The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

[grokit]

Unfortunately for Bernie, the only Dem caucuses remaining after today are the Virgin Islands, North Dakota, and Guam for a total of about 42 delegates. Pretty soon he is gonna have to win some primaries by large margins to have any chance. I recommend California and New York, but I am not too hopeful for him. I think New Hampshire and Vermont (his home state) are the only primaries he has won so far...

I agree if hillary loses new york by a large enough margin that it's anybody's ballgame.
California could decide it!


Meanwhile hillary is making her own news, doubling down on death:

Hillary leads to more war: Her latest speech on Israel is just the newest horrific example

She just gave a clear statement of her foreign policy agenda — and it isn't a pretty picture for the world

"Hillary’s promise to keep Israel safe is indicative of her hawkish style more broadly around the globe. Her support of the coup in Honduras, the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya and her uncritical support of Saudi Arabia are just a few examples of what we can expect from Clinton’s foreign policy. When you rely on Henry Kissinger, a war criminal, to back you, you should know you are on the wrong side of history."

more:
https://www.salon.com/2016/03/26/hi...on_israel_is_just_the_newest_horrific_example

 

[Gunky]

Bernie is great. I agree with so much of what he says. The problem with Bernie's revolution is: he's the only politician in his party. He has no allies, no constituency, he has basically been a loner all along in his political career, only becoming a democrat for this election. And yet a lot of people have fallen for him, seem to view him as a savior, till the thing has become more a cult of personality and a faith-based initiative than a real political movement, which requires more than just a leader, some fine-sounding but vague goals with no way to achieve them, and a bunch of besotted followers. I really wish people pounding down the Bernie Kool-aid would ask themselves what happens after Bernie gets elected? What would or could he do? This is the part where you lose me. Nobody in Congress is running on a socialist platform. If Bernie pitches who is going to be playing catcher, who's on first, who will do the fielding? Where is the rest of his team? Politics in a democracy is not a solo performance.

I will certainly vote for him if he becomes the nominee, but whenever I try to imagine him in the White House I see a Jimmy Carter, an isolated, ineffectual leader with few allies.

 

[HellsWindStaff]

To be honest I don't want any of the D's or R's currently in the running to become president. I am looking into third party candidates. I am actually kind of frightened, but maybe they will surround themselves with decent advisers? Gary Johnson is running again. I didn't vote for him 4 years ago but considering the lineup he may be worth a second look - to me. Different strokes for different folks.

I don't like voting for the lesser of an evil. I did once to help get Obama in his first term but that's it. I thought he was going to be our savior though. Did not turn out as well as I had hoped.

Lot of posts in here that I agree with, lots I don't, only read the last 10 or so pages though, but this resonated with me. I agree, no one stands out to me, in a good way.

I actually voted for Gary Johnson in 2012. And I also voted for Obama in 2008. He's more in line with my way of thought too.

Broad strokes here, but I don't like general lack of societal freedoms that Republicans tend to be more in line with. I should be able to smoke weed, if I want? Love who I want? My girlfriend should be able to have an abortion (Though, personally, I disagree with this.......but that's the thing, we should be able to have a CHOICE)

Again, broad strokes here, and maybe I am biased because I am only 25, I am a "young person." Feel the Bern 2016 sounds and feels a LOT like Obama Change 08 (First election I voted in). I have all these peers, talking about how unfair the world is, and how Bernie will change that and make it "better for us." We are the 99%! We are getting screwed!

You know.......plenty of people have came from "nothing" and made themselves into "something" without handouts. Of every color. I don't believe that wealth is unattainable.....you work hard, you reap the benefits.

"The Millionaire Next Door", is not a new, or unattainable concept. A little personal responsibility.........again, I said broad strokes...but Democrats in general, from my POV, are more about a lack of personal responsibility. And a lot of young people tend to have the "gimme gimme gimme, I'm entitled to this!!" mentality, and they are also the ones who are all about the Change 08, Bern 2016,, Feel Good Campaign 2024, etc.

