2016 Democratic Thread

[lostfan]

This is obviously a problem Repubs have, and for good reason give a segment of the Repub constituency, but it's also the nature of the two positions. Dems want to directly provide things, Repubs want to fix the system so that government doesn't have to. Which sounds more appealing if you're in the poorer areas of Chicago?

What does "fix the system" mean? For people who live in cities, this means invest in public transportation, housing development, access to jobs (which is always promised through tax cuts to the wealthy but never come), public investment in schools. Those are actually mostly municipal and state-level things, actually. That's what I meant earlier. People who live in cities are Dems because Dems live in cities.

 

When I hear a conservative talking head talking about how Dems are pandering to minority voters I chuckle to myself because the answer to their question is actually pretty obvious. It's not pandering, the minority voters are the people actually saing it, because they ARE the Democrats. White liberals are just one part of them.

[bmags]

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

 

Lusitania too.

 

Boats. LOL. People still use boats. That should have been Trumps angle, not B-52s.

 

"We're still out here, using boats! It's an ancient technology! The greeks, they were going around, they had boats, people made faces, Splat, they would kill them, and democrats, they don't want to try, and we're still on boats!"

[iamshack]

Clearly that type of behavior doesn't turn them off if they are considering voting for Trump.

No, but if she stoops to the same sort of behavior than it ceases to be something that separates her from him.

[Soxbadger]

I don't think you are understanding what I am saying. Perhaps I am not articulating it well.

 

I am not arguing that she should not ever engage him...that is unavoidable. But she can do so by staying above him and avoiding the laughing and the big grin and then "WOW" reactions. That serves no purpose other than her own ego and comic relief for hardcore democrats like yourself who are already voting for her anyways.

 

There are actually reasonably intelligent voters who are considering Trump and that type of behavior does nothing but turn them off.

 

Shack,

 

If that behavior "turns them off', then why is it okay when Trump does similar behavior, should that not turn them off to Trump. I honestly think that Clinton was acting that way on purpose. Whether or not it was a good plan or a bad plan is a judgment call. I personally think that if someone is lying that being demonstrative can be effective.

 

That being said, Trump is far worse when it comes to this stuff, not only does he make faces, he starts talking over people. If people are okay when Trump does it, but not when Hillary does, then its more than just her facial expressions. Those people are likely "looking for an excuse" to vote for Trump.

 

(Edit)

 

I just think the problem for Hillary is Trump tries to make her look "weak" so she cant just stand there and take it other wise it opens her up to the "stamina" etc, stuff.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Soxbadger

[illinilaw08]

I presume 98% of his contractors get paid, or some high percentage. IF people didn't do their job, they shouldn't be paid. You can have amazing hotels without always having the best contractors on various sub-projects, etc. That is life in business. Now there could be examples where he is being ridiculous, I don't know, but not enough facts were presented to make me care one way or another. The tax issue was played brilliantly by Hillary and he was a knuckle head...should have just said those are the laws of this country and I follow the laws.

 

SS posted this link two pages back, but it merits re-posting here - http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/...or-decades.html

 

Paraphrasing from the article - at least 60 lawsuits against Trump and hundreds of liens and judgments for failure to pay - and not merely limited to contractors and subs. Read the article - this isn't an isolated one off. Trump's history suggests that he looks for every reason to not pay people who do work for him.

 

But what started this discussion is Jenks saying that the idea of discussing this was a low blow, and akin to criticizing someone for not tipping. The way that Trump treats his employees, contractors, etc. is absolutely relevant to the narrative he's built around himself.

[StrangeSox]

Lusitania too.

 

Boats. LOL. People still use boats. That should have been Trumps angle, not B-52s.

 

"We're still out here, using boats! It's an ancient technology! The greeks, they were going around, they had boats, people made faces, Splat, they would kill them, and democrats, they don't want to try, and we're still on boats!"

 

Haha I didn't even think of that one, I was just thinking Spanish-American war, Vietnam, and Pearl Harbor. The list of "wars started by blowing up someone's boat" is ridiculous.

[iamshack]

Maybe, but I think you underrate that democrats needed to be energized. They just aren't right now. She needed to show fight. They love that s***. They all watched west wing and thought it was a great show.

Do they? It doesn't energize me. It makes me think that she is a more polished politician than he is but little else.

[lostfan]

I don't know how you can say that when the Republican policies in black communities and major cities are nonexistent at this point. Inner cities under Democratic rule have a bunch of people on welfare, inadequate schooling and Democrats going there every election year to tell them they are victims and that race is the biggest problem in America. There were almost 6,000 blacks killed by other blacks in 2015 and only 258 deaths by police gunfires. Stop locking them up for selling weed, stop ruining their employability with a flawed legal system and make an emphasis of stopping single mother households instead of race. Maybe then we'll see progress.

 

Democrats in Chicago built the highway system to keep black people contained in certain neighborhoods and have since just locked them up, given them horrible school systems (Bush's plan certainly shares blame there) and given them welfare while calling the Republicans racist for having no part in their fate. It's a shame. Rahm Emanuel doesn't even make a point of making a difference until some thugs come up to the Lakeview and Lincoln Park and start wreaking havoc where the money is at.

