondly, nice hypothetical there. It's too bad they've been wasting the "aaahh a socialist!" card for the last 8 years on a right-of-center politician. And I can guarantee you, if there weren't already SO MANY JUICY THINGS they can hit Clinton on, they'd also air ads about her flagrant "socialism".

Thirdly, we don't even need Ohio anymore (though we can still take it) according to "Mr Data" himself. While I don't have the article on hand, states like Colorado and Iowa have moved to the left of the Ohio, moving the electoral "tipping point".

Fourthly, last time I recalled, it was the talk of the town about how ads aren't working like they used to. As it turns out, a simple google search can dispell that notion.

[amiller92]

They're a non-profit organization supported by the government.

I'm not sure I'd say "supported by the government." It gets grants from the government to provide certain services the government would like to see provided to eligible patients.

[at40man]

uh, what? have you actually read his platform? He's a Social Democrat.

I described his form of politics as internationalist based on his own words and positions: "I think we should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway, and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people." If that isn't a form of internationalism, then I don't know what is.

And Sanders' doesn't describe himself as a social Democrat; he has described himself as a "Democratic Socialist" on multiple occasions.

[EOst]

Nice substance you've got there, but you can shove your bloviating and concern trolling where the sun don't shine.

I'm a lifelong Democrat and vastly more radical than Bernie, though I try to be pragmatic in the real world. But I find your arguments deeply unconvincing, and feel that they are driven more by wishful thinking than by real political analysis. In particular, I feel that your offhand dismissal of Bernie's potential weaknesses to be a sign that you aren't interested in having a real discussion, but instead in cheerleading.

But everyone knew that, so...

[David Greene]

http://feelthebern.org/

Ugh. The section on infrastructure prominently features a paper by Wendell Cox.

[mattaudio]

Ugh. The section on infrastructure prominently features a paper by Wendell Cox.

Yep, disappointing. I'm all about the Bern, but he has a very wrong-headed perspective on infrastructure investments. That's probably my #1 critique about Sanders, though I'm fairly certain every single other mainstream candidate on the left or the right shares that mainstream ideology which throws good money at bad infrastructure.

[Tiller]

uh, what? have you actually read his platform? He's a Social Democrat.

I described his form of politics as internationalist based on his own words and positions: "I think we should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway, and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people." If that isn't a form of internationalism, then I don't know what is.

"Internationalistic Socialism" usually includes/implies a "world socialist revolution" kind of thing, "workers uniting accross borders" and "overthrowing the capitalistic oppression" blah blah blah. Bernie's talk about Scandinavia, as an example, is more about comparing ourselves and our policies to other countries in order to figure out what we can/should do [better] here at home.

It's not something limited to any ideology, but a method of self-improvement, a tactic.

As an example, America under Reagan and the UK under Thatcher can be/are used as examples by some countries of how to improve themselves. A conservative government in country X borrowing policies from Reagan's America wouldn't be "Internationalist". Similar things can be said about FDR and the New Deal (with both us borrowing from other countries, and vice-versa). There have also been a number of countries whose constitutions borrow from ours.

And Sanders' doesn't describe himself as a social Democrat; he has described himself as a "Democratic Socialist" on multiple occasions.

Well here we get into labels, which can mean many things to different people. "Democratic Socialist" vs. "Social Democrat" in the context of US politics seems to be historical minutea. If I remember correctly, They were one in the same as a political group, but splintered in the early 70s, with the "Democratic Socialists" wanting to get out of Vietnam, and to focus on the working class and unions(as opposed to the middle class). Aside from wierd historical semantics, it's basically the same thing. They just switched the words around because shit happens.

[Tiller]

As for the planned parenthood thing, income/revenue/profit can be easily mixed up, so not really a big deal. We should probably avoid the topic though, because the root of disagreement is a values thing that can't really be worked out.

I'm a lifelong Democrat and vastly more radical than Bernie, though I try to be pragmatic in the real world.

You can shove these qualifiers too, along with their connotations and implications.

But I find your arguments deeply unconvincing

Yes, because they don't fit your world view.

feel that they are driven more by wishful thinking than by real political analysis.

So back to "feeling", your gut, and the bloviating I mentioned.

In particular, I feel that your offhand dismissal of Bernie's potential weaknesses

It's the same tired old "socialist" canard that has little beyond speculation to substantiate it. "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

The fact that others can place different weights and values on things than you do, leading to disagreement, doesn't mean they aren't "serious", "pragmatic", or in the "real world". It also doesn't indicate that one doesn't want to discuss something. Belittling others, and posting mostly small contrarian comments, irrelevant to the point at hand, is.

So you can take your concern trolling, and shove it.

[MNdible]

I know we've all got our blindspots, but...

Yes, because they don't fit your world view.

Wow... this is really something.

[EOst]

So you can take your concern trolling, and shove it.

Glad to find someone new for my ignore list.

[Sacrelicio]

They're a non-profit organization supported by the government.

I'm not sure I'd say "supported by the government." It gets grants from the government to provide certain services the government would like to see provided to eligible patients.

Thanks for the clarification. I definitely don't want to feed the misinformation machine.

[trigonalmayhem]

I know Scandinavia can look like the moon in winter, but Bernie's ideas have been very demonstrably proven to work there. So maybe that's a moonbat?

[Sacrelicio]

I know Scandinavia can look like the moon in winter, but Bernie's ideas have been very demonstrably proven to work there. So maybe that's a moonbat?

I don't see any reason why they wouldn't work here, other than for political reasons, which is why they haven't been implemented in the first place.

[mattaudio]

Hillary Clinton’s Poll Numbers are in Absolute Free Fall
http://usuncut.com/politics/clintons-le ... appearing/

[Didier]

Jeb Bush's blatant insincerity in saying that the country was better in 2008 than it is today perfectly illustrates why he's losing.

[Tiller]

Wow look at this vicious negative ad Bernie released:

What is with all these Bernie folk saying "this is what actual negative campaigning looks like"?

Also, guess who's 35 now, and can run for president after her mother!

[VacantLuxuries]

I would hope by now this country has learned it's lesson about electing the relatives of presidents. The only time it's worked out fairly well is between the Roosevelts, and they were fifth cousins.

[twincitizen]

I actually did not know that Hillary Clinton opposed "single-payer" before this recent attention on the topic. Given the high degree to which I pay attention to politics (relative to most Americans who barely pay attention), I suspect I was not alone in overlooking this massive policy difference between them.

Maybe I live in a millennial super progressive bubble, but I guess I thought that like a majority of self-identified democrats supported single-payer at this point. That percentage of single-payer supporters has probably only gone UP since the rocky implementation of the ACA. I'll have to check the polling on this for myself, but damn you'd think Bernie would just be beating her over the head on this issue. I don't get the sense that has been doing that, at least not until recently.

[EOst]

I would hope by now this country has learned it's lesson about electing the relatives of presidents. The only time it's worked out fairly well is between the Roosevelts, and they were fifth cousins.

Hey, Benjamin Harrison resents that.