Jump to content

  •  
Photo

The VERY CIVIL 2016 Presidential Election Discussion

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
325 replies to this topic

#1 ziggy Posted 10 August 2015 - 05:31 AM

ziggy

    Administrator

  • Administrators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,399 posts
  • Joined 05-January 06

Politics threads always have the potential to get out of hand, but I am sure that we can keep this one civil.

 

What are your thoughts on the current group of candidates that are running for the 2016 presidency?

Are there any that you feel really good about? Are there any that you feel will put the interests of the common man before the interests of their Super-PACS and deep pocketed corporate donors?

 

Or are we the people screwed regardless of who wins the election?

 

What are your thoughts?


  • Back to top

#2 Chef Posted 10 August 2015 - 05:56 AM

Chef

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,650 posts
  • Joined 29-February 08

mine are represented fairly well here.

 

https://market-ticke...www?post=230492

 

My comment: It didn't work, Fox; in fact, it blew up in your face.

What is being misunderstood is that this is not so much about Trump as it is about the Republican party, which has lied repeatedly over the last several decades and, when in power, has failed to deliver on any of its promises despite having the ability to do so.

The mealy-mouthed games have finally awakened the people of this country who understand that there is a Constitution and it has meaning -- the original meaning in the words, not some load of crap after-the-fact that happens to be convenient for you at the time.

The cuckservative games, whether condescending crap that spews repeatedly from John McCain, the crying of Boehner, the outright lies of Ryan and McMorris-Rodgers and more have finally reached the point that the people of this country with a view toward the original intent and wisdom of the founders of this nation, never mind the Republican structure of our government, have simply had enough.

We're not going to vote for another McCain, no matter what name he has.  We're not going to vote for a Bush who takes credit for a Florida "economic miracle" that was in fact all built on housing market leverage, liar loans and illegal mexican labor.  We're not going to vote for those who claim to be opposed to virtually every program President Obama has championed and led yet while holding the power of the purse to stop every last one of them they were instead funded, continued and expanded!  We're not going to vote for a Doctor who refuses to raise and debate the issue of outrageous monopoly interests that drive the price of medical care up by 10x what it should cost, and why the people involved are not under indictment and in prison rather than driving around in a Mercedes.  And we're not interested in the excuses coming from the various orifices of these candidates while they bow before the Koch Brothers and their money, or show up at Redstate when its leader bars Trump from coming after he, and the media, charged him with using words he never spoke, turning a well-justified riposte for an uncivil and intentionally dishonest attack put forward by the big corporate media into words he never uttered.

We, those of mind such as myself and others, simply refuse to play this "but if you don't vote for our jackass, evil though he may be, Hillary will win" game any more.  This garbage was run with McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012, and it's not happening again.  I voted for Cthulu last time for this very reason and vowed to never again lend support or assistance to any such crap by the cuckservative Republicans -- then or in the future.  I meant it.

Yes, this means that if Trump is improperly treated by the Republican Party and/or their media affiliates and as a result he decides to run on a third party or independent ticket, an act he certainly can do and fundhimselfI will vote for him.  If you think I fail to understand the consequence of this you're wrong; my intent is to destroy the Cuckservative party now masquerading as "Republican", and I'm not alone.

Yes, that is a threat Mr. Boehner, Mr. Ryan, Mr. McConnell, Ms. McMorris-Rodgers and all of the rest of you.  It is a lawful and political threat.  It is a gigantic "**** you" middle finger in your direction, exactly as I expressed in plain language to a McMorris-Rodgers staffer after all of you folded in the debt ceiling debacle rather than doing what you were elected to, and promised to, do.

I will accept no more excuses nor will I accept any more lies.  I am done and so are millions of others who identify as Conservative.  You are not conservatives, you are cuckservatives, sellouts, frauds, liars and thieves and you will either reform now and turn back all of what you have done to destroy this republic, federalism and the rights guaranteed to us under the Constitution before you ask for my vote once again or I, and millions of others, will take every legal political action available to us to destroy YOU.

