2016 Democratic Thread

[greg775]

I support Hillary. There are some posters here who I will take out the time to write a post on my thoughts because it will be a part of an interesting discussion. If one of them ask I may write one.

That's pretty much what I hear from all Hillary supporters. I just support her, dammit. Truthfully I think most who support Hillary either are doing so because they would never ever vote Republican and the other democrat candidate is kind of off the wall bizarre.

Good luck to Hillary supporters as she will be continuing her fight to stay out of jail. Her email situation/FBI may be in the news for a long time until it culminates in formal charges?

[LDF]

That's pretty much what I hear from all Hillary supporters. I just support her, dammit. Truthfully I think most who support Hillary either are doing so because they would never ever vote Republican and the other democrat candidate is kind of off the wall bizarre.

Good luck to Hillary supporters as she will be continuing her fight to stay out of jail. Her email situation/FBI may be in the news for a long time until it culminates in formal charges?

 

nice point, i think that some may have to vote for her b/c the rep party people, right now is too bizarre.

[Balta1701]

I honestly havent met a single person who says Obamacare has helped them. Mostly you hear people complaining that their job cut their hours or that peoples premiums have went up.

Well now you have.

[LDF]

 

the Obamacare can really be discussed in a totally separate topic.

 

but in essence.... health care for everyone... equal health care and benefits. for all. this is the same kind of health care that england has for decades. the elderly, the single parents, the poor... same quality of health benefits for everyone.

 

 

[Brian]

Well now you have.

 

Same here.

[Balta1701]

the Obamacare can really be discussed in a totally separate topic.

 

but in essence.... health care for everyone... equal health care and benefits. for all. this is the same kind of health care that england has for decades. the elderly, the single parents, the poor... same quality of health benefits for everyone.

Actually it's not even close to what you just described or what England does.

[LDF]

Actually it's not even close to what you just described or what England does.

 

really, i thought it was.

 

i was in england for a month + back in the 90's, i was brief on the medical care and how it works.... i guess i just didn't understand it back then.

 

sorry.

 

 

[pettie4sox]

Obamacare pushed the coverage ages from 23 to 26. That's a lot of people it helped, myself included.

[bmags]

That's pretty much what I hear from all Hillary supporters. I just support her, dammit. Truthfully I think most who support Hillary either are doing so because they would never ever vote Republican and the other democrat candidate is kind of off the wall bizarre.

Good luck to Hillary supporters as she will be continuing her fight to stay out of jail. Her email situation/FBI may be in the news for a long time until it culminates in formal charges?

 

Yes, just like the formal charges that came out of the 6 year whitewater scandal.

 

Also, don't quote me unless you are actually responding to or extending a thought that I wrote. I did not write "I just support her, dammit", I wrote that I support her, and would gladly explain that to someone worth my time.

[farmteam]

Also, don't quote me unless you are actually responding to or extending a thought that I wrote. I did not write "I just support her, dammit", I wrote that I support her, and would gladly explain that to someone worth my time.

Alright, I'll bite. Why do you support Hillary?

 

My general thoughts are that my values line up more with Sanders than Clinton (particularly when it comes to hawkishness). However, I'm not sure how realistic his policies really are. Seems to have his head in the clouds a bit.

 

I also have a negative gut reaction to Hillary because I don't want another Clinton (or Bush). Maybe that's dumb, but it's my gut reaction nonetheless.

 

As of right now, I'd probably go Sanders in a primary and Hillary or 3rd party in the general.

 

FWIW, the issues most important to me are infrastructure improvements and education. And, more recently, improving/changing the relationship of police departments and the citizens they serve.

[iamshack]

Alright, I'll bite. Why do you support Hillary?

 

My general thoughts are that my values line up more with Sanders than Clinton (particularly when it comes to hawkishness). However, I'm not sure how realistic his policies really are. Seems to have his head in the clouds a bit.