*white Democrats in Chicago. The distinction is not insignificant. This happened in every city with a large black population around the country in the 60s. (again, this is all local-level stuff, not federal)

[Chisoxfn]

I presume 98% of his contractors get paid, or some high percentage. IF people didn't do their job, they shouldn't be paid. You can have amazing hotels without always having the best contractors on various sub-projects, etc. That is life in business. Now there could be examples where he is being ridiculous, I don't know, but not enough facts were presented to make me care one way or another. The tax issue was played brilliantly by Hillary and he was a knuckle head...should have just said those are the laws of this country and I follow the laws.

By the way, that is my presumption. IF he is just stiffing people to stiff people, well that is another story.

[bmags]

Lusitania is ...loosertania, than the others.

 

Germany was probably right to anyway. Total B.S. move by US. And who was in power? DEMOCRATS.

[StrangeSox]

They did the same thing in NYC, too. s*** like intentionally building overpasses *just* low enough so that public buses, which black people relied on much more heavily, couldn't easily leave different neighborhoods while cars had no problem. Racial segregation as public policy was the whole thrust of TNC's "The Case for Reparations" article a few years ago, and that focused on Chicago's awful legacy.

[iamshack]

Shack,

 

If that behavior "turns them off', then why is it okay when Trump does similar behavior, should that not turn them off to Trump. I honestly think that Clinton was acting that way on purpose. Whether or not it was a good plan or a bad plan is a judgment call. I personally think that if someone is lying that being demonstrative can be effective.

 

That being said, Trump is far worse when it comes to this stuff, not only does he make faces, he starts talking over people. If people are okay when Trump does it, but not when Hillary does, then its more than just her facial expressions. Those people are likely "looking for an excuse" to vote for Trump.

See my post above yours.

 

These people are absolutely looking for reasons to vote for Trump - that can be the only reason he is actually the Republican nominee.

 

Trump offers something different. Things have gotten so bad in the state of American politics that a large percentage of voters are willing to overlook all of his flaws because they believe the possibility that he might bring something different to the table outweighs those flaws.

 

If Hillary starts exhibiting those same type of flaws, it only makes it easier for folks considering whether Trump's flaws may be overlooked to make the decision to vote for him.

[StrangeSox]

Anyone seriously considering voting for Trump at this point who isn't already locked in is just looking for an excuse, and I can't imagine how Clinton could persuade them no matter how she comported herself during the debates. Her best hope isn't to try to convince those people anyway, but to make sure her own voters turn out. If the demographics look like 2008/2012 or better, she crushes it. If they look like 2004, we're in for a long night with a very real possibility of President Trump.

 

The short version is that the mythical "undecided" voter doesn't actually matter because anyone who can't decide between these two at this point is very unlikely to vote at all anyway.

[Soxbadger]

By the way, that is my presumption. IF he is just stiffing people to stiff people, well that is another story.

 

Its Trump's business model. Even with the Trump tower in Chicago he screwed a bunch of people by canceling their contracts.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-01...hotel-contracts

 

He then changed parts of some contracts to make them less lucrative.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-02...p-trump-project

[StrangeSox]

See my post above yours.

 

These people are absolutely looking for reasons to vote for Trump - that can be the only reason he is actually the Republican nominee.

 

Trump offers something different. Things have gotten so bad in the state of American politics that a large percentage of voters are willing to overlook all of his flaws because they believe the possibility that he might bring something different to the table outweighs those flaws.

 

If Hillary starts exhibiting those same type of flaws, it only makes it easier for folks considering whether Trump's flaws may be overlooked to make the decision to vote for him.

 

Or a large percentage of white voters are willing to overlook all of his flaws because they're all-in on his white grievance nationalism, and the Democrats absolutely should not be chasing those votes.

[Chisoxfn]

By the way, I should make one thing clear. I am 1000% not voting for Trump. My only debate is do I actually associate my vote with Hillary or do I write in a candidate. So technically, Hillary was speaking to me or someone like me in the audience. My current prevailing wisdom is I disagree with her on too much policy related matters (not to mention I have zero trust in her) to give her my vote and thus will write-in a candidate.

[RockRaines]

This is obviously a problem Repubs have, and for good reason give a segment of the Repub constituency, but it's also the nature of the two positions. Dems want to directly provide things, Repubs want to fix the system so that government doesn't have to. Which sounds more appealing if you're in the poorer areas of Chicago?

Eh, you mean give less to the people at the bottom and give more to the people at the top? Not sure that fixes anything for the "system"

[illinilaw08]

I don't know how you can say that when the Republican policies in black communities and major cities are nonexistent at this point. Inner cities under Democratic rule have a bunch of people on welfare, inadequate schooling and Democrats going there every election year to tell them they are victims and that race is the biggest problem in America. There were almost 6,000 blacks killed by other blacks in 2015 and only 258 deaths by police gunfires. Stop locking them up for selling weed, stop ruining their employability with a flawed legal system and make an emphasis of stopping single mother households instead of race. Maybe then we'll see progress.

