Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 12, 2016, 04:47:04 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 250
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Elizabeth Warren 2004 Video - Hillary changed vote after getting huge Money on: Today at 03:30:20 am
This began circulating at least a week ago, and Hillary has already done a spectacular job explaining why she did what she did.

Take your hit piece somewhere else.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/09/elizabeth-warrens-critique-of-hillary-clintons-2001-bankruptcy-vote/

Her explanation for the 2001 vote was complete bull. 

Give her credit, though, that she changed her mind in 2005 when the bill came back up and was on the right side then.

Not really, and the article you provide even concludes that this series of events does not adequately prove Hillary's claim wrong.

I mean, let's be honest: You don't know how many women's groups begged and begged Hillary to work on their behalf and amend the bill. And it's also totally reasonable that part of the wheeling and dealing to get the bill changed would have involved her eventually supporting it. So if this thing had a chance of passing and Hillary knew no one else would stand up to improve the legislation, taking one for the team if it meant a better final draft seems worthwhile.

Anyhow, I realize that the standard with Hillary is always "when there's smoke, there's fire." The thing is, the only reason people yell "fire" is because they want to find reasons to hate her, even if it requires essentially making things up.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: First and Second Choice for President on: Today at 03:17:40 am
Hillary
Kasich
Bush

I don't think I could support any of the other candidates still in the race. I find myself rooting for Trump on the Republican side only because the party needs to be exposed for what it is, and it's an interesting combination of sad and hilarious. I could never actually vote for him though (assuming I could vote in American elections at all, that is Tongue).

Kasich and Bush would be tolerable, but they have some serious, serious weaknesses as candidates.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary mocks Sanders/Rubio: Obama knows exactly what he's doing on: February 11, 2016, 03:50:14 pm
I don't get why Bernie doesn't just say "I am proud of the accomplishments Pres. Obama has done and I hope to build on them when I am President." I actually think Sanders can put some cracks in Hillary's black support especially among younger blacks, but acting dismissive toward Obama is the worst thing he can do.

He is not an incremental President. He wants a revolution & feels the system is not fair or just. I don't think he is a fan of Obama & wants to run on "building up Obama's success."  He wants MAJOR MAJOR change.

He has however said thought when Bush was around the country was in mess, 100's of 1000's of jobs were lost daily & Obama did well to help the economy recover & add jobs back. He also talked how Bush took the country to a war that they should not have been & Obama did his best to get out of it.

I have not seen him make any downright negative comments about Obama. Hillary is a politician, she will keep making these comments, her fans are unethical & will spin it anyways to make Sanders look bad.

Anyways I'm really tired of the "Obama knows", "Obama doesn't know". It's getting stupid. I think Obama's achievements should be debated not whether he knows or not knows.

It's cute that you think a president can be anything other than incremental.

Obama championed and passed the biggest social support program in decades, which practically required the stars to align, and he's still an incremental president. I have no idea what you folks are reasonably expecting out of Bernie Sanders, but it's so, so silly.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is the conservative movement collapsing? on: February 11, 2016, 01:52:32 pm
Conservatism is a gut feeling. It's a culture. It's a way of being. Policy and specifics don't matter.

And that is why conservatism will never die or collapse. It hasn't been about anything substantive for quite a while. Trumps knows this and has been exploiting and exposing it for the last half a year.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Elizabeth Warren 2004 Video - Hillary changed vote after getting huge Money on: February 11, 2016, 01:49:01 pm
This began circulating at least a week ago, and Hillary has already done a spectacular job explaining why she did what she did.

Take your hit piece somewhere else.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: I have this nightmare on: February 10, 2016, 02:21:09 pm
The answer is Hillary Clinton.  Practical balancer of budgets and public-private solutions.

I was thinking longer term than the immediate election. Anyway, you are assuming Hillary will win the nomination. Assume away. My gut tells me she will not. Bernie is just getting better and better on the stump, and as a human being, he is so far ahead of the pack in both parties that they are not even in sight.

Bernie will need ~2/3rds of all pledged delegates to actually win the nomination.  Otherwise, the superdelegates, who don't want to endanger their 1964 Part 2 60/40 win against Trump/Cruz will go near unanimously for Hillary.  They are currently roughly tied in pledged delegates, and that's before a single Clinton base state has voted.  Bernie is being overhyped.  Don't fall for it. 

I understand that now. However, if Bernie wins a clear majority of the delegates, and is still denied the nomination, Hillary will be even more wounded than she is now, and I would think some Sanders supporters would not vote for her in the General. It could potentially tear the Democratic Party apart. It would be better off, just sucking it up I would think, and let Bernie get the nomination, even if he is destined to lose, ala McGovern in 1972. So it might not be quite a hopeless for Bernie as the numbers suggest.

Hillary isn't wounded at all.  Everyone knew New Hampshire and Iowa are about as good as it gets for Bernie.   As soon as you enter the non-white liberal states he's going to fall flat and Hillary will soar.   It's just total luck that Bernie got two of his best states to run in first.   