 

I also have a negative gut reaction to Hillary because I don't want another Clinton (or Bush). Maybe that's dumb, but it's my gut reaction nonetheless.

 

As of right now, I'd probably go Sanders in a primary and Hillary or 3rd party in the general.

 

FWIW, the issues most important to me are infrastructure improvements and education. And, more recently, improving/changing the relationship of police departments and the citizens they serve.

You're not worthy!

 

I agree in re: infrastructure.

 

Interesting point about the police.

 

I support Bernie as well, but share some of your concerns.

 

Not a fan of Hilary at all, but not sure what I will do if she wins the primary.

[Brian]

I was too young to understand what was going on when Bill Clinton was president so people would have to educate me on why he was hated besides cigars and Monica. He created 25 million jobs, raised tax on the rich, balanced budget. So to say you don't want another Clinton doesn't make sense.

I'm a Bernie guy but will vote Hillary if I have to. Bmags has his reasons for supporting her. Nobody really needs to explain their reasoning for supporting anyone. Besides Trump because I just don't comprehend that.

[farmteam]

You're not worthy!

 

I agree in re: infrastructure.

 

Interesting point about the police.

 

I support Bernie as well, but share some of your concerns.

 

Not a fan of Hilary at all, but not sure what I will do if she wins the primary.

If I were starting a country from scratch, education would be my #1 priority. But we're not starting from scratch, and are faced with a literally crumbling infrastructure.

 

From a transportation perspective, the number of unsafe bridges and roads is insane. But at the same time, we really need to focus more attention on high-speed rail. Imagine Chicago as a hub between Indianapolis, St. Louis, Madison, Minneapolis. It makes too much sense. It's a lot of money to start up, but from a long range planning perspective is a good investment.

 

That's the obvious stuff, and not even touching on communication or energy infrastructure.

[farmteam]

I was too young to understand what was going on when Bill Clinton was president so people would have to educate me on why he was hated besides cigars and Monica. He created 25 million jobs, raised tax on the rich, balanced budget. So to say you don't want another Clinton doesn't make sense.

I'm a Bernie guy but will vote Hillary if I have to. Bmags has his reasons for supporting her. Nobody really needs to explain their reasoning for supporting anyone. Besides Trump because I just don't comprehend that.

That assumes it's because I though Bill was bad. I don't. It's just a negative gut reaction to having a dynastic presidency. Not enough to keep me from possibly voting for her. Just a gut reaction.

[LDF]

Alright, I'll bite. Why do you support Hillary?

 

My general thoughts are that my values line up more with Sanders than Clinton (particularly when it comes to hawkishness). However, I'm not sure how realistic his policies really are. Seems to have his head in the clouds a bit.

 

I also have a negative gut reaction to Hillary because I don't want another Clinton (or Bush). Maybe that's dumb, but it's my gut reaction nonetheless.

 

As of right now, I'd probably go Sanders in a primary and Hillary or 3rd party in the general.

 

FWIW, the issues most important to me are infrastructure improvements and education. And, more recently, improving/changing the relationship of police departments and the citizens they serve.

 

i know this wasn't referred to me, buy i like some of your post.

 

coming from a cop family, and with how i grow up on the streets, there was a huge conflict there, i tend to go with the police in most of what they do. the streets are crazy and the police needs all the pr support, they have a rough job.

 

my second thing i really want is a huge support in changing the education ..... my closest friend is a teacher down here in LA and in HS, those kids couldn't answer the question of war yr, decade and century was the war of 1812 ..... i swore to God that i am telling the truth.

[LDF]

That assumes it's because I though Bill was bad. I don't. It's just a negative gut reaction to having a dynastic presidency. Not enough to keep me from possibly voting for her. Just a gut reaction.

 

interesting, a friendly question on a What if.

 

what if RFK didn't get kill, would you have a problem with him being president???

[bmags]

Alright, I'll bite. Why do you support Hillary?

 

1. My general thoughts are that my values line up more with Sanders than Clinton (particularly when it comes to hawkishness). However, I'm not sure how realistic his policies really are. Seems to have his head in the clouds a bit.

 

2. I also have a negative gut reaction to Hillary because I don't want another Clinton (or Bush). Maybe that's dumb, but it's my gut reaction nonetheless.

 

3. As of right now, I'd probably go Sanders in a primary and Hillary or 3rd party in the general.

 

FWIW, the issues most important to me are infrastructure improvements and education. And, more recently, improving/changing the relationship of police departments and the citizens they serve.

 

Sure, had to move to a desktop, but this will still be rather quick. First off, in response to you - I put numbers in front of your paragraphs for a couple of quick points:

 

1- I am also concerned about Hillary's hawkishness. However, I think there is a strong faction of "doves" in the democratic party and democratic base. I'm still concerned she will put US resources in unproductive places where she may see inaction as weakness, but am not concerned about a full-fledged war. Part of my pro-Hillary points comes back to this.

 

2 - I don't think its dumb. Even with Obama in office we had 8 years of a very Clinton-cabinet. They are part of a very powerful family, and I share concerns of dynasties. However, institutions matter more than people. She is an effective instrument of the policies the democratic base will push. As you see with Justin Trudeau, we aren't unique in this. Sons/daughters of politicians help bridge gap to multiple generations of constituents but also have experience on how to work in a modern political landscape. I'm pretty sure my posts on soxtalk from ages 17-22 alone would ban me from any public office.

 

3- Please, please, please do not go 3rd party. If you care about infrastructure and education, know that you may not get what you want in the next 8 years what you want. But the president that comes next may very well flip the supreme court. The next president may very well also keep the things you'd like to improve from getting worse. I guarantee you Hillary will be able to appoint a justice that will make rulings that will allow not cripple fed gov't ability to help national infrastructure or help with national education policy in a way that a Republican candidate winning would.

 

On why I support Hillary.

 

First, I am very concerned about the Supreme Court with RBG's age. I do not know what will happen with Scalia's seat, but I imagine the Republicans will just refuse to vote and the #bothsides-ing of the media will allow it to happen. I think Hillary is the better of the two candidates, but I support both, and I think this is a very important election in order to preserve some of the groundwork for liberal policies laid under 2008-2010. I think Obama was a very, very good president, and when I look at the 2008 election I find it remarkable how many of the topics he implemented policies for. I credit Pelosi for her incredible work in the house, and Reid who, looking back actualy did a hell of a job with a difficult group to keep together. So, I am voting the democratic ticket. I will happily vote for Sanders. I will happily vote for Clinton. I think the debates have been reassuring that this is, thankfully, a good crop of candidates even though the dems got decimated in 2010-2014 in governerships, senate and house seats.

 

As a candidate, I'm happier to support Clinton this time around because I have been thrilled with her improvement as a candidate. She has been much more disciplined and ran a much better campaign than she did in 08. I think she learned a lot of lessons and applied them, which is consistent with whom I think she is as a public official and person. She makes mistakes, can often be wrongheadedly defensive about it, but has shown the willingness to change and improve from those mistakes.

 

- In point 1 I discussed how I worry about her hawkishness. This was the single biggest blackeye in 08 and why I went with Obama initially. That's the downside. The upside is she is a very skilled diplomat with lots of international respect among world leaders. I don't know why Sanders is so inept at attacking Hillary from the left on Foreign policy, but he is. Libya is this big open area to hit and he doesn't hit it, and frankly it's because I don't think he cares and understands. His answers are just way too simpleton that I cringe. Yes...coalitions will solve all. Well Clinton has shown ability to tackle the tough challenges in coalitions. I didn't come to this at all times. I was frustrated with her after SOS, and it wasn't until after that I recognized her work in pushing the hard sanctions on Iran that led to a fruitful second term with Kerry. She also did very good work in AsiaPac. I find her non-support of the TPP very compelling, even though I support that deal and think it's good enough to go on and tweak later. SOS used to be the position to elevate people to president,a nd its easiy to see why now. Her complete comfort in handling FP questions in debates is telling.

