The Democrat Thread

[southsider2k5]

I actually think Hillary, and by her I mean her husband's, biggest weakness was was willingness to accept a bad compromise over no compromise. DADT probably lengthened the time it took to remove bans on homosexuality in the military as it made it seem like "something" was done. She is the coach that always recruits the 2 stars that she knows she can woo vs ever attempting to hit a 4 star game changer.

OTOH, she's a politician. And that can be a bad thing, it was bad when the "reasonable" position was to be a hawkish democrat. But it also means she pays attention to the base wants and what will help her sell. With Obama, people kept thinking there would be an American President moment where he inspires politicians to give up their long-held beliefs for...basically nothing.

 

With Hillary, we know that won't happen. Obama put a lot of effort into pushing popular support into congressional action. Hillary is going to put a lot more effort into institutional action IMO.

 

But I may be off. Frankly Obama was the first real president to have to deal with a lack of any pork in congress. There isn't much horsetrading to be done.

 

Maybe we are just living in a delusion now that has not crashed, where the whole nation thinks the President can get things done, and the institution is just not set up for that.

 

I don't think it has anything to do with compromise, but more of what is most popular. What was right was to overturn the ban on gays in the military, but it wasn't popular, so they didn't do it. There are all kinds of stories about how closely the Clintons pay attention to polling numbers, and shaped policy around them while Bill was President. I have no reason to believe Hillary would be any different.

[bmags]

I don't think it has anything to do with compromise, but more of what is most popular. What was right was to overturn the ban on gays in the military, but it wasn't popular, so they didn't do it. There are all kinds of stories about how closely the Clintons pay attention to polling numbers, and shaped policy around them while Bill was President. I have no reason to believe Hillary would be any different.

Yeah I wrote "no compromise" but meant no action when no action would have been better to ultimately get to the right move faster. I think you are right but ultimately that's largely fine.

 

When you look at Obama with gay marriage, he basically set up the court and government so that popular support could tip the scale as much as possible. DADT actually made it harder to get the right think done.

 

Clinton is valuable largely because she will play nice defense for Obama policies. I don't trust her to pass anything meaningful it many piecemeal bills.

[greg775]

Maybe we are just living in a delusion now that has not crashed, where the whole nation thinks the President can get things done, and the institution is just not set up for that.

So if the position is a do-nothing position, I think we should just give it to Carson. He's very intelligent. He's soft spoken and let him represent the USA. You know, personality does matter. There have been enough red-flags on Hillary's temper and rudeness to make Americans fear her being "in charge" of the nation.

 

Greg's quick hits ...

• Hillary: Too rude, too mean, too obnoxious to be allowed to be President for 8 years. Please America wise up. Plus her winning would precede 8 more years of Chelsea and do we want that??

• Trump: Too cocky, too intolerant of anybody but himself, too boastful to represent the USA for 4 years (he'd lose re-election).

• Bernie: Too nutty with this socialism stuff to be given the office for 8 years.

• Bush: Too incompetent in terms of garnering absolutely any support.

• Carson: Smart, classy, calm, brilliant, yet not a politico. He'll hire good people in all the key positions and re-energize the country's faith in politics. Give him the office, baby! 8 years.

• Florina: Too incompetent in terms of her past jobs. Has a bit of a mean edge like Hillary and is too much of a self-made corporate 'tool' if that's the word. She knows how to impress a room full of HR people. Can't let her rule the roost for 4 years (she'd lose re-election).

 

I would encourage those of you who like politics and have been silent in defending my rants against Hillary or even trying to re-but them to give me your quick hits on the leading candidates. I'm open to changing my mind on Hilly, I really am. I just have a gut feeling from everything I've read and heard coming out of her mouth she is truly a disaster waiting to happen.

Edited October 27, 2015 by greg775

[ron883]

Tex do you really want Hillary? You think there's gridlock now? Wait til she takes over. At least Obama is likeable and still he can't rally ANY support. I don't even think Hillary will try to pass anything. She'll give up quickly and just sit there and pout and say the big bad Republicans won't cooperate. She'll take her full eight years cause she won't even have to break a sweat so to speak in winning her second term. Then it figures to be Chelsea time. Why are Americans so stupid? There's no reason to let this very mean person run the country for 8 years? Aside from the D by her name, what are her strengths? Nobody even tries to say what she does well. They just say "Vote Hillary."

Congrats greg. You have lowered the bar SO much regarding the quality of your posts, that you can get away with posts that would normally be considered trolling. I've never seen so much baseless drivel compressed into one post. Chelsea following Hillary as president? lol.

