2nd Democratic Party Debate

[nageov3t]

It's a hard truth to tell Americans that the reason they hate us and come after us is because we occupy their countries just to suck their resources up, if we build more self sustaining forms of energy we produce in our own country we can pack up and leave.

even if we all switch over to driving Tesla's, though, it's not exactly in answer in how we combat ISIS and an unstable Middle East at-large inside of the next President's term in office.

 

[theeedude]

Regardless of who one supports in the primaries, does anyone have any doubt that Hillary, if nominated, will be the best pick in the general election, given the Republican field?

 

[DrPizza]

Why has American society convinced people that our "leaders" have to be swindlers and liars to be qualified?

I honestly had hoped to one day live to see people with science backgrounds start becoming our leaders instead of just a bunch of lawyers.

Instead of having to have advisers on climate change and the internetS I'd love to have leaders who actually understand it themselves.

I have to agree. Perhaps that's part of the reason I don't think Sanders would be effective - one person who seems honest, against 535 Reps and Senators. (Well, not all of them are weasels, but a lot are. In fact, I just got an official government survey from my elected weasel. I'll probably craft a letter and stick that in the postage paid envelope - Based on the questions, either my Congressman is stupid (doubtful) else he's attempting to pander to stupid people.

Was nice to see Sanders call out the big money backers Clinton has, her BS excuse of why she has them was a joke and of course she couldn't bring herself to say how she would deal with the issue of them becoming too big cause as anyone sane knows she doesn't want to lose their funding.

Sanders = The people
Shillary = Big Corps/Big Banks

It's weird that people can't see the big picture. As any sane person should realize, the economy is a hell of a lot better than in 2008. Though, it's mostly unrelated to policies and more related to what's happening globally, gas in many areas is under $2/gallon. Overall, a lot of people are doing better now than they were in 2008. The Democrats, running on a "things have come a long way and are still improving, Republicans are trying to take back all those things" platform have a very good chance of winning.
If you're Wall Street, you're not going to put all your eggs in one basket - a Republican candidate. You're also going to put some of your eggs on the Democrat side, and there, it's between 2 people. Do you think Wall Street would rather that Bernie won?? Of course not. As far as I'm aware, Republicans are getting significantly more money from Wall Street than the Democrats; but of course, money does buy some influence. Hillary's policies will likely be more in favor of Wall Street than Bernie's. But, perhaps not as much in favor as the Republicans, particularly since they want to remove some of the regulations effected over the past 8 years.

 

[cubby1223]

Why has American society convinced people that our "leaders" have to be swindlers and liars to be qualified?

I honestly had hoped to one day live to see people with science backgrounds start becoming our leaders instead of just a bunch of lawyers.

Instead of having to have advisers on climate change and the internetS I'd love to have leaders who actually understand it themselves.

If you knew the level of time and dedication required to become a true expert in even just one field, then multiply that across the wide range of topics in the world, you would quickly realize that this is impossible.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

It's weird that people can't see the big picture. As any sane person should realize, the economy is a hell of a lot better than in 2008. Though, it's mostly unrelated to policies and more related to what's happening globally, gas in many areas is under $2/gallon. Overall, a lot of people are doing better now than they were in 2008. The Democrats, running on a "things have come a long way and are still improving, Republicans are trying to take back all those things" platform have a very good chance of winning.

$2 gallon gas is the reason we are at unemployment levels we are at?

What are you smoking? Can I have some?

If OPEC keeps this up, people are going to be laid off left and right. Plenty of big dogs have already announced house cleaning. Also, through the transition from 2008 -> 2015, our middle class is forever shrunken. Is that your ideal scenario? But yeah, sure, totally brah - gas has been down for < 1 year, and that was totally the reason for the jobs market leading up to it.

Indeed it is weird, some people REALLY CAN'T see the big picture :hmm:

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Regardless of who one supports in the primaries, does anyone have any doubt that Hillary, if nominated, will be the best pick in the general election, given the Republican field?

Absolutely not.

She is a complete pussy that gets whipped every debate where you actually have to do critical thinking. Ideally, Sanders isn't afraid to speak out. He also isn't afraid to reason with the other side.

 

[cubby1223]

Absolutely not.

She is a complete pussy that gets whipped every debate where you actually have to do critical thinking. Ideally, Sanders isn't afraid to speak out. He also isn't afraid to reason with the other side.

Everyone is willing to work/reason with the other side right up until the moment their job position is secured.

If by Sanders "reasoning with the other side" you mean "get the other side to accept my reasonings," I don't think there's going to be much culture change in D.C. with Sanders elected. Do you think he's going to promote and pass legislation that's down the middle?

 

[Jhhnn]

Regardless of who one supports in the primaries, does anyone have any doubt that Hillary, if nominated, will be the best pick in the general election, given the Republican field?

Of course she would be. Sound govt isn't based on rage & resentment which is what the Repub field plays on almost exclusively.