 

- Point 2, I think women's issues are finally hitting a tipping point for federal policy and I trust Clinton to lead the way there. I don't think Sanders won't, I think he'd be great here as well. But for all of the crap she takes of being unprincipled, she has stood early and often for the repeal of the Hyde amendment, something I strongly support. This is not a popular move, and she has made a tremendous case for it. I like the fact that she is so comfortable making the cases for the unobvious issues affecting constituencies like this. In the same way that I think its refreshing that Sanders actually calls on all people to pay more taxes because the government can provide them with a good they can use, I have liked what I've heard from Clinton on this front. It's important and she's good at it. Obama, an incrementalist in someways much like Clinton, was sometimes gulity of taking the easiest piece of progress and packaging it as the whole argument in a way that I felt undermined the future ability to build on a policy item. I didn't like that he couldn't win the argument on death panels, I think Clinton has her finger on those bits when the make sense to her and she believes in it. I fully acknowledge though, that when its a liberal base issue that she doesn't seem to carea bout she does tend to throw it under the bus without a fight if it will not go through.

 

- In 2008, healthcare was a major issue in all of the debates. Its one of the reasons I find it so funny that there apparently was "not enough debate" in 2010 2 years later during passage after 10 months of negotiations. But it should be noted that Clinton held her ground on a mandatory penalty on people who did not buy health insurance, because without it the financials of the bills would not make sense. You couldn't add a whole bunch of sick people to the pool wihtout offsetting it with younger healthier people. Obama basically contended that you could. He was wrong, and she held that position because it was technically and intellectually right. Again, when she has a good grasp of something taht she is pushing forward, she knows what is workable and does not shy away from the difficult aspects of the bill.

 

- This is somewhat anti-Bernie, but I have trouble separating the Candidate from his following. I am annoyed by the social media presence and their constant victimization posts. THIS ISNT DEMOCRACY to coin flips. THIS ISNT DEMOCRACY to super delegates, as if they had no idea about 8 years ago. I also am just annoyed by his policy framing strategy. Some times I hear him talk, and I'm just floored and think its enough to support him. Other times, I hear him just say millionaires and billionaires over and over again, and I'm just like, this guy is just saying a point people want to hear. And I worry that as with in 08, as soon as people realize Sanders won't just be able to debate the republicans into inputting their policies they'll disappear again, as they did in 10. I think the Dem party needed a break from the DLC. But Hillary's time with the DLC is exciting to me now because I think the dems need to make serious gains in conservative areas with candidates that may not be 100% in party lock step, but have enough flexibility to push through dem economic plans at LEAST. This is where your infrastructure comes into play.

 

- In her time in the Senate, I think it's clear that one of Clintons interests is the actual effectiveness of government. She worked very hard as Senate chair on her many committees to make sure the government programs she looked over actually worked. It's far away now, but she was a popular senator who worked across the aisle to improve benefits for veterans on healthcare and education. Sometimes this works against the clintons, where they strip down programs instead of building them up. But I find her an effective advocate of good government.

 

That said, I do find her supporting cast often annoying, and I do think even though she is unfairly often embroiled in controversy, she needs to be better at avoiding it.

 

That's some of it. It also rubs me the wrong way that Sanders is so conservative on gun legislation. Obviously that's capitulating to his consituency and had he actually been in the fights of the 90s and 00s he would have had a lot more awkward moments that his supporters could not be able to fall back on his "purity"

 

 

[Brian]

That was quick? ?

[LDF]

Sure, had to move to a desktop, but this will still be rather quick. First off, in response to you - I put numbers in front of your paragraphs for a couple of quick points:

 

1- I am also concerned about Hillary's hawkishness. However, I think there is a strong faction of "doves" in the democratic party and democratic base. I'm still concerned she will put US resources in unproductive places where she may see inaction as weakness, but am not concerned about a full-fledged war. Part of my pro-Hillary points comes back to this.

 

2 - I don't think its dumb. Even with Obama in office we had 8 years of a very Clinton-cabinet. They are part of a very powerful family, and I share concerns of dynasties. However, institutions matter more than people. She is an effective instrument of the policies the democratic base will push. As you see with Justin Trudeau, we aren't unique in this. Sons/daughters of politicians help bridge gap to multiple generations of constituents but also have experience on how to work in a modern political landscape. I'm pretty sure my posts on soxtalk from ages 17-22 alone would ban me from any public office.

 

3- Please, please, please do not go 3rd party. If you care about infrastructure and education, know that you may not get what you want in the next 8 years what you want. But the president that comes next may very well flip the supreme court. The next president may very well also keep the things you'd like to improve from getting worse. I guarantee you Hillary will be able to appoint a justice that will make rulings that will allow not cripple fed gov't ability to help national infrastructure or help with national education policy in a way that a Republican candidate winning would.

 

On why I support Hillary.

 

First, I am very concerned about the Supreme Court with RBG's age. I do not know what will happen with Scalia's seat, but I imagine the Republicans will just refuse to vote and the #bothsides-ing of the media will allow it to happen. I think Hillary is the better of the two candidates, but I support both, and I think this is a very important election in order to preserve some of the groundwork for liberal policies laid under 2008-2010. I think Obama was a very, very good president, and when I look at the 2008 election I find it remarkable how many of the topics he implemented policies for. I credit Pelosi for her incredible work in the house, and Reid who, looking back actualy did a hell of a job with a difficult group to keep together. So, I am voting the democratic ticket. I will happily vote for Sanders. I will happily vote for Clinton. I think the debates have been reassuring that this is, thankfully, a good crop of candidates even though the dems got decimated in 2010-2014 in governerships, senate and house seats.

 

As a candidate, I'm happier to support Clinton this time around because I have been thrilled with her improvement as a candidate. She has been much more disciplined and ran a much better campaign than she did in 08. I think she learned a lot of lessons and applied them, which is consistent with whom I think she is as a public official and person. She makes mistakes, can often be wrongheadedly defensive about it, but has shown the willingness to change and improve from those mistakes.

 

- In point 1 I discussed how I worry about her hawkishness. This was the single biggest blackeye in 08 and why I went with Obama initially. That's the downside. The upside is she is a very skilled diplomat with lots of international respect among world leaders. I don't know why Sanders is so inept at attacking Hillary from the left on Foreign policy, but he is. Libya is this big open area to hit and he doesn't hit it, and frankly it's because I don't think he cares and understands. His answers are just way too simpleton that I cringe. Yes...coalitions will solve all. Well Clinton has shown ability to tackle the tough challenges in coalitions. I didn't come to this at all times. I was frustrated with her after SOS, and it wasn't until after that I recognized her work in pushing the hard sanctions on Iran that led to a fruitful second term with Kerry. She also did very good work in AsiaPac. I find her non-support of the TPP very compelling, even though I support that deal and think it's good enough to go on and tweak later. SOS used to be the position to elevate people to president,a nd its easiy to see why now. Her complete comfort in handling FP questions in debates is telling.

 

- Point 2, I think women's issues are finally hitting a tipping point for federal policy and I trust Clinton to lead the way there. I don't think Sanders won't, I think he'd be great here as well. But for all of the crap she takes of being unprincipled, she has stood early and often for the repeal of the Hyde amendment, something I strongly support. This is not a popular move, and she has made a tremendous case for it. I like the fact that she is so comfortable making the cases for the unobvious issues affecting constituencies like this. In the same way that I think its refreshing that Sanders actually calls on all people to pay more taxes because the government can provide them with a good they can use, I have liked what I've heard from Clinton on this front. It's important and she's good at it. Obama, an incrementalist in someways much like Clinton, was sometimes gulity of taking the easiest piece of progress and packaging it as the whole argument in a way that I felt undermined the future ability to build on a policy item. I didn't like that he couldn't win the argument on death panels, I think Clinton has her finger on those bits when the make sense to her and she believes in it. I fully acknowledge though, that when its a liberal base issue that she doesn't seem to carea bout she does tend to throw it under the bus without a fight if it will not go through.

