2016 Democratic Thread

[caulfield12]

It's a good argument if you're just talking about the past few elections though. There was definitely dirt in them (eg Swiftboating), but nothing like 2016.

 

Look at Willie Horton in 1988...and the way Atwater ran those campaigns, albeit there were code words back then and vague insinuations.

 

Numerous (some likely innocent) prisoners had to die in Arkansas solely so Bill Clinton wouldn't be labelled as soft on crime. Even HRC was using terms like "super predator" to classify minorities (even though she won't ever admit it).

[CrimsonWeltall]

McCain's illegitimate black baby smear in 2000 primary

 

True, but I believe that was a phone push-poll. Not anything GWB himself was throwing at McCain in debates and in every stump speech.

[southsider2k5]

This isnt even close to the amount of a welfare check though.

 

Reality is that it isn't rationale. But that doesn't really matter.

[BigSqwert]

Hey, stop channeling Mike Pence!

 

Smoking doesn't kill! Only 33% percent of smokers die from smoking!

 

I knew one of you would catch the joke.

[StrangeSox]

Big reason why McCain himself was uncomfortable with going too negative against Obama (his loose-cannon running mate notwithstanding). He knew what it was like to be on the receiving end of those smears and he wouldn't be responsible for it.

 

Yep. While he ran on a pretty conservative platform and he propelled Sarah Palin onto the national stage, I don't remember those campaigns really getting "dirty."

 

I don't know how much of it is driven by outside PAC money running negative ads, but I have to imagine that the pendulum is going to swing back a bit for the next election. Nothing will seem all that outrageous and insane compared to Trump, and maybe it can go back to being a little more policy-focused. At least I hope.

[StrangeSox]

Reality is that it isn't rationale. But that doesn't really matter.

 

I guess I'm just pretty skeptical that the tiny subset of people who are both living on less than $3k/year and who would actually consider having a child for welfare money are also following policy close enough that they'd be incentivized into having a child for an extra $1k for three years.

[StrangeSox]

I've been saying for years that HRC would be the next president. I have never wavered on that. Although I never thought in a million years Trump would win the GOP, but once he did, HRC should have popped champagne right then.

 

Some of the wikileaks recent emails showed that that is pretty much exactly what happened. Trump was their dream candidate to run against.

[caulfield12]

I think you parroted some widely-understood premises. This is obviously an area where the current leadership of the GOP loses young people including myself.

 

Consent is where the progressives lose a lot of men. If a man or woman get in a car drunk and get pulled over either will be held accountable. Regardless of their feelings the next day, the have to deal with the consequences.

 

If a man and a woman get in a bed drunk, only the man could be held responsible. If the girl sobers up and sees that the guy she f***ed wasn't Prince Charming and has regret all of a sudden she's thinking "was I raped?" where as if a man f***s Rosie O'Donnell when he's drunk he just gets made fun of by his friends.

 

I am not offering this as testimonial evidence but my example: when I was a senior in high school there was this girl who was a junior who everyone considered the best looking girl in their grade. Gorgeous little blonde girl. Her and her boyfriend broke up during the week but they were probably going to get back together in a few days like young people tend to do. She shows up at the party, upset about her ex and hits the water bottle filled with vodka and ends up flirting and hooking up with my bestfriend, a black kid. They made out, and only made out, on a pool table in the middle of the party (classy, I know). When her boyfriend found out and was livid, she cried rape because she was "forced." Word traveled fast and my guy took a lot of s*** for it when he did absolutely nothing wrong.

 

I know it's impossible to have a nuanced conversation about rape allegations without getting called names, but people aren't always honest and presenting yourself as a victim often deludes people from holding you accountable for your actions. To act as if every rape allegation is legitimate is ridiculous.

 

And, of course if your best friend was Zach from Saved by the Bell, nothing would have happened to him, right?

Edited October 11, 2016 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

Some of the wikileaks recent emails showed that that is pretty much exactly what happened. Trump was their dream candidate to run against.