 

[boomerang]

AP FACT CHECK: Clinton on guns; Sanders on wage inequality

 

[boomerang]

Was nice to see Sanders call out the big money backers Clinton has, her BS excuse of why she has them was a joke and of course she couldn't bring herself to say how she would deal with the issue of them becoming too big cause as anyone sane knows she doesn't want to lose their funding.

Sanders = The people
Shillary = Big Corps/Big Banks

Read Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich sometime. It's a pretty quick read although there are a ton of names to keep track of.

Then multiply that level of corruption by all the politician's with enough clout to pull something like that off. The Clinton's I would hope are an extreme example. If not, we're in far deeper shit than any Tom, Dick or Harry could ever imagine.

 

[Jhhnn]

Why has American society convinced people that our "leaders" have to be swindlers and liars to be qualified?

I honestly had hoped to one day live to see people with science backgrounds start becoming our leaders instead of just a bunch of lawyers.

Instead of having to have advisers on climate change and the internetS I'd love to have leaders who actually understand it themselves.

If you knew the level of time and dedication required to become a true expert in even just one field, then multiply that across the wide range of topics in the world, you would quickly realize that this is impossible.

I'd settle for politicians who understand scientific method. We engaged in trickle down Reaganomics & serial deregulation of finance for nearly 30 years culminating in the Ownership Society only to beat down the middle class. That qualifies as a failed experiment other than for the financial elite (Wall St) who have profited enormously at the expense of everybody else.

Repubs hold to the delusion that we can somehow still drink whiskey out of that bottle of wine despite all evidence to the contrary.

It's interesting how righties manage to claim that Hillary is the biggest whore to Wall St after their own hopefuls engage in blatant knob slobbering on national TV.

 

[Jhhnn]

Read Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich sometime. It's a pretty quick read although there are a ton of names to keep track of.

Then multiply that level of corruption by all the politician's with enough clout to pull something like that off. The Clinton's I would hope are an extreme example. If not, we're in far deeper shit than any Tom, Dick or Harry could ever imagine.

You might as well reference the National Inquirer-

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209

Schweizer is a professional right wing propagandist.

 

[bozack]

That's to be expected. Most Americans prefer mindless entertainment (e.g., reality TV, Trump's specialty) to intelligent substance.

The GOP debates have been so popular because they've been a cross between a circus and a cage match. Little substance or policy discussion, lots of bombast and poo flinging, lots of whoppers to draw howls from the fact-checkers. They are entertaining. Last night's Democratic debate had a few entertaining moments, but it was notably more focused on substance. Plus, it was on a Saturday night.

umm, this is quite possibly one of the dumbest thing I have read this week, anyone who thinks that substantive information comes out of any of these debates is pretty silly.

Ultimately it is all about ratings and generating a stir to drum up interest in the candidates/party/election etc.

the Saturday piece is just making excuses as even the media doesn't seem to care much about the debate.

 

[Virge_]

They really need to just get rid of the audiences. CBS threw in tons of fake applause for scumbag Clinton, like this moment she says some stupid shit and they play tons of canned clapping just to have it pan out and show one helmet-wearing mouth-breather clapping furiously and the rest of the crowd deadpan wondering how this woman can put on clothes in the morning. What utter horseshit theater.

https://youtu.be/wb4VqoJlLM4?t=1h2m35s

Edited because Bowfinger needed some substance to argue against a typo on CNBC/CBS to attempt to defer what I'm saying. Typical Clintard.

 

[Bowfinger]

umm, this is quite possibly one of the dumbest thing I have read this week, anyone who thinks that substantive information comes out of any of these debates is pretty silly.

Ultimately it is all about ratings and generating a stir to drum up interest in the candidates/party/election etc.

the Saturday piece is just making excuses as even the media doesn't seem to care much about the debate.

Had you actually watched last night's debate, you would know it was, indeed, more focused on substance than the GOP spectacles. We understand this doesn't fit your agenda of knee-jerk attacks on anything with a (D). It is, nonetheless, accurate.

 

[ivwshane]

umm, this is quite possibly one of the dumbest thing I have read this week, anyone who thinks that substantive information comes out of any of these debates is pretty silly.

Ultimately it is all about ratings and generating a stir to drum up interest in the candidates/party/election etc.

the Saturday piece is just making excuses as even the media doesn't seem to care much about the debate.

That's just you projecting. Some of us, like myself actually watch the debate for substance. I couldn't give a shit about how many viewers a debate got nor do I give a shit about what moment got the biggest applause line (the end of the debate was stupid).

In my opinion there shouldn't even be an audience at the debates, it leads to too much pandering.

 

[Bowfinger]

They really need to just get rid of the audiences. CNBC threw in tons of fake applause for scumbag Clinton, like this moment she says some stupid shit and they play tons of canned clapping just to have it pan out and show one helmet-wearing mouth-breather clapping furiously and the rest of the crowd deadpan wondering how this woman can put on clothes in the morning. What utter horseshit theater.

https://youtu.be/wb4VqoJlLM4?t=1h2m35s

None of what you just typed has any connection with reality. And by the way, your link was to last night's debate, hosted by CBS. The CNBC debate was two GOP debates ago. Perhaps that's why you're so befuddled.