 

- In 2008, healthcare was a major issue in all of the debates. Its one of the reasons I find it so funny that there apparently was "not enough debate" in 2010 2 years later during passage after 10 months of negotiations. But it should be noted that Clinton held her ground on a mandatory penalty on people who did not buy health insurance, because without it the financials of the bills would not make sense. You couldn't add a whole bunch of sick people to the pool wihtout offsetting it with younger healthier people. Obama basically contended that you could. He was wrong, and she held that position because it was technically and intellectually right. Again, when she has a good grasp of something taht she is pushing forward, she knows what is workable and does not shy away from the difficult aspects of the bill.

 

- This is somewhat anti-Bernie, but I have trouble separating the Candidate from his following. I am annoyed by the social media presence and their constant victimization posts. THIS ISNT DEMOCRACY to coin flips. THIS ISNT DEMOCRACY to super delegates, as if they had no idea about 8 years ago. I also am just annoyed by his policy framing strategy. Some times I hear him talk, and I'm just floored and think its enough to support him. Other times, I hear him just say millionaires and billionaires over and over again, and I'm just like, this guy is just saying a point people want to hear. And I worry that as with in 08, as soon as people realize Sanders won't just be able to debate the republicans into inputting their policies they'll disappear again, as they did in 10. I think the Dem party needed a break from the DLC. But Hillary's time with the DLC is exciting to me now because I think the dems need to make serious gains in conservative areas with candidates that may not be 100% in party lock step, but have enough flexibility to push through dem economic plans at LEAST. This is where your infrastructure comes into play.

 

- In her time in the Senate, I think it's clear that one of Clintons interests is the actual effectiveness of government. She worked very hard as Senate chair on her many committees to make sure the government programs she looked over actually worked. It's far away now, but she was a popular senator who worked across the aisle to improve benefits for veterans on healthcare and education. Sometimes this works against the clintons, where they strip down programs instead of building them up. But I find her an effective advocate of good government.

 

That said, I do find her supporting cast often annoying, and I do think even though she is unfairly often embroiled in controversy, she needs to be better at avoiding it.

 

That's some of it. It also rubs me the wrong way that Sanders is so conservative on gun legislation. Obviously that's capitulating to his consituency and had he actually been in the fights of the 90s and 00s he would have had a lot more awkward moments that his supporters could not be able to fall back on his "purity"

 

whew..... damn you know your pov. pls i do not mean this as an insult, i really mean i am really impress with the chronological order of your points.

 

very direct and to the point.

 

very nice.

 

btw, how come you never ran for office. i mean you got the smarts.

 

[bmags]

That was quick? ?

 

I figured I probably would not want to specifically write something up later so I may as well finish since I grabbed a keyboard for it.

[caulfield12]

The problems with Hillary...

 

1) Likelihood of her being the one to break gridlock and bridge partisan rancor are about zero. As she claimed, Citizens Unired was aimed at her and her family...this whole right wing conspiracy plot, while partially true, is also quite tiresome.

 

2) She has an inspirational factor of zero. Speeches and debates, just not her strength. Very few actually like her...I'd even argue more voters passionately like Trump than Hillary, although she's not nearly as universally hated, either.

 

3) It's very telling that a woman is losing the 18-29 demographic by margins 20-25 points higher than Obama, who was a much more compelling candidate than Sanders. With all the challenges we face, the country needs a younger and more energetic president who is future rather than past-oriented.