I am digressing a little bit, just kind of trying to explain my PoV. I have student loans. I will pay them. I would of had a "free" ride (to a degree...) if I didn't fuck off so much at college. Now, I am paying a lot more when I could of had a cheaper ride so to speak. This is not the colleges fault. Or the banks. Or the government. It's mine, for being a fuck up.

Back to the candidates, I dislike them all for various reasons. I think Ted Cruz is an antiquated backwards thinking man. I think Donald Trump is a loud mouthed bigot. I think Bernie Sanders is an idealistic old fool. I think Hilary Clinton is absolutely bottom pole, low rung, not even entertaining the idea of voting for her. Morally, can't vote for her. When you willingly let US Citizens die because of incompetence......than lie about it......among other lies........her character is worse than Trumps IMO... I'm aware you can pull up liberal media articles saying that it is a Red Devil Evil Campaign against her, just as I'm aware that you can pull up conservative media articles saying she's the devil and should be lynched. I'm not of either extreme........but her character is highly questionable from my PoV.

The fact that those extremes are so prevalent is annoying as is, for politics as a whole. Too bad we can't get unbiased media. CNN is not unbiased. Fox News is not unbiased. MSNBC is not unbiased. Please save the links disproving my points/opinions, as they are simply my opinions for every Red Devil Republican article is a Bleeding Heart Democratic one.

I have two anecdotes that I saw recently, that actually were a bit, more right leaning/biased. I don't disagree with the general point of either of them, and did want to share them.

Remember, for this whole post, broad strokes. Just making some general points/opinion giving my opinion on things. I'm sure there are Republicans who are more about social freedoms, I'm sure there are Democrats who don't want to spend spend spend on social programs. I'm sure there are Republicans who want to spend spend spend more than some Democrats. I'm sure there are some Democrats that want tighter controls on freedoms more in line with a Republican. I'm sure there are some members of the 1% who are getting unneccessary perks and benefits, I'm sure there are some members of the 99% who don't deserve the perks and handouts being proposed and I'm sure there are some that do deserve them.

I say that, because I'm not looking for this post to be nitpicked about how x is wrong, and how y perspective is so skewed. (That's the close minded Republican in me talking ) It is MY perspective....I know many of you guys lean left, and thats totally cool, I'm enjoying reading your perspectives. As I said at the top of this, I agree with some points of some of them, and disagree with some of them. Its your right to have the opinions you have. Just think it can benefit here having a slightly differing PoV, at the very least to make you guys think about certain things in a different light like some of your posts have made me.

The anecdotes will be in the next post, was 800 characters too many for one. Cheers all!

 

[HellsWindStaff]

Spoiler: Taxing the Wealthy More

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like
this…
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
The fifth would pay $1
The sixth would pay $3
The seventh would pay $7
The eighth would pay $12
The ninth would pay $18
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59
So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. “Since you
are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your
daily beer by $20”. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the
first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what
about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that
everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that
from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill
by a h higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the
tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he
suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to
drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their
savings.
“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man,”but he got $10!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too.
It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”
“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I
got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get
anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down
and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of
them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our
tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will
naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much,
attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In
fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat
friendlier

Spoiler: Ant & Grasshopper

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.
CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.
America is stunned by the sharp contrast.
How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green.’
ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, ‘We shall overcome.’
Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper’s sake.
President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper’s plight.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with PBS that the ant has clearly gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper.
Both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
As expected, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity For Grasshoppers Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.
The ant is severely fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government’s Green Czar and provided to the grasshopper.
The story winds down as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government-provided house (Read: the Ant's old house) they now occupy crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn’t bother to maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow, understanding that only the strong (politically correct) survive.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize and ramshackle the once prosperous and peaceful neighborhood.
Thousands of similar stories play out across the entire Nation as it collapses bringing the rest of the free world down with it.

 

[Joel W.]

What would or could he do?

For me, it's about what he has already done and what Clinton has done (or not done.)

I don't see the GOP stopping their obstructionism just because Clinton gets elected

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/isaac-saul/i-despise-hillary-clinton-gender_b_9160682.html

 

[Gunky]

For me, it's about what he has already done and what Clinton has done (or not done.)