 

It is exactly why they didn't smear him until later on in the campaign. They KNEW they could destroy him, and they wouldn't have to run on any platform at all.

[NorthSideSox72]

you misspelled 'woman'

I am overwhelmed by the staggering profundity of your artfully crafted retort.

 

[lostfan]

It is exactly why they didn't smear him until later on in the campaign. They KNEW they could destroy him, and they wouldn't have to run on any platform at all.

They do have a platform though. She talks about it almost every day.

 

It's just... well, Trump.

[StrangeSox]

It is exactly why they didn't smear him until later on in the campaign. They KNEW they could destroy him, and they wouldn't have to run on any platform at all.

 

They haven't even really opened up until recently. I think their goal was to let him keep shooting himself in the face as much as he wanted and not get in the way, let as much of the GOP tie themselves to him as possible in spite of that, and then open the floodgates.

 

And, from all polling indications, it's working.

[Jenksismyhero]

Ok let's be real on this child tax credit thing. If you're making $3k a year, you can't afford yourself, let alone a child. You're on welfare for everything you need in life including shelter, food and healthcare. $1,000 month isn't a paycheck, but it's also not a disincentive to having another kid you can't afford and shouldn't bring into the world.

 

I question the need for that kind of credit given that all of the care for the child is being paid for anyway, but at the end of the day how many people would take advantage of that credit and it's only $1,000. Pretty much a drop in the bucket.

 

[StrangeSox]

Ok let's be real on this child tax credit thing. If you're making $3k a year, you can't afford yourself, let alone a child. You're on welfare for everything you need in life including shelter, food and healthcare. $1,000 month isn't a paycheck, but it's also not a disincentive to having another kid you can't afford and shouldn't bring into the world.

 

I question the need for that kind of credit given that all of the care for the child is being paid for anyway, but at the end of the day how many people would take advantage of that credit and it's only $1,000. Pretty much a drop in the bucket.

 

Per the article bmags posted, dropping the phase-in point to $0 from $3k would cost 16.5B over 10 years.

[Dick Allen]

Why wouldn't we think he was serious? Who falsely brags about sexual assault? Trump already admitted on Howard Stern that he would barge into the dressing rooms of Miss USA contestants to see them naked. This isn't a guy who gives a s*** about what women want. They're sexual objects.

 

He does whatever he wants and knows he has enough power/money to get away with it.

And in 1997 he was sued by a former business partner for doing exactly what he said he could do to Billy Bush. Whether it actually happened, who knows. The lady has done some things that would break out red flags, like date him later after they both were divorced.

 

 

The comment was awful, and if he was a younger guy, it could have blown over. But a 59 year old? He is what he is.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Jenksismyhero]

Per the article bmags posted, dropping the phase-in point to $0 from $3k would cost 16.5B over 10 years.

 

Oof, then nevermind!

[StrangeSox]

Oof, then nevermind!

 

1.6B a year is a drop in the bucket of the federal budget though

 

that's like one garbage F-35 a year

Edited October 11, 2016 by StrangeSox

[NorthSideSox72]

I do believe that early child education, pre-K, is hugely critical for development.

 

That said, I don't necessarily think the federal government should be the ones to address that. This is one I think the states and localities need to get addressed. It is something that benefits the entire community, and much like public education in general, should be funded by local and state taxes. If you want to keep the existing providers, then use a voucher system for pre-K levels (and only pre-K levels, because that's where the private structure is already the ONLY structure for the most part). But it is important, and I do think it should be an added tax. Then remove the federal credit entirely, and if people want to pay above what the public structure provides in services or voucher amounts, then don't get a tax break on it.

 

I will probably manage to piss of R's and D's at the same time with that one, haha.

 

[caulfield12]

Sure. Trump is awful. He's tacky, he's annoying, he knows nothing about policy, he can't stay on subject or present a full fledged argument. Then you can just hang him out to dry when he says some insensitive stuff about women, Mexicans, Muslims, etc. You're just pulling large chunks of each demographic offended. The only redeeming part of his entire campaign is when he talks about the reality of DC in plain form and speaks about Hillary's sketchy career. Other than that he's just providing us with eye rolls and head shakes.

 

 

Per usual, I have no idea what you're talking about but the young girl probably didn't want to own up to her actions or hurt the guy she cared about.

 

Fine. And I have no idea how you can write so well about baseball for someone in their twenties but be so far off base in how you look at the world in terms of politics, but that's okay.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

I do believe that early child education, pre-K, is hugely critical for development.

 

That said, I don't necessarily think the federal government should be the ones to address that. This is one I think the states and localities need to get addressed. It is something that benefits the entire community, and much like public education in general, should be funded by local and state taxes. If you want to keep the existing providers, then use a voucher system for pre-K levels (and only pre-K levels, because that's where the private structure is already the ONLY structure for the most part). But it is important, and I do think it should be an added tax. Then remove the federal credit entirely, and if people want to pay above what the public structure provides in services or voucher amounts, then don't get a tax break on it.

 

I will probably manage to piss of R's and D's at the same time with that one, haha.

 

Honestly through the exposure I have gotten to differing amounts of early education, the biggest thing that needs to be done is to convince parents stuck in the poverty cycle that the best way for their kids to break out of it starts from Day 1, and not Age 5. I run into so many people who think because they didn't do anything with their lives, that their kids won't either, so their kids never get exposed to things like reading until a much later age than they should. That failure follows them as they trail their contemporaries all of the way through school, and never full recover as a whole. Sure some individuals get saved and recover, but as a group, no.

[StrangeSox]

The Associated Press ✔ @AP

BREAKING: Prosecutors say they will charge Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio with criminal contempt of court over immigration patrols.

11:19 AM - 11 Oct 2016

[StrangeSox]

Honestly through the exposure I have gotten to differing amounts of early education, the biggest thing that needs to be done is to convince parents stuck in the poverty cycle that the best way for their kids to break out of it starts from Day 1, and not Age 5. I run into so many people who think because they didn't do anything with their lives, that their kids won't either, so their kids never get exposed to things like reading until a much later age than they should. That failure follows them as they trail their contemporaries all of the way through school, and never full recover as a whole. Sure some individuals get saved and recover, but as a group, no.

 

That is important, and it seems to be a big part of what ultimately ends up being blamed on the school systems. At its root, a lot of our education problems are really poverty problems.

[illinilaw08]

I do believe that early child education, pre-K, is hugely critical for development.

 

That said, I don't necessarily think the federal government should be the ones to address that. This is one I think the states and localities need to get addressed. It is something that benefits the entire community, and much like public education in general, should be funded by local and state taxes. If you want to keep the existing providers, then use a voucher system for pre-K levels (and only pre-K levels, because that's where the private structure is already the ONLY structure for the most part). But it is important, and I do think it should be an added tax. Then remove the federal credit entirely, and if people want to pay above what the public structure provides in services or voucher amounts, then don't get a tax break on it.

 

I will probably manage to piss of R's and D's at the same time with that one, haha.

 

Part of the issue with funding that locally is that you run into the same disparate levels of funding that already exist in education. Wealthy tax bases will see the benefit. Poor tax bases will not (unless, of course, it's done at the state level, but I'm skeptical the will power exists to get that done at the state level). And those are the groups that need the subsidized pre-k services the most. Thus, I think that is an initiative that needs to be done at the federal level, if it's ever going to get done.

 

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

That is important, and it seems to be a big part of what ultimately ends up being blamed on the school systems. At its root, a lot of our education problems are really poverty problems.

 

Study after study shows that a large part of the finished product is already statistically determined by the time a kid is put into K.

[StrangeSox]

Baseball isn't clouded with subscribing to ideologues and deception so there's less room for bias. Sure you have the extremist stat guys who think you can create a playoff team in an excel sheet on one side and "Let's hire Ron Gardenhire and bunt" on the other but those are the fringes. In politics, most everyone is extreme.

 

I appreciate the complement though.

 

I WILL GO TO WAR WITH YOU OVER THE SUPERIORITY OF fWAR!!!!