THAT is what this -- and Trump's popularity -- is about.


Holding out hope that Mike sells.

  • Back to top

#3 InProblematique Posted 10 August 2015 - 10:28 AM

InProblematique

    Al's Questionable Shots Gave Me a Hangover

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts
  • Joined 05-June 13
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

I'll be voting for Bernie Sanders. I've been waiting for a candidate like him ever since I became interested in politics. He doesn't take money from Super PACs. He campaigns off of the small donations given to him by the people. Unlike Trump, who himself is a billionaire who may not be bought out, but has certainly done the buying, Sanders truly is running for the people.


Six Words/PP11

Posted Image
  • Back to top

#4 Chef Posted 10 August 2015 - 05:27 PM

Chef

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,650 posts
  • Joined 29-February 08

I'll be voting for Bernie Sanders. I've been waiting for a candidate like him ever since I became interested in politics. He doesn't take money from Super PACs. He campaigns off of the small donations given to him by the people. Unlike Trump, who himself is a billionaire who may not be bought out, but has certainly done the buying, Sanders truly is running for the people.


Just a question not trying sway your opinion, how can someone who is for an open southern border with blanket amnesty be for the "people" of this country who will certainly lose jobs and fight for resources against non-Americans?

Holding out hope that Mike sells.

  • Back to top

#5 dnbman Posted 10 August 2015 - 06:01 PM

dnbman

    Existential Crisis Manager

  • Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,398 posts
  • Joined 25-June 07

*
POPULAR

Just a question not trying sway your opinion, how can someone who is for an open southern border with blanket amnesty be for the "people" of this country who will certainly lose jobs and fight for resources against non-Americans?

 

Sanders? He's not for an open border, as far as I know. Seemed to speak against it on this. I was actually pretty shocked at his response. (I'm still not sure what he means by the open boarder being a right wing idea.) 

 

http://www.vox.com/2...ox-conversation

 

Ezra Klein

You said being a democratic socialist means a more international view. I think if you take global poverty that seriously, it leads you to conclusions that in the US are considered out of political bounds. Things like sharply raising the level of immigration we permit, even up to a level of open borders. About sharply increasing ...

Bernie Sanders

Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers proposal.

Ezra Klein

Really?

Bernie Sanders

Of course. That's a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. ...

Ezra Klein

But it would make ...

Bernie Sanders

Excuse me ...

Ezra Klein

It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn't it?

Bernie Sanders

It would make everybody in America poorer —you're doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don't think there's any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation state or in a country called the United States or UK or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people. What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.

You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you're a white high school graduate, it's 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?

I think from a moral responsibility we've got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don't do that by making people in this country even poorer.


Last Member: Nick Batum Fan Club

Professional Self-Loather

  • Back to top

#6 InProblematique Posted 10 August 2015 - 06:08 PM

InProblematique

    Al's Questionable Shots Gave Me a Hangover

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts
  • Joined 05-June 13
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Just a question not trying sway your opinion, how can someone who is for an open southern border with blanket amnesty be for the "people" of this country who will certainly lose jobs and fight for resources against non-Americans?

... he's not for open borders. He wants to make legal immigration easier.


Six Words/PP11

Posted Image
  • Back to top

#7 dnbman Posted 10 August 2015 - 06:08 PM

dnbman

    Existential Crisis Manager

  • Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,398 posts
  • Joined 25-June 07

Chef, is this a fair statement: your support of Trump is not support for him necessarily as the best candidate, but as vengeance upon the Republican party?


Last Member: Nick Batum Fan Club

Professional Self-Loather

  • Back to top

#8 Chef Posted 10 August 2015 - 06:26 PM

Chef

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,650 posts
  • Joined 29-February 08
I should have clarified that post. I probably wouldn't vote for trump anyway. But at this point I don't think I will vote for any of the other repubs running. Maybe but yes, that is fair. I am done voting for the lesser of two evils. I loathe the Democratic Party and specifically liberals in it, but unlike republicans at least they do what they say they are going to do.Ted Cruz maybe rand Paul.