You say "It's about what he has done". The problem with that is darn near everything in the Bernie column is: he took such and such position. Not he passed such and so legislation. Not he organized such and so an here is the result. Just having a position is not the same as doing things politically. I get it - you like Bernie's positions. I really really understand that. I am pointing toward something different from liking or not liking somebody's positions on various issues. How can this person be effective in achieving change? Doing, not talking.

 

[CarolKing]

I liked Jimmy Carter and still do. He got short changed in the history books IMO. He wasn't one of the greatest but not as bad as people say. I happen to have a lot of respect for Jimmy Carter.

 

[Joel W.]

You say "It's about what he has done". The problem with that is darn near everything in the Bernie column is: he took such and such position. Not he passed such and so legislation. Not he organized such and so an here is the result. Just having a position is not the same as doing things politically. I get it - you like Bernie's positions. I really really understand that. I am pointing out something different from liking or not liking somebody's positions on various issues. How can this person be effective in achieving change? Doing, not talking.

I hear you also, I don't have the answer unless a lot of dems take the house and senate.

All I have is a long ass track record for both of them and it's telling of how each of them may act in the future on issues I care about.

The kind of deals Clinton may be better at making, may not be better deals for us, is all. (I'd still vote for her, if she is the nominee)

 

[Gunky]

I liked Jimmy Carter and still do. He got short changed in the history books IMO. He wasn't one of the greatest but not as bad as people say. I happen to have a lot of respect for Jimmy Carter.

I like Jimmy Carter too but I still have quite a vivid memory of his years in office and I would not like to have another Carter presidency. Carter would propose some health plan on his own and then Ted Kennedy would savage it and produce his own competitive plan. Carter had very little influence in Congress. He was an outsider, a former governor of Georgia. Supposed to be a leader, he couldn't get anyone to follow. He wasn't very effective as prez for precisely the same reasons I expect Bernie to be a hermit in the White House, disregarded by his sometime party.

 

[CarolKing]

I think his stance (Jimmy Carter) on civil rights for people in different countries over shadowed some of his decisions. He didn't have a good relations with congress. His timing as president was during the oil embargo.

The hostages that were held by Iran weren't let go until Reagan became president is what folks remember.

He did help with peace between Egypt and Isreal.

He was the first president that I voted for. I was 18 years old.

He has done a lot of good since being president and that shows what kind of person he is. That stands on its own merit.

It wasn't a good suggestion when Jimmy thought Trump would be the lesser evil between the republicans.

 

[Gunky]

I think his stance (Jimmy Carter) on civil rights for people in different countries over shadowed some of his decisions. He didn't have a good relations with congress. His timing as president was during the oil embargo.

The hostages that were held by Iran weren't let go until Reagan became president is what folks remember.

He did help with peace between Egypt and Isreal.

He was the first president that I voted for. I was 18 years old.

He has done a lot of good since being president and that shows what kind of person he is. That stands on its own merit.

It wasn't a good suggestion when Jimmy thought Trump would be the lesser evil between the republicans.

Carter is a decent human being. I agree with him on a lot and disagree with him on a few things. But when I evaluate his presidency, his inability to lead other politicians and get them to follow was more critical to the success or failure of his presidency than the fact that he agreed with my thinking on many issues.

What I am trying to say is having good ideas does not make somebody a good politician. If you have read Doris Kearns Goodwin's book on Lincoln or saw the film, I think you can see what I mean here. Many of Lincoln's competitors held similar views. But Lincoln knew how to lead, how to get people to follow, the many-faceted art of cajoling, threatening, rewarding, forming alliances, etc. These are real skills and they are required to be effective in this job.

 

[grokit]

If bernie gets the nod, he would surely end up upsetting ex-colleagues on both sides of the isle. But he would also find bi-partisan common cause with those that actually want to serve their constituents. He's said all along that he can't do it alone, and that he needs the american people to have his back. It seems that america is starting to wake up, and may be ready to enact its own change with bernie as the catalyst.

In his own words:

"We knew from day one that we were going to have a hard time in the deep South. That is a conservative part of our country. But we knew that things were going to improve as we headed West!" [crowd cheers]

"And last week, we won Utah with 78% of the vote. We won Idaho with 79% of the vote. And we won Democrats Abroad with 67% of the vote. We are making significant inroads in Secretary Clinton's lead -- and we have, with your support coming here in Wisconsin, we have a path toward victory! ... Our campaign has the momentum. YOU are the momentum. Look around you tonight... " [crowd cheers more loudly]

"... Don't let anybody tell you that we can't win the nomination or win the general election. We're going to do both of those things!" [crowd erupts into chants of "WE BELIEVE THAT WE WILL WIN!"]

 

[TeeJay1952]

I liked Jimmy Carter and still do. He got short changed in the history books IMO. He wasn't one of the greatest but not as bad as people say. I happen to have a lot of respect for Jimmy Carter.

One of the few "Professed Christians" who actually attempts to walk the walk. Always amazed me how vilified he was when all in all he merely tried to do the right thing.

 

[lwien]

CNN is not unbiased. Fox News is not unbiased. MSNBC is not unbiased.

While I agree with you that CNN is not unbiased, I do think it's a bit unfair and inaccurate to put their bias in the same league as either Fox or MSNBC.

...how to lead, how to get people to follow, the many-faceted art of cajoling, threatening, rewarding, forming alliances, etc. These are real skills and they are required to be effective in this job.

Bingo. And this is where Obama has fallen short as well. Ya gotta be able to schmooze. Ya gotta be able to compromise. Ya gotta be able to sell your ideas and then rally support in order to get others to implement those ideas.

Ya know what's weird about what I and Gunky just stated? It's that a business man like Trump fits the bill perfectly in these regards. His problem is the ideas that he wants to sell along with all of his other personality deficits.

Always amazed me how vilified he was when all in all he merely tried to do the right thing.

Not unlike Christ himself, eh? I guess the problem is the "perception" of what is right and what is wrong.

 

[Joel W.]

After three big wins out west, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders said he thinks many of the party's superdelegates who have pledged to rival Hillary Clinton will switch to his side.

"I think the momentum is with us," Sanders said on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper on Sunday. "A lot of these superdelegates may rethink their positions with Secretary Clinton."
The Vermont senator swept Saturday's Democratic contests in Washington, Alaska and Hawaii, easily winning the majority of the 142 pledged delegates in those states. The biggest prize of the day was in Washington, which offered 101 delegates to be split up on a proportional basis.

The latest delegate counts still put Sanders behind Clinton, however, with 1,004 pledged delegates to her 1,712.

Of those, 469 are superdelegates who have pledged to Clinton and only 29 have pledged to Sanders.

Sanders on Sunday said those superdelegates may begin to see the "reality" that he's the best candidate to beat GOP front runner Donald Trump.

"I think when they begin to look at reality, and that is that we are beating Donald Trump by much larger margins than Secretary Clinton" Sanders said. "And then you've got superdelegates in states where we win by 40 or 50 points. I think their own constituents are going to say to them, 'Hey, why don't you support the people of our state and vote for Sanders?'"

link

Backup link

This is what I think will happen soon. Just like 2008.

 

[howie105]

Clinton is the machine candidate (money, access and organizational support) and as such was the winner before the process started. Sanders did what was expected by being a weak prop opponent firing up a portion of the party that otherwise would not have as much interest in the process but he was still doomed before the lights went green. So unless something totally unexpected happens we going to get more of the same policies we have seen from the last administration. I still don't want my country involved in a generational war that is bleeding the country white as the number of homeless and desperate people increases within our borders. However its the process we as a nation are allowing to exist. Don't get me wrong if the republicans were to somehow get the seat it would be no better and just bad in a different way. I just don't have a dog in this fight, again.

 

[CarolKing]

Republicans are circulating a petition to allow guns at the Republican National Convention. Not sure if they would allow that but anything is possible. If someone had a lisence to carry a gun maybe. They are risking everyone's safety IMO, not to mention their candidate Cruz or Trump.

Edit
I thought it sounded rediculous, anybody can circulate a petition.