 

[Virge_]

None of what you just typed has any connection with reality. And by the way, your link was to last night's debate, hosted by CBS. The CNBC debate was two GOP debates ago. Perhaps that's why you're so befuddled.

So.. how do you explain when they panned out and showed one guy clapping while the studio filled the airwaves with fake applause?

Jesus Christ, are you blind AND stupid?

 

[Bowfinger]

So.. how do you explain when they panned out and showed one guy clapping while the studio filled the airwaves with fake applause?

Jesus Christ, are you blind AND stupid?

No. You're imagining things, seeing what you want to see. CBS cuts to the (dark) view of the audience just as the applause is ending. You can see many people applauding in the first second after the cut., none a couple of seconds later. And by the way, your link was to last night's debate, hosted by CBS. The CNBC debate was two GOP debates ago. Perhaps that's why you're so befuddled.

 

[Virge_]

No. You're imagining things, seeing what you want to see. CBS cuts to the (dark) view of the audience just as the applause is ending. You can see many people applauding in the first second after the cut., none a couple of seconds later. And by the way, your link was to last night's debate, hosted by CBS. The CNBC debate was two GOP debates ago. Perhaps that's why you're so befuddled.

Yes, yes, congratulations, you've repeatedly pointed out I typo'd CNBC as CBS, congratulations on your excellent ability to use something as silly as a typo for your primary argument. All you've done is illustrate how you are an arrogant jackass, which was already rather evident far before this point - but thanks for letting me know so I could edit the previous post. It's pretty easy for me to mix up any of the major networks since I don't watch TV, but hey, if you want to feel superior for it then by all means keep on prodding it and I'll keep laughing at you!

You know what? I hope Clinton does win, that way you and all the rest of the Clintards get what they deserve - it won't matter to me either way.

 

[Jhhnn]

So.. how do you explain when they panned out and showed one guy clapping while the studio filled the airwaves with fake applause?

Jesus Christ, are you blind AND stupid?

Amusing coming from an Arkancide believer. All conspiracy all the time, right?

More tinfoil in the hat will fix that, you know.

 

[Bowfinger]

Yes, yes, congratulations, you've repeatedly pointed out I typo'd CNBC as CBS, congratulations on your excellent ability to use something as silly as a typo for your primary argument. All you've done is illustrate how you are an arrogant jackass, which was already rather evident far before this point - but thanks for letting me know so I could edit the previous post. It's pretty easy for me to mix up any of the major networks since I don't watch TV, but hey, if you want to feel superior for it then by all means keep on prodding it and I'll keep laughing at you!

You know what? I hope Clinton does win, that way you and all the rest of the Clintards get what they deserve - it won't matter to me either way.

No, sweetie, my primary argument was that you're imagining things ... or outright lying, I suppose. We can clearly see many people applauding in the first second after the cut. The sound of the applause drops as people stop clapping. Your claims of adding an applause track are conspiracy nonsense.

The CNBC part was just prodding you to correct your other error.

 

[bozack]

Had you actually watched last night's debate, you would know it was, indeed, more focused on substance than the GOP spectacles. We understand this doesn't fit your agenda of knee-jerk attacks on anything with a (D). It is, nonetheless, accurate.

That's just you projecting. Some of us, like myself actually watch the debate for substance. I couldn't give a shit about how many viewers a debate got nor do I give a shit about what moment got the biggest applause line (the end of the debate was stupid).

In my opinion there shouldn't even be an audience at the debates, it leads to too much pandering.

My point to you both is that only idiots watch the debates in the hopes to see anything of any substance when it comes to policy position revelations, if anything they are more a barometer of how the candidates conduct themselves while under stressful situations and how they carry themselves in front of a national audience, most replies are silly soundbite worthy material in the hopes they get quoted by the media after the fact.

Looks like Klinton was the winner of this one though...stick a fork in Sanderclaus... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ights-democratic-debate/ar-BBn106p?li=BBgzzfc

 

[Virge_]

Looks like Klinton was the winner of this one though...stick a fork in Sanderclaus... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ights-democratic-debate/ar-BBn106p?li=BBgzzfc

Yes, because we should all just listen to the establishment-funded media when they prop up their future job security. Sheep, the lot of you. 🙄

 

[Indus]

My point to you both is that only idiots watch the debates in the hopes to see anything of any substance when it comes to policy position revelations, if anything they are more a barometer of how the candidates conduct themselves while under stressful situations and how they carry themselves in front of a national audience, most replies are silly soundbite worthy material in the hopes they get quoted by the media after the fact.

I was a Republican who voted for Bush the 1st time around.. I was disgusted with the party at how it handled things at home and abroad and how the President was too busy bbq'ing in crawford texas to read a report on terrorists by Condi Rice.

That said I voted for Hill in the Primary and was never fully sold on Obama till the 2nd national debate vs McCain on how they answered the question Bin Laden and Pakistan. That one answer caused me to vote for him.

And I'm glad I did.