In exit polls in NH 64% of Sander's voters would be happy with Hillary as the Dem nominee...on the Republican side only 48% of Republican voters would be happy with Trump as the nominee.   I think for Cruz the number is even lower.

The trouble is that a strong performance in the first two states gives the media the ammo it needs to manufacture a close race everywhere else.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When do you think the 2016 Republican primaries will have a clear winner? on: February 10, 2016, 05:57:25 am
There are compelling reasons to think this one really could go all the way to the end. There's currently no incentive for the establishment folks to drop out. I don't know that there ever will be.
8  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Would you rather live in Atlanta or Toronto? on: February 10, 2016, 04:53:16 am
I've lived in Atlanta so Toronto easy.  There is no way traffic is worse in Toronto.

I wouldn't be so sure.
9  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Non-Straights: Top or Bottom on: February 10, 2016, 04:38:53 am
Yeah I'm def true vers
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Superdelegates are an affront to democracy and should not exist on: February 10, 2016, 04:12:03 am
Also it will be better if hillaryh is the nominee so superdelegates cna change it if bernie wins
11  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Would you read a gender-inverted version of 50 Shades of Gray? on: February 09, 2016, 07:51:33 pm
Why are you so suddenly parroting stuff about dom women?
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic New Hampshire primary results thread (polls close @7pm and 8pm ET) on: February 09, 2016, 07:44:44 pm
What if we see The Harpy go down by 30 points or more this evening? Surely The Media will put the final nail in her coffin!

And people wonder why claims of sexism get thrown around. Roll Eyes
13  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Non-Straights: Top or Bottom on: February 09, 2016, 06:10:05 pm
It has taken considerable restraint for me not to contribute to this thread.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Buzzfeed exposť: The Anxiety Of Being Marco Rubio on: February 09, 2016, 05:09:44 pm
You are right politically speaking. It would blunt an important Democratic advantage by having to run against a Hispanic senator from Florida.

That doesn't mean, though, that Rubio's ethnicity actually changes the reality of how the parties approach minorities and the issues that affect them. One success story in Marco Rubio doesn't mean the GOP has all the answers. It means Marco Rubio is one of the exceptions to the rule.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NH voter pushes Rubio on gay marriage, second asks if Lindsey Graham is gay on: February 09, 2016, 05:03:29 pm
Yes, he's been coming out in force today.

And you know, if fighting to give people basic respect and dignity is radical, then give me one good reason why everyone shouldn't be radical. Conservatives like to talk in terms of right and wrong. So let's speak in a language we can all understand. Discrimination is wrong. End of story. You can do backflips to try and justify it ("it was worse 50 years ago, so shut up and be grateful!"), but there's no other way to dice it... treat others as you would want to be treated. Democrats pretty clearly have the moral advantage on a host of issues because the Republicans continue to deny people the respect they deserve as human beings. And when Republicans get it so clearly wrong on the issues that should be easy, those issues where they might actually have the upper-hand, like tax and trade policy (the greyer issues), become losing issues too: If they can't offer basic respect to people who are different, it's understandable why people find it hard to take anything they say seriously!

So you can talk about Republican backlash all you want, and I admit that you're probably right; Republicans will get angrier and angrier. But there aren't enough small-minded bigots in your party's base for it to make a difference. So if y'all don't change, you'll fall into obscurity pretty fast. And you know, I'm of the opinion that the United States actually needs a sensible GOP to reign in the Democrats when they go too far. I'm exceptionally peeved that your side has blown its influence by doubling down on some positions that are just objectively wrong.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Buzzfeed exposť: The Anxiety Of Being Marco Rubio on: February 09, 2016, 04:47:52 pm
Thankfully society is collectively reconsidering which people should be dismissed as "faults." And this time it has nothing to do with traits that are beyond people's control.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sen. Elizabeth Warren shows support for Hillary Clinton's Wall Street plan on: February 09, 2016, 03:39:39 pm
The more I think about it, the more I think Hillary might have had more success if she ran against Obama's legacy.

Let's face it: She's been pushed up against the wall by so-called "political revolutions" in both of her presidential runs... and she just doesn't really have the appeal to compete in that super-progressive lane. She knows it, which is why she's branding herself as a progressive who can get things done (in other words, Bernie can't). The thing is, there's a relatively popular perception that Obama also did not know how to get things done. I mean, he rode in on this wave of hope and change, and he did not meet most people's expectations; the zeal disappeared.

We have in Obama, then, an example of what we'd get in Bernie Sanders... except Obama at least sort of operated within the realm of possibility (his health care plan was, you know, achievable). I think Hillary would have more success if she was able to use the example of Obama's naivety and ineffectiveness to blunt Bernie's revolutionary appeal. She'd never convince the brainwashed, but even a lot of older people are flirting with supporting Bernie's campaign. And if they connected the dots between the letdown of Obama's eight years (relative to expectations) and what Bernie's presidency would look like, they might jump back to Team Hillary.