 

[cybrguy]

Bingo. And this is where Obama has fallen short as well. Ya gotta be able to schmooze. Ya gotta be able to compromise. Ya gotta be able to sell your ideas and then rally support in order to get others to implement those ideas.

Obama's inability to get the Republicans to cooperate on advancing the country had a LOT more to do with the Republicans getting together at the beginning of his Presidency and promising to destroy it than any inability on Obama's part to "schmooze" or otherwise cajole republicans to go along. McConnell promised on day 1 that his job was "to make sure this President is a one term President". While he failed at that he did effectively throw a roadblock in front of EVERYTING the President tried to do. The fact that Obama was able to effect the change he HAS made (and there is quite a bit if you need a list) is a testament to his strength, not his weakness. I don't think there is another politician in the Democratic party who could have been more effective given the ABSOLUTE resistance the Republican party presented. Maybe if Obama had been white some of the resistance that was racially motivated may have been less, but there was nothing Obama could do about that.

Republicans are circulating a petition to allow guns at the Republican National Convention. Not sure if they would allow that but anything is possible.

Hard to imagine the Secret Service allowing this, and it is likely up to them.

 

[Joel W.]

Republicans are circulating a petition to allow guns at the Republican National Convention

A classic Tarantino ending scenario keeps popping into my head here...

 

[Snappo]

Circulation of a petition, no matter the stated goal, is an extended form of freedom of expression. I have to question whether the true aim of the petition is to gauge the level of hyped-up idiocy as relates to poorly educated (Trump loves em) non-thinking emotionally-charged extremists in the crowd. 20K+ signatures in a hall of 30-40K indicates a lot more than just a small brush fire - it's a raging forest fire of flaming idiots!

 

[CarolKing]

The Iraq people shot their guns in celebration when Sadam Hussein was captured. The republicans can gather outside and do that - otherwise they would shoot holes in the roof of the convention center.

Sometimes I think that there should be two Americas. One for the sane and one for some of the republicans, the Tea Party, Trump and Sarah Palin lovers. They don't think on the same wavelength as the rest of us. What the hell.

Edit
I know it's illegal to shoot guns in a populated area - just joking. Some of the republicans might have that in mind. Exactly, what goes up must come down.

 

[Snappo]

The republicans can gather outside and do that - otherwise they would shoot holes in the roof of the convention center.

Actually, it is illegal to shoot firearms while in populated areas - even shooting skyward - what goes up must come down... that heavy little piece of lead can do fatal damage to skull-carrying humans, though they may be empty.

 

[howie105]

I am all in favor of such a situation occurring, it puts an ideology to the test. If all the gun totters make it happen safely it says one thing and if it turns into the countries largest mass shooting it will say something else. One way or the other the test results would be obvious.

 

[lwien]

Obama's inability to get the Republicans to cooperate on advancing the country had a LOT more to do with the Republicans getting together at the beginning of his Presidency and promising to destroy it than any inability on Obama's part to "schmooze" or otherwise cajole republicans to go along. McConnell promised on day 1 that his job was "to make sure this President is a one term President". While he failed at that he did effectively throw a roadblock in front of EVERYTING the President tried to do. The fact that Obama was able to effect the change he HAS made (and there is quite a bit if you need a list) is a testament to his strength, not his weakness. I don't think there is another politician in the Democratic party who could have been more effective given the ABSOLUTE resistance the Republican party presented. Maybe if Obama had been white some of the resistance that was racially motivated may have been less, but there was nothing Obama could do about that.

Yeah, cybr, I'm well aware of everything you stated above but I do believe that the gridlock that we've experienced is a two way street and that Obama does bear some of the responsibility for that gridlock.

The GOP puts all the blame on Obama. The Dems put all the blame on GOP obstruction. I believe, like most things, the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[His_Highness]

I feel the Bern but admittedly ... I've become so disillusioned.....
- If Bernie wins he will more closely represent my ideals but there will be gridlock
- If Hillary wins she will represent only some of my ideals but there will be gridlock

Hope I'm wrong about the common denominator.