Holding out hope that Mike sells.

  • Back to top

#9 buckets Posted 10 August 2015 - 06:56 PM

buckets

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,736 posts
  • Joined 27-June 15

I'll be voting for Bernie Sanders. I've been waiting for a candidate like him ever since I became interested in politics. He doesn't take money from Super PACs. He campaigns off of the small donations given to him by the people. Unlike Trump, who himself is a billionaire who may not be bought out, but has certainly done the buying, Sanders truly is running for the people.


+1 on Sanders. He's refreshing esp after watching Walker torch my state for his own personal gain the last 5 years.
#Chodidthemath
  • Back to top

#10 InProblematique Posted 10 August 2015 - 07:08 PM

InProblematique

    Al's Questionable Shots Gave Me a Hangover

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts
  • Joined 05-June 13
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

+1 on Sanders. He's refreshing esp after watching Walker torch my state for his own personal gain the last 5 years.

Yeah, I have a lot of friends and family in Wisconsin (I think I mentioned to you that I'm a Brewers fan back when you joined), so I've been pretty aware of what Walker's done up there. He's completely gutted public education in the state, I'm terrified of what he would do for the country. It's hard to watch.


Six Words/PP11

Posted Image
  • Back to top

#11 buckets Posted 10 August 2015 - 07:25 PM

buckets

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,736 posts
  • Joined 27-June 15

Yeah, I have a lot of friends and family in Wisconsin (I think I mentioned to you that I'm a Brewers fan back when you joined), so I've been pretty aware of what Walker's done up there. He's completely gutted public education in the state, I'm terrified of what he would do for the country. It's hard to watch.


Particularly for WI which was always a divided State but took pride in political discourse and high participation rates. From day 1 Walker used the ALEC/Koch Brothers playbook to enrich his donors and further his own career, even if it was obviously a detriment to the State.

It's been hard to watch and live through. With the completely gerrymandered districts it's not gonna improve for awhile. At least Walker will be done soon - he's literally broke and I think he'll step down next year for some donor payback.
#Chodidthemath
  • Back to top

#12 Swedd523 Posted 10 August 2015 - 07:41 PM

Swedd523

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,691 posts
  • Joined 18-June 09
I'm looking at Ted Cruz right now.

It's baffling watching Trump do so well in popularity polls despite all the non PC shit he says. I mean, it's refreshing to see someone actually say what they mean and not pander to the social movement or donor group du jour, but he doesn't have the political resume to make me confident in his ability to lead.

Then again, that may be a good thing? And I think he'd do well on the economy side of things. I don't really have the time to invest in researching these people nowadays but I'll have to look into him more closely to see his foreign policy platform and, more specifically, his views on the military and defense spending
  • Back to top

#13 ziggy Posted 10 August 2015 - 07:49 PM

ziggy

    Administrator

  • Administrators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,399 posts
  • Joined 05-January 06

I'm looking at Ted Cruz right now.

It's baffling watching Trump do so well in popularity polls despite all the non PC shit he says. I mean, it's refreshing to see someone actually say what they mean and not pander to the social movement or donor group du jour, but he doesn't have the political resume to make me confident in his ability to lead.

Then again, that may be a good thing? And I think he'd do well on the economy side of things. I don't really have the time to invest in researching these people nowadays but I'll have to look into him more closely to see his foreign policy platform and, more specifically, his views on the military and defense spending

 

SWedd,

 

From your perspective, Is our current level of military spending adequate, too high or too low?


  • Back to top

#14 Chef Posted 10 August 2015 - 08:12 PM

Chef

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,650 posts
  • Joined 29-February 08

Sanders? He's not for an open border, as far as I know. Seemed to speak against it on this. I was actually pretty shocked at his response. (I'm still not sure what he means by the open boarder being a right wing idea.) 