 

4) When the only way to beat Sanders is hitting him over the head with her newfound Obama admiration, it might be enough to hold the African American vote in the South but it's a disaster for the general...then again, so is defending Bush family foreign policy, so both sides are equally lost.

 

5) No more excuses. She will win SC, but if she loses NV despite large numbers of Hispanic voters, all bets are off. That means there's a war of attrition all the way until the convention.

 

 

What has she actually accomplished in all of her time as a public servant? Her resume is Rubio-esque as a senator.

 

My biggest concern is that it feels like the Clintons have learned nothing at all from 2008...clearly misreading the electorate both times, and by a wide margin. It feels their time has come and gone.

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by caulfield12

[greg775]

The problems with Hillary...

 

2) She has an inspirational factor of zero. Speeches and debates, just not her strength. Very few actually like her...I'd even argue more voters passionately like Trump than Hillary, although she's not nearly as universally hated, either.

 

What has she actually accomplished in all of her time as a public servant? Her resume is Rubio-esque as a senator.

 

My biggest concern is that it feels like the Clintons have learned nothing at all from 2008...clearly misreading the electorate both times, and by a wide margin. It feels their time has come and gone.

Excellent post. You have captured my stance on Hillary. Regarding point No. 2, Bill Clinton had so much charisma. He actually still has it. Hillary has no charisma. You either have it or you don't. I can't prove this, but I suspect Bill knows Hillary Clinton is no Bill Clinton as far as being an effective speaker/politician.

Saturday Night Live has a winner in Kate McKinnon, who captures her in such a funny and almost sad way. Hope they keep it up. They know they have a winner and whoever is writing the Hillary skits is dead on every week. The Bernie skits, by contrast, are not funny. It's not enough to get Larry David to sound exactly like him. Give me some funny lines, SNL.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I honestly havent met a single person who says Obamacare has helped them. Mostly you hear people complaining that their job cut their hours or that peoples premiums have went up.

 

 

It works fine for me but I'm a teacher and my healthcare is awesome. That being said, I do know a lot of people that had teaching degrees and couldn't find jobs. Being able to stay on their parents insurance until 26 really helped.

[caulfield12]

Excellent post. You have captured my stance on Hillary. Regarding point No. 2, Bill Clinton had so much charisma. He actually still has it. Hillary has no charisma. You either have it or you don't. I can't prove this, but I suspect Bill knows Hillary Clinton is no Bill Clinton as far as being an effective speaker/politician.

Saturday Night Live has a winner in Kate McKinnon, who captures her in such a funny and almost sad way. Hope they keep it up. They know they have a winner and whoever is writing the Hillary skits is dead on every week. The Bernie skits, by contrast, are not funny. It's not enough to get Larry David to sound exactly like him. Give me some funny lines, SNL.

 

Here's a serious question, Greg.

 

What makes Dr. Ben Carson more qualified than you to be president?

 

What has he particularly impressed you with in the debates?

 

Other than constantly referring to his website, where one of his "policy experts" has written out some platform platitudes, there's really not much there. His basic idea in terms of health care is medical savings accounts, which is the same concept as abolishing social security and letting you invest and control your own money...which still isn't going to control any of the costs of prescription drugs or limit insurance company oligopolies.

 

There's just not much evidence that his last month of campaigning has been about anything besides enriching himself and trying to rescue his "brand" name from irrelevance...it's also quite obvious he would like to follow the Gingrich/Huckabee/Palin track of being a full-time media personality/public speaker.

 

Ultimately, the next Supreme Court appointee will have a lot more say in determining the fate of religious expression in the country than Dr. Carson or Ted "My grandfather hid $100 in his undies" Cruz.

Edited February 15, 2016 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

I honestly havent met a single person who says Obamacare has helped them. Mostly you hear people complaining that their job cut their hours or that peoples premiums have went up.

What's the uninsured rate down to these days