 

Democrats in Chicago built the highway system to keep black people contained in certain neighborhoods and have since just locked them up, given them horrible school systems (Bush's plan certainly shares blame there) and given them welfare while calling the Republicans racist for having no part in their fate. It's a shame. Rahm Emanuel doesn't even make a point of making a difference until some thugs come up to the Lakeview and Lincoln Park and start wreaking havoc where the money is at.

 

I'm talking about Republican policies at the national level. If you are looking for a party who is trying to reform the prison system nationally, look at the Democrats, with Clinton actually criticizing the for profit prison system. If you are looking for a party who is trying to provide opportunity for kids coming from poor neighborhoods, look at the party that wants to make college free and reduce the rate on outstanding student loans. If you are looking for the party that wants to fix schools, look for the party that wants to invest more in public schools, not the party that wants to reduce taxes across the board. If you are looking for the party that will make it easier for single parents to work and parent, then look at the party who wants to bring government support to childcare and standardize time off for maternity (and paternity) leave.

 

At the end of the day, the Republican policies are worse than Democratic policies for those communities. And examples of crappy policies in Chicago, locally, by White Democrats in the 60s does not change that analysis.

[StrangeSox]

Its Trump's business model. Even with the Trump tower in Chicago he screwed a bunch of people by canceling their contracts.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-01...hotel-contracts

 

He then changed parts of some contracts to make them less lucrative.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-02...p-trump-project

 

Trump ran a scam "university" to hard-sell people out of tens of thousands of dollars for useless pre-packaged real estate "advice" from people with little or no knowledge. He's always been a grifter.

[iamshack]

I presume 98% of his contractors get paid, or some high percentage. IF people didn't do their job, they shouldn't be paid. You can have amazing hotels without always having the best contractors on various sub-projects, etc. That is life in business. Now there could be examples where he is being ridiculous, I don't know, but not enough facts were presented to make me care one way or another. The tax issue was played brilliantly by Hillary and he was a knuckle head...should have just said those are the laws of this country and I follow the laws.

I'm sure Trump is not easy to work for...but people work for him because he has capital.

 

Look at Apple, for instance.

 

They throw their weight around to force vendors to sell them components at virtually no margin - because they can. They take advantage of existing tax law because that is what results in them keeping more of their revenues.

 

This is called business, people.

 

I am sorry, but I simply cannot fault the guy for being a shrewd businessman.

 

 

[RockRaines]

Or a large percentage of white voters are willing to overlook all of his flaws because they're all-in on his white grievance nationalism, and the Democrats absolutely should not be chasing those votes.

There is also a ridiculous amount of lower income whites who believe things will be "given back to them" when America is Made great again.

[lostfan]

They did the same thing in NYC, too. s*** like intentionally building overpasses *just* low enough so that public buses, which black people relied on much more heavily, couldn't easily leave different neighborhoods while cars had no problem. Racial segregation as public policy was the whole thrust of TNC's "The Case for Reparations" article a few years ago, and that focused on Chicago's awful legacy.

Yeah, this exactly. Like the way they have built public transportation in Baltimore. We'll build highways that are good for getting OUT of the city, and fine, we'll build public transportation, but only if it's a park and ride so *they* can't get out here where we've moved to.

 

It's not a coincidence that Chicago's trains go into the north suburbs and on the south side it only goes to 95th.

[RockRaines]

I'm sure Trump is not easy to work for...but people work for him because he has capital.

 

Look at Apple, for instance.

 

They throw their weight around to force vendors to sell them components at virtually no margin - because they can. They take advantage of existing tax law because that is what results in them keeping more of their revenues.

 

This is called business, people.

 

I am sorry, but I simply cannot fault the guy for being a shrewd businessman.

It depends if you value the dollar over whats right. There are plenty of businessmen that I fault for being total pieces of s*** regardless of their financial stature. Being good at screwing people over isnt exactly a quality that HAS to be valued just because it brings you money.

[StrangeSox]

I'm sure Trump is not easy to work for...but people work for him because he has capital.

 

Look at Apple, for instance.

 

They throw their weight around to force vendors to sell them components at virtually no margin - because they can. They take advantage of existing tax law because that is what results in them keeping more of their revenues.

 

This is called business, people.

 

I am sorry, but I simply cannot fault the guy for being a shrewd businessman.

 

Trump took over $100k in money for 9/11 recovery funds even though none of his property was damaged.

 

He takes a property tax credit meant for low income people in New York City.

 

The list of ways Trump runs nickle-and-dime grifts is pretty long.

[greg775]

By the way, I should make one thing clear. I am 1000% not voting for Trump. My only debate is do I actually associate my vote with Hillary or do I write in a candidate. So technically, Hillary was speaking to me or someone like me in the audience. My current prevailing wisdom is I disagree with her on too much policy related matters (not to mention I have zero trust in her) to give her my vote and thus will write-in a candidate.

Great post. I will write in Jesse Ventura.

It's pretty obvious Hillary is going to win. She doesn't need to do anything. It's likely to be a landslide, but if it's not it's obvious she has enough support to eke out the electoral thing. You wait, the election will be over this time by 10 p.m. eastern time on election night. This is a coronation not an election.