 

http://www.vox.com/2...ox-conversation

 

Ezra Klein

You said being a democratic socialist means a more international view. I think if you take global poverty that seriously, it leads you to conclusions that in the US are considered out of political bounds. Things like sharply raising the level of immigration we permit, even up to a level of open borders. About sharply increasing ...

Bernie Sanders

Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers proposal.

Ezra Klein

Really?

Bernie Sanders

Of course. That's a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. ...

Ezra Klein

But it would make ...

Bernie Sanders

Excuse me ...

Ezra Klein

It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn't it?

Bernie Sanders

It would make everybody in America poorer —you're doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don't think there's any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation state or in a country called the United States or UK or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people. What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.

You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you're a white high school graduate, it's 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?

I think from a moral responsibility we've got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don't do that by making people in this country even poorer.

 

i stand corrected. he is for amnesty and an easier immigration path which would largely serve to accomplish the same effect on the "regular folks", but i do like his stance on this country needs to be a defined country. i also couldn't agree with him more on his "free trade" agreement stances.


Holding out hope that Mike sells.

  • Back to top

#15 Swedd523 Posted 10 August 2015 - 10:35 PM

Swedd523

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,691 posts
  • Joined 18-June 09

SWedd,

From your perspective, Is our current level of military spending adequate, too high or too low?

Honestly Ziggy that is something very, very far above my head.

I would say that overall there is a ton of waste spending just like on the typical political level. The military is a bureaucracy just like the state and federal governments. A lot of the money going to wasteful projects and programs could be better spent training soldiers, giving them better equipment, and things of that nature.

It could definitely be streamlined, and I think it'd benefit us to have a slightly smaller, but much more overall trained and equipped force. But that would require career officers to make difficult (for them) decisions That they simply aren't willing to do. Sound familiar?


On the individual level... I know for one thing, I make much less than the hourly minimum wage. Sure, I get healthcare, but I was just in the field for a month straight working 20-22 hour days with no ac or running water and limited food/sleep, missed my one year wedding anniversary while I was gone, and have spent roughly 7 months of the past year away from my wife. Keep in mind I'm only in a training environment.
  • Back to top

#16 InProblematique Posted 11 August 2015 - 12:49 AM

InProblematique

    Al's Questionable Shots Gave Me a Hangover

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts
  • Joined 05-June 13
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Honestly Ziggy that is something very, very far above my head.

I would say that overall there is a ton of waste spending just like on the typical political level. The military is a bureaucracy just like the state and federal governments. A lot of the money going to wasteful projects and programs could be better spent training soldiers, giving them better equipment, and things of that nature.

It could definitely be streamlined, and I think it'd benefit us to have a slightly smaller, but much more overall trained and equipped force. But that would require career officers to make difficult (for them) decisions That they simply aren't willing to do. Sound familiar?


On the individual level... I know for one thing, I make much less than the hourly minimum wage. Sure, I get healthcare, but I was just in the field for a month straight working 20-22 hour days with no ac or running water and limited food/sleep, missed my one year wedding anniversary while I was gone, and have spent roughly 7 months of the past year away from my wife. Keep in mind I'm only in a training environment.

You know, it's funny... you're obviously a conservative dude who's in the military, I'm more or less a liberal hippie. So I'm sure we disagree on pretty much everything that will be discussed in this thread.

 

That said, I remember watching The West Wing for the first time. If you haven't seen it, it's a very left-leaning show (aka I loved it) about a democratic president and the day-to-day goings on of his presidency. One thing that was brought up in an episode was when one of the White House staffers (Donna, the secretary to the Deputy Chief of Staff) was dating one of the Situation Room standing watch officers. She mentioned how she thought it was ridiculous that the government was paying [a very large amount of money here] for ashtrays. I forget how much it was, but it was quite a lot for an ashtray.