I know I'm showing my bias here, but Bernie is setting voters up for disappointment just like Obama did. If Hillary was able to praise Obama where he deserves praise but also call him out on failing to realize his "vision" for politics... it might help. She'd lose him as a potential aggressive surrogate though, so I guess that's something to weigh...
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Tonight is Bernie's campaign peak? Agree or Disagree? on: February 09, 2016, 03:16:09 pm
In order for Bernie to peak, he would actually have to lose net support.

The thing is, this has never happened to him since the beginning of the campaign. He has never gone down in the polls meaningfully anywhere.

Not in any state. Not nationally. Never. It's like the Walking Dead. You don't transition back from zombie to human. Once they're converted to Berniebots, the assimilation is complete.

I would say his numbers actually did go down in Iowa at the end there. He was clearly leading two weeks before the caucus, and Hillary managed to chip away at that lead. She's also doing it in New Hampshire, even though it won't be to very significant effect.

I agree though that he still has room to rise, especially because tonight will give him momentum. It won't give him any momentum where it counts, however, which is why we will see him eventually start to drop, perhaps after Nevada and most probably after SC (although the media will find some way to spin it in Bernie's favour, I'm sure Roll Eyes).
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What type of vicious rhetoric is this? on: February 09, 2016, 02:56:25 pm
With respect, I think there is something to the idea that younger people today have bought into the narrative that we're somehow living in a post-sexist, post-racial world. It's in the interests of pretty much every corporation in America to sell the picture of a pluralistic society so they can push their products into as many homes as possible. It's why you see these Coke commercials with as many different people as they can fit into the spot, and it's why you've seen companies move almost en masse towards supporting and recognizing the legitimacy of gay people.

The problem is, this sort of "feel-good pluralism" addresses some of the problems we see with respect to race, gender, and discrimination, but it also helps perpetuate the structures of discrimination that persist because it says, basically, that racism and sexism are over. We now have this population of people that's not willing to think critically about discrimination. It's almost like Franz Fanon's "internal colonization": The status quo seems fine and natural for a lot of women. I'm not saying their experiences are wrong or telling them how they should vote, but I don't think America has ever really had the conversations about gender that it should... and if it were to have these conversations, you'd see more people at least understanding why it actually is very significant to have a woman president.

In some ways, the baby boomers have had more conversations about race and feminism than the millennials. Rudimentary conversations to be sure, but there were fewer attempts to frame these issues as closed like there are today.

Anyway, that's my schpeel.
20  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What do you look like? (using avatar creators) on: February 09, 2016, 04:54:29 am
Something like this. The hair is way off, but nothing really fit.

21  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Climate Change: The Burden of Proof on: February 09, 2016, 04:19:53 am
Yeah, let's just stop trusting climate scientists when it comes to climate change.
And while we're at it let's ignore medical doctors too and their alarmist nonsense about vaccination. Let's trust instead the conspiracy nuts and stop vaccinating our kids.

He's not really faulting the reasoning of the scientists though. He's faulting the source data that would have led any reasonable scientist to the conclusion they've reached. And it's a claim I can't dispute. "Trusting the scientists" seems intellectually lazy if there's also a plausible counter-explanation for why they might be wrong.

One thing that doesn't quite square for me though is how we can just ignore the science, or observable physics, of RAGs. Whether the temperature data proves it or not, it seems to me that enough greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would produce warming. And even though it may be "mild or moderate" now, the phenomenon is concerning enough to take precautions, no? Especially if the precautions can actually have net benefits for the economy.

Also, what is to be made of the increased incidence of extreme weather events? Or the "northern amplification" of climate change (the idea that warming is much easier to observe in arctic and antarctic regions, even while it might go virtually unnoticed in areas where most of the world's population lives)? I know this is very unscientific, but it just "seems" like climate change is indeed happening.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What is the better strategy for Republicans? on: February 09, 2016, 12:36:13 am
The second option has appeal to both the base and moderates. Option one doesn't have the same appeal to those in the middle because at this juncture, getting anything done at all is an accomplishment.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NH voter pushes Rubio on gay marriage, second asks if Lindsey Graham is gay on: February 08, 2016, 11:59:42 pm
Well this thread certainly devolved into a bigotry circle jerk. Roll Eyes
24  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Should the standards for substitute teachers be higher? on: February 08, 2016, 03:21:51 pm
In Ontario, all substitute teachers are certified teachers who are basically forced onto the supply list as "Step 1" in getting a permanent teaching position. Many of them are innovative and dedicated professionals who would probably make for way better full-time teachers than the aging ones on staff or the younger ones who get jobs because they have parents working at the school board (happens a lot). So I realize the situation may be different in the US, but I'm not keen to slander substitute teachers.
25  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What's your no sleeping record? on: February 07, 2016, 06:24:31 pm
I'll say around 36.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 250


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines