The Democrat Thread

[bmags]

I was on a flight to mexico one time and a bunch of the flight were old men who loved the history channel. They couldn't stop talking about the aliens building the pyramids.

[pettie4sox]

[Chisoxfn]

I avoid plane conversations like the plague.

Yeah - I am Mr. Anti-social on a plane. Polite but I don't go out of my way to engage in a conversation unless I overhear something that I truly find very interesting and then might but in.

[StrangeSox]

A pretty good read from Krugman reviewing Robert Reich's latest book examining the shift in wealth and rising inequalities.

 

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17...ging-oligarchy/

[greg775]

I'm not blaming Obama, but it sure seems to me we've had sooooooo many of these mass shootings during his 8 years. Gunmen kill many today in California in a building that helps the disabled??? Pretty soon we're going to be in a militaristic state everywhere we go. Nobody's gonna be allowed in any building, any sports arena, cause frankly at any time somebody might come in and blast away. It's just plain sickening.

 

It's Obama's watch. Not saying it's his fault but wow, all the murders, all the destruction. Just think how many people are plotting mass murders as I write this. It has to be thousands of plots being planned right now, which is very very scary.

 

Peace on earth good will toward men.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I'm not blaming Obama, but it sure seems to me we've had sooooooo many of these mass shootings during his 8 years. Gunmen kill many today in California in a building that helps the disabled??? Pretty soon we're going to be in a militaristic state everywhere we go. Nobody's gonna be allowed in any building, any sports arena, cause frankly at any time somebody might come in and blast away. It's just plain sickening.

 

It's Obama's watch. Not saying it's his fault but wow, all the murders, all the destruction. Just think how many people are plotting mass murders as I write this. It has to be thousands of plots being planned right now, which is very very scary.

 

Peace on earth good will toward men.

 

 

What would you like him to do about it though? You're implying that it's his fault. This is one of the problems. Republicans want to blame Democrats. Democrats want to blame Republicans. And we are sheep that keep doing this while the people that are really running this country continue to do whatever benefits them.

[bmags]

Who are the people that really run this country? The reason gun laws don't change is the NRA membership is active and devoted and will only vote for officials who are very pro-gun.

 

If the people that favored gun control were actually equally as passionate and voted as a bloc you would see a much different situation. They don't though. They just rely on bloomberg's money.

[Jenksismyhero]

Who are the people that really run this country? The reason gun laws don't change is the NRA membership is active and devoted and will only vote for officials who are very pro-gun.

 

If the people that favored gun control were actually equally as passionate and voted as a bloc you would see a much different situation. They don't though. They just rely on bloomberg's money.

 

I really think the NRA's control is overblown. I think its classic case of polls showing that people overwhelming like the idea of gun control, but when push comes to shove, and proposals are on the table, they don't want to restrict their own use/ownership rights.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

No, it is driven by the people who put guns as their top or only political priority. The Colorado recalls a couple of years back are an excellent example of this: a small but very dedicated minority of voters can control elections especially when there is low turnout. Most people supported something at least as strong as the gun law put forth by Manchin after Sandy hook

 

At the national level, you also have the unequal representation in both the house and Senate that favors rural and conservative policies inherently.

[bmags]

No, it is driven by the people who put guns as their top or only political priority. The Colorado recalls a couple of years back are an excellent example of this: a small but very dedicated minority of voters can control elections especially when there is low turnout. Most people supported something at least as strong as the gun law put forth by Manchin after Sandy hook

 

At the national level, you also have the unequal representation in both the house and Senate that favors rural and conservative policies inherently.

 

Right, but this is a problem on the left. There is no voting bloc. There is no issue that people are so passionate enough that they'll vote for local candidates on, not just talk about a president who believes in 80% of things that won't get acted on.

[StrangeSox]

I don't disagree with that. Democrats definitely need to figure out how to get people to pay attention and vote consistently at every level, not just every four years.

[Jake]

I somewhat agree with Jenks as far as the NRA goes. I don't think it's so much their immediate and deliberate influence that shapes gun policy, though it very well could play a larger role than I think it does. It's moreso the groundwork they have done over decades to reframe the debate on guns, doing things like funding legal scholarship to make the 2nd amendment seem unambiguously supportive of unimpeded home ownership of guns, creating alarm over things like gun registries (which in turn makes so many gun control policies difficult), and things like this. They have created a relatively coherent set of arguments that are easy to understand and repeat and are often highly logical (who is to argue that a gun won't save you in one of many contrived situations in which a gun is obviously an advantage?), which has led us to a point now where the pro-gun base is loud and effective.

 

The gun rights crowd can relate to people and themselves on several levels that are very closely tied to deeply held beliefs. Historically, they can talk about founding fathers (2nd amendment), even if the truth of history is far less clear. Another historical angle is the idea that guns were crucial in the revolution (what war doesn't require guns?), thus making a provocative correlation of citizen gun use with freedoms.

 

Ideologically, they can talk about government control and interference in lifestyles, something lots of people don't like in the abstract. Culturally, guns can be a symbol of a certain identity, whether that's the country/rural person or a Southerner or vigilante badass, etc.

 

And logically, it is easy to imagine yourself in a situation in which a gun is probably your best chance at survival. Most people aren't able to think that their personal ownership of a gun can have a negative effect on the world, but it's easy to think about how it can help you or some other innocent person. Those talking about gun control usually have to get people thinking about society-wide phenomena and things like this that just aren't so easy to grasp and aren't worth the effort for someone who already finds guns appealing.

[cabiness42]

Keep this in mind if you are voting in a Democratic primary:

 

Hillary is such a lying, conniving b**** that I'll even vote for somebody as insane as Trump or Cruz if those are the two choices.

 

And I'm not alone.

 

I'm not a fan of a big chunk of Bernie's ideas, but I at least find the man to be trustworthy enough to vote for him over somebody like Trump or Cruz.

[NorthSideSox72]

Keep this in mind if you are voting in a Democratic primary:

 

Hillary is such a lying, conniving b**** that I'll even vote for somebody as insane as Trump or Cruz if those are the two choices.

 

And I'm not alone.

 

I'm not a fan of a big chunk of Bernie's ideas, but I at least find the man to be trustworthy enough to vote for him over somebody like Trump or Cruz.

Bizarre. I mean, I despise Hillary, but how can you even compare the two? Trump is - and yes I am going here - more and more approaching Hitler levels. The parallels are striking. Just replace "Muslims" with "Jews". The guy is a lunatic (and fortunately only supported by about 6% of the country - the lunatic fringe). I would rather have the most extreme policy people (Sanders? Paul?) than a person who might as well be that racist uncle you pretend isn't in your family. The guy is not only incapable of leading at that level, he's driven by hate and bigotry.

 

I've vote for every single candidate running in either party, that I've ever seen run in 6 election cycles in my voting lifetime, than Trump and by a country mile.

 

[StrangeSox]

Paul's isolationist-lite when it comes to foreign policy but a pretty standard Republican otherwise. He's closer to the mainstream than his father was, anyway. I'd say Cruz is more radical than Paul.

[southsider2k5]

Keep this in mind if you are voting in a Democratic primary:

 

Hillary is such a lying, conniving b**** that I'll even vote for somebody as insane as Trump or Cruz if those are the two choices.

 

And I'm not alone.

 

I'm not a fan of a big chunk of Bernie's ideas, but I at least find the man to be trustworthy enough to vote for him over somebody like Trump or Cruz.

 

I have said before, and will say again, I can't stand Sanders ideas, but at least I can trust the guy. I know what he stands for, and what he wants to do. The rest of the fields? No f***ing clue.

 

Honestly, Trump is the one person who might make me vote for Hillary.

 

Bizarre. I mean, I despise Hillary, but how can you even compare the two? Trump is - and yes I am going here - more and more approaching Hitler levels. The parallels are striking. Just replace "Muslims" with "Jews". The guy is a lunatic (and fortunately only supported by about 6% of the country - the lunatic fringe). I would rather have the most extreme policy people (Sanders? Paul?) than a person who might as well be that racist uncle you pretend isn't in your family. The guy is not only incapable of leading at that level, he's driven by hate and bigotry.

 

I've vote for every single candidate running in either party, that I've ever seen run in 6 election cycles in my voting lifetime, than Trump and by a country mile.

 

Trump and Clinton have more in common than you might think. While their styles are 100% different, they both are going to say and do whatever they think will get them elected, and not what they think is right. Honestly, I am not sure either one of them has any real stances that they absolutely believe in, other than power.

 

Trump has identified with a specific group, and will do or say whatever he thinks they want to here to try to get himself elected. At this point, why would he stop? It has put him solidly in front of the polls, as disgusting as that thought it. I have no doubt that if he base started to evaporate, he's discard their opinions and find new ones that were more popular.

 

Hillary just follows the polls when it comes to her opinions. She is obviously much less of a showman, and hasn't thrown her lot with an obvious bunch of idiots as of today, but I have no doubt if the polls told her to pick up some of those same ideas, she would. Let's not forget how many things originated under the Clinton watch that are now absolutely repulsive, such as the Don't ask, don't tell ideas, the protection of marriage act, and the birther movement. But now polls have shifted, and so has she.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I have said before, and will say again, I can't stand Sanders ideas, but at least I can trust the guy. I know what he stands for, and what he wants to do. The rest of the fields? No f***ing clue.

 

Honestly, Trump is the one person who might make me vote for Hillary.

 

 

 

Trump and Clinton have more in common than you might think. While their styles are 100% different, they both are going to say and do whatever they think will get them elected, and not what they think is right. Honestly, I am not sure either one of them has any real stances that they absolutely believe in, other than power.

 

Trump has identified with a specific group, and will do or say whatever he thinks they want to here to try to get himself elected. At this point, why would he stop? It has put him solidly in front of the polls, as disgusting as that thought it. I have no doubt that if he base started to evaporate, he's discard their opinions and find new ones that were more popular.

 

Hillary just follows the polls when it comes to her opinions. She is obviously much less of a showman, and hasn't thrown her lot with an obvious bunch of idiots as of today, but I have no doubt if the polls told her to pick up some of those same ideas, she would. Let's not forget how many things originated under the Clinton watch that are now absolutely repulsive, such as the Don't ask, don't tell ideas, the protection of marriage act, and the birther movement. But now polls have shifted, and so has she.

 

Only in common in that both will swing with polls to get elected. But No chance Hillary has the lack of boundaries for it that Trump does. No way. Trump is "special" that way. Not to mention that the polls she swings around on don't put her into hate territory. Their stance on same-sex marriage doesn't look great, but never did they imply some group of people should be deported or kept out en masse, which Trump has done with multiple groups now.

 

Not even close. And that comes from someone who would rather anyone by Hillary gets the Dem nod.

 

[StrangeSox]

Keep this in mind if you are voting in a Democratic primary:

 

Hillary is such a lying, conniving b**** that I'll even vote for somebody as insane as Trump or Cruz if those are the two choices.

 

And I'm not alone.

 

I'm not a fan of a big chunk of Bernie's ideas, but I at least find the man to be trustworthy enough to vote for him over somebody like Trump or Cruz.

honestly thought this was a greg post until I saw ss2k5's reply

[Y2HH]

Trump has played every last one of you.

[StrangeSox]

Only in common in that both will swing with polls to get elected. But No chance Hillary has the lack of boundaries for it that Trump does. No way. Trump is "special" that way. Not to mention that the polls she swings around on don't put her into hate territory. Their stance on same-sex marriage doesn't look great, but never did they imply some group of people should be deported or kept out en masse, which Trump has done with multiple groups now.

 

Not even close. And that comes from someone who would rather anyone by Hillary gets the Dem nod.

You want a politician to have some convictions and ground they'll hold, but on the other hand, it seems sort of silly to criticize them for changing their stances in tune with their constituency's changing desires over 10-15 years e.g. support for LGBT equality. I think it's good that Hillary has shifted noticeably leftward on some issues compared to her 2008 campaign in response to what Democratic voters want.

[StrangeSox]

Trump has played every last one of you.

care to elaborate?

[southsider2k5]

Only in common in that both will swing with polls to get elected. But No chance Hillary has the lack of boundaries for it that Trump does. No way. Trump is "special" that way. Not to mention that the polls she swings around on don't put her into hate territory. Their stance on same-sex marriage doesn't look great, but never did they imply some group of people should be deported or kept out en masse, which Trump has done with multiple groups now.

 

Not even close. And that comes from someone who would rather anyone by Hillary gets the Dem nod.

 

I honestly don't buy that. I think she is better at hiding it, while the group that supports Trump wants to see that, which is why he puts on the show. If the preferences of the demographics were different, I am sure Hillary would be doing the same things.

[StrangeSox]

I honestly don't buy that. I think she is better at hiding it, while the group that supports Trump wants to see that, which is why he puts on the show. If the preferences of the demographics were different, I am sure Hillary would be doing the same things.

 

This only makes sense if you think that the political parties that candidates choose to align with and draw their support from are random or something. I mean it's basically saying "if Hillary were a radical right-wing Republican trying to appeal to radical right-wing Republicans, she'd do the same thing!"

 

edit: and you can look at her own stances in comparison with what the Democratic base wants, and it doesn't really support that idea. Most liberals are strongly in favor of Universal Health Care and many (possibly most?) support free college plans, but she's criticizing Sanders from the right on both of those issues.

Edited December 9, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Y2HH]

care to elaborate?

 

He's a life long reality tv media whore, so much so he was doing it before reality tv even existed.

 

Throughout the 80's, Trump and his crazy marriage in the media was basically the entire Kanye/Kim storyline BEFORE Kanye/Kim.

 

He says outlandish things because it makes people notice him, not because he actually means any of it...and people keep falling for it over and over. This presidential race is nothing but more reality tv to him, and unlike his opponents, he doesn't have to spend a dime. Nearly all of the things Trump is saying CANNOT EVEN BE DONE, and he KNOWS THAT. He's NOT the dumbass people try to make him out to be.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

He's a life long reality tv media whore, so much so he was doing it before reality tv even existed.

 

Throughout the 80's, Trump and his crazy marriage in the media was basically the entire Kanye/Kim storyline BEFORE Kanye/Kim.

 

He says outlandish things because it makes people notice him, not because he actually means any of it...and people keep falling for it over and over. This presidential race is nothing but more reality tv to him, and unlike his opponents, he doesn't have to spend a dime. Nearly all of the things Trump is saying CANNOT EVEN BE DONE, and he KNOWS THAT. He's NOT the dumbass people try to make him out to be.

I'm fine with calling anyone who openly espouses fascism and racism, whether or not they "actually mean any of it," a dumb ass, especially if they're doing it as the front-runner for nomination for President of a major political party.

 

He's also an old white dude saying ridiculous s*** that at least some small but significant percentage of his supporters fully embrace. I see no reason to assume that Trump doesn't genuinely believe the s***ty things he's saying.