 

He explained how, by smashing the ashtray with a hammer, the glass broke into three dull pieces, and how the glass was engineered to only break in that way. That way, if a Navy ship is hit, the loose glass that's broken won't break into shards and ruin someone's life.

 

I also don't have a good answer on military spending, but that's speaking as a civilian. Both of my parents are vets, my brother-in-law is currently in the Navy, and a huge portion of my extended family was in the military. As an outsider who will never join the military, I see shit that I think could EASILY be trimmed, but for every dollar I believe could be cut from something, I'm easily able to apply it to something that would A - improve the safety of those in the military, B - improve their wellbeing as military personnel from a living/well-being standpoint, or C - both of those things.

 

Deciding whether or not our military is overfunded or underfunded is a pretty loaded discussion topic. If I had to give a single answer, I would say the military has enough funding, it's just distributed poorly.


Six Words/PP11

Posted Image
  • Back to top

#17 Swedd523 Posted 11 August 2015 - 06:15 AM

Swedd523

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,691 posts
  • Joined 18-June 09
I think that last sentence is a relatively fair one.

I also think that a lot of the people who complain about our defense budget would change their tune after seeing the affect major cutbacks have on the military's efficacy as a whole. They're already cutting another 40k members as it is.

I'm also not one to subscribe to one political ideology or another. I have my own values and look for a candidate who most closely falls in line with them. Before Obama initially took office I remember saying "he sounds alright, I'll give him a shot". That didn't last long, and unfortunately most candidates you see are so crooked and bought out that it's damn near impossible to find out what their actual platform is
  • Back to top

#18 Adam42R Posted 11 August 2015 - 08:43 AM

Adam42R

    MKG's biggest fan

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,380 posts
  • Joined 22-December 10
My only thoughts are that
A.) I wish we'd stop doing the 22 month run up to elections but I know that horse long ago left the barn
B.) Any bonefide front runner today stands the chance of being the next 2012 Rick Perry or 2008 Hillary Clinton... I.e. stop it with the "we KNOW x will be the emerging candidate stuff"
C.) I really wish we could move off liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican being pejoratives. Right and Left Wing NUTS are just that and I wish we'd properly deride those that emerge as such from our side of the tent. Being one that roots his beliefs in rule of law, or one that is open to new ideas with regard to the intent of law are not inherently bad. The looney toons on both fringes IMO are what hurts a real dialog and when we let them represent the middle, we deserve what we get.
Here comes McRoberts, the throw to Walker, it's in the aaaaaiiiiirrrr, YESSSSS! Bobcats win it! My my my, Kemba Walker. Steve Martin - Toronto 12/18/2013
  • Back to top

#19 buckets Posted 11 August 2015 - 08:56 AM

buckets

    The All-Knowing All-Seeing Beagle

  • Honorary Beagle

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,736 posts
  • Joined 27-June 15
I think we spend too much on the military through engaging without factoring both the direct and indirect economic costs, including the aftermath. The military is a relatively abundant resource for the U.S. so we tend to use it. Essentially, we've spent so much on the hammer that everything starts looking like a nail.

One thing, however, that really pisses me off is how veterans are treated. If our government calculated the true cost - including expedient and appropriate healthcare for vets - maybe politicians would be more prudent about using our military as a political tool. Not to mention more morally defensible.
#Chodidthemath
  • Back to top

#20 TheBeagle Posted 11 August 2015 - 11:12 AM

TheBeagle

    Hoedown Hugo

  • 1000+ posts
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,211 posts
  • Joined 06-June 07
  • LocationCommunity of Arcadia, NC

Chef, is this a fair statement: your support of Trump is not support for him necessarily as the best candidate, but as vengeance upon the Republican party?

That was my reason for the thumbs up.  He's the only Republican I can see voting for because he pisses off the Republican party, or more accurately, the "cuckservatives," as the article calls them.

 

I really prefer Bernie though.


  • Back to top




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users