[greg775]

Congrats greg. You have lowered the bar SO much regarding the quality of your posts, that you can get away with posts that would normally be considered trolling. I've never seen so much baseless drivel compressed into one post. Chelsea following Hillary as president? lol.

I'm just very confused by the lack of posts supporting anything but the "name" Hillary Clinton. I am asking for reasons people want her president and I'm not seeing any. I don't think my comments are that reprehensible. I don't think my post constituted "drivel." Nobody here or pretty much anywhere I've looked is supporting anything but Hillary's name. It's very bizarre that a person is going to win in a landslide and it's all because of her name. From what I can tell, nobody's excited about any of her positions, just the fact it's her turn, hence my comments on her "coronation." Sorry if I've offended u or anyone else.

[NorthSideSox72]

So if the position is a do-nothing position, I think we should just give it to Carson. He's very intelligent. He's soft spoken and let him represent the USA. You know, personality does matter. There have been enough red-flags on Hillary's temper and rudeness to make Americans fear her being "in charge" of the nation.

 

Greg's quick hits ...

• Hillary: Too rude, too mean, too obnoxious to be allowed to be President for 8 years. Please America wise up. Plus her winning would precede 8 more years of Chelsea and do we want that??

• Trump: Too cocky, too intolerant of anybody but himself, too boastful to represent the USA for 4 years (he'd lose re-election).

• Bernie: Too nutty with this socialism stuff to be given the office for 8 years.

• Bush: Too incompetent in terms of garnering absolutely any support.

• Carson: Smart, classy, calm, brilliant, yet not a politico. He'll hire good people in all the key positions and re-energize the country's faith in politics. Give him the office, baby! 8 years.

• Florina: Too incompetent in terms of her past jobs. Has a bit of a mean edge like Hillary and is too much of a self-made corporate 'tool' if that's the word. She knows how to impress a room full of HR people. Can't let her rule the roost for 4 years (she'd lose re-election).

 

I would encourage those of you who like politics and have been silent in defending my rants against Hillary or even trying to re-but them to give me your quick hits on the leading candidates. I'm open to changing my mind on Hilly, I really am. I just have a gut feeling from everything I've read and heard coming out of her mouth she is truly a disaster waiting to happen.

Leaving aside the hilariously backwards views on Carson, you left out the Republican most likely to win the nomination, in my view.

 

[illinilaw08]

So if the position is a do-nothing position, I think we should just give it to Carson. He's very intelligent. He's soft spoken and let him represent the USA. You know, personality does matter. There have been enough red-flags on Hillary's temper and rudeness to make Americans fear her being "in charge" of the nation.

 

Greg's quick hits ...

• Hillary: Too rude, too mean, too obnoxious to be allowed to be President for 8 years. Please America wise up. Plus her winning would precede 8 more years of Chelsea and do we want that??

• Trump: Too cocky, too intolerant of anybody but himself, too boastful to represent the USA for 4 years (he'd lose re-election).

• Bernie: Too nutty with this socialism stuff to be given the office for 8 years.

• Bush: Too incompetent in terms of garnering absolutely any support.

• Carson: Smart, classy, calm, brilliant, yet not a politico. He'll hire good people in all the key positions and re-energize the country's faith in politics. Give him the office, baby! 8 years.

• Florina: Too incompetent in terms of her past jobs. Has a bit of a mean edge like Hillary and is too much of a self-made corporate 'tool' if that's the word. She knows how to impress a room full of HR people. Can't let her rule the roost for 4 years (she'd lose re-election).

 

I would encourage those of you who like politics and have been silent in defending my rants against Hillary or even trying to re-but them to give me your quick hits on the leading candidates. I'm open to changing my mind on Hilly, I really am. I just have a gut feeling from everything I've read and heard coming out of her mouth she is truly a disaster waiting to happen.

 

Gregg, please see below regarding Carson.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/10/...ness-continues/

 

As to Hillary Clinton, of all the candidates who are likely to win the nomination, she is the most likely to work across the aisle without massive shocks to political institutions.

 

Any Conservative that wins will be expected to work with the guys who keep trying to shut down the government. Sanders is too far to the left to get any of his policies through. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, will be pushed to the left in the primaries by Sanders, but has the best chance amongst all the candidates of being able to work across the aisle and get things done.

 

Furthermore, of that group above, Clinton has the most experience - both as a Senator and as Secretary of State.

