No thread on the democratic debate?

[HomerJS]

So obamacare is fully funded without us chipping in more to health ins companies? GTFOOH. My wealth has eroded paying for your healthcare. And now your next candidate wants me to pay for your college education too? Get a job and then we'll talk, millennial.

Middle class wealth has not been eroded by the ACA. MCW have been