 

There are plenty of reasons to avoid Hillary Clinton as President. I'm not particularly excited about a Clinton presidency (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton is a bad trend) but she is the best of the options at the moment (in my opinion). Her being mean and her ushering in a Chelsea Clinton presidency (seriously Greg?) have nothing to do with policy...

 

 

[StrangeSox]

"My whole life, really, has been a no, and I fought through it. And, you, know, I talk about it. It’s not been easy for me, it has not been easy for me. You know, I started off in Brooklyn. My father gave me a small loan of a million dollars. I came into Manhattan, and I had to pay him back, and I had to pay him back with interest. But I came into Manhattan and I started buying properties, and I did great.”

-Trump

[GoSox05]

I hate when your parents only give you a small loan of a million bucks. It's like come on cheap ass!

[StrangeSox]

A "small loan" in 1968 which would be the equivalent of almost $7M today plus tons of connections in real estate. Born on third and thinks he hit a triple. It's almost as sad of a story as Mitt and Ann having to part with some of their stock portfolio to pay their college tuition.

[CrimsonWeltall]

A "small loan" in 1968 which would be the equivalent of almost $7M today plus tons of connections in real estate. Born on third and thinks he hit a triple. It's almost as sad of a story as Mitt and Ann having to part with some of their stock portfolio to pay their college tuition.

 

I can't even afford to put lobster in my ramen noodles anymore!

[greg775]

Gregg, please see below regarding Carson.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/10/...ness-continues/

 

As to Hillary Clinton, of all the candidates who are likely to win the nomination, she is the most likely to work across the aisle without massive shocks to political institutions.

 

Any Conservative that wins will be expected to work with the guys who keep trying to shut down the government. Sanders is too far to the left to get any of his policies through. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, will be pushed to the left in the primaries by Sanders, but has the best chance amongst all the candidates of being able to work across the aisle and get things done.

 

Furthermore, of that group above, Clinton has the most experience - both as a Senator and as Secretary of State.

 

There are plenty of reasons to avoid Hillary Clinton as President. I'm not particularly excited about a Clinton presidency (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton is a bad trend) but she is the best of the options at the moment (in my opinion). Her being mean and her ushering in a Chelsea Clinton presidency (seriously Greg?) have nothing to do with policy...

Thanks for the link on Carson. But how come when I link something about Hillary it's immediately dismissed by killing the messenger. Seems to me that author had an agenda. None of that Carson stuff was out of context or exaggerated? But the Hillary stuff I post is just discarded as incorrect.

 

-Trump

Trump isn't going to be President. It will be very funny if he's the Republican nominee, though. Funny as in comical, entertaining. Funny thing about Trump. If he won the Presidency I could see him just quitting after a year. If things got tough or he got bored, he's egotistical enough to just quit. Probably same with Carson for that matter. That's what happens when you are extremely rich and capable of being bored by politics. At this point, I'd still go with Carson. I do think if Trump won, he'd tire of the job and the criticism and just quit.

Edited October 27, 2015 by greg775

[StrangeSox]

Senate passes controversial cybersecurity-cyberspying bill 74-21

 

The Senate overwhelming approved the so-called Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) on Tuesday. The measure would allow companies to share consumers' data with the US government in the event of security breaches or cyber attacks—all in the name of cybersecurity.

 

The Center for Democracy & Technology also chimed in.

 

"Passage of CISA is a huge step backwards for privacy rights in the United States. Now, more personal information will be shared with the NSA and with law enforcement agencies, and that information will certainly be used for purposes other than enhancing cybersecurity," said Greg Nojeim, CDT's senior counsel and director of the Freedom, Security and Technology Project.

 

The White House, meanwhile, supports the bill. The measure still must be reconciled with the April version that passed the House.

 

[cabiness42]

Senate passes controversial cybersecurity-cyberspying bill 74-21

 

Bernie voted against it.

[CanOfCorn]

So if the position is a do-nothing position, I think we should just give it to Carson. He's very intelligent. He's soft spoken and let him represent the USA. You know, personality does matter. There have been enough red-flags on Hillary's temper and rudeness to make Americans fear her being "in charge" of the nation.

 

Greg's quick hits ...

• Hillary: Too rude, too mean, too obnoxious to be allowed to be President for 8 years. Please America wise up. Plus her winning would precede 8 more years of Chelsea and do we want that??

• Trump: Too cocky, too intolerant of anybody but himself, too boastful to represent the USA for 4 years (he'd lose re-election).

• Bernie: Too nutty with this socialism stuff to be given the office for 8 years.

• Bush: Too incompetent in terms of garnering absolutely any support.

• Carson: Smart, classy, calm, brilliant, yet not a politico. He'll hire good people in all the key positions and re-energize the country's faith in politics. Give him the office, baby! 8 years.

• Florina: Too incompetent in terms of her past jobs. Has a bit of a mean edge like Hillary and is too much of a self-made corporate 'tool' if that's the word. She knows how to impress a room full of HR people. Can't let her rule the roost for 4 years (she'd lose re-election).

 

I would encourage those of you who like politics and have been silent in defending my rants against Hillary or even trying to re-but them to give me your quick hits on the leading candidates. I'm open to changing my mind on Hilly, I really am. I just have a gut feeling from everything I've read and heard coming out of her mouth she is truly a disaster waiting to happen.

 

Hillary: Politician to the core.

Trump: TV Game show host

Bernie: Good ideas, won't play in Peoria

Bush: Whhhaaaaaa...?

Carson: Let's just say, if he were my doctor, I'd find another doctor.

Fiorina: Failed in business, fail in presidency.

Rubio: Still don't understand how immigrants don't like other immigrants. Well, I do, but it just doesn't make sense.

Kasich: Closest thing to a moderate up there. Still not a big fan.

 

How's that?

 

Also, I'm just glad I have a vote, because no matter who I vote for, it will offset one vote for Ben Carson. Any candidate that readily brings up Nazi Germany and compares it to the United States should never be handed the keys to the White House.

[southsider2k5]

Andy Shaw

12 mins · Hootsuite ·

 

There’s mounting evidence that Mayor Rahm Emanuel and perhaps some top city aides have used private email accounts to conduct public business in secret – in an attempt to bypass public disclosure rules.

[pettie4sox]

I hope they fry Rahm. That schmuck and the city council just approved a property tax hike.

[southsider2k5]

I hope they fry Rahm. That schmuck and the city council just approved a property tax hike.

 

Realistically, you can thank the Daley Dynasty for that. There were so many costs just kicked down the road that the choices weren't pretty.

 

-Huge tax increases

-Huge spending cuts

-More long term borrowing to make the situation in the future even worse than it is now.

 

Speaking as a Hoosier, we don't have those problems, and have really low taxes because of it.

[StrangeSox]

Andy Shaw

12 mins · Hootsuite ·

 

There’s mounting evidence that Mayor Rahm Emanuel and perhaps some top city aides have used private email accounts to conduct public business in secret – in an attempt to bypass public disclosure rules.

Emanuel is the worst

[Soxbadger]

I hope they fry Rahm. That schmuck and the city council just approved a property tax hike.

 

 

How else do you expect the city to pay for things?

 

As SS2k said, Rahm was left with a horrendous budget deficit, unlike Daley he is trying to fix the problem now instead of making it even worse in the future.

 

Nobody likes taxes, but at least Rahm is willing to take the publicity hit to try and salvage the Chicago economy.

[caulfield12]

I hated that prick when he worked for Clinton.

 

Great strong armer with bundling money and later enforcing party discipline, but not close to a nice guy by any stretch of the imagination. Smart, driven and ambitious...sure, but those tendencies have brought out an array of other undesirable qualities and tendencies along with it.

[StrangeSox]

Also full-bore with privatizing education

[pettie4sox]

Yeah the corruption is thick like LA smog in Chicago. Chicago is already taxed to oblivion, there had to be another way then dipping into our pockets.

[caulfield12]

If the outcomes were clearly better, sure.

 

Maybe 10% of charter schools are much more effective. Many are even worse.

 

That said, if it was KIPP or the Harlem Children's Zone or an innovative new approach that hasn't been tried before, those students deserve the best possible education and not the same tired tenure/anti-labor union/the system can't be changed or improved arguments. Teachers want the best for students as well.

[Soxbadger]

Also full-bore with privatizing education

 

You do realize that article is talking about deals that Rahm inherited.

 

Not sure how you can blame him for the parking meters, at least he tried to cancel the deal. The same thing with Park Grill restaurant lease.

 

Just because something is "private" doesnt make it bad, just because something is "public" doesnt make it good or vice versa. But when you attack something, you have to start with the facts. The facts are Chicago has significant debt, something that Rahm didnt create. So given that debt, you have to make decisions that maybe you wouldnt make if it wasnt there.

 

People want everything. They want a pretty city with amazing free stuff. Well it just doesnt work that way.

 

(edit)

 

Pettie4,

 

There are a million other solutions, people will just like them far less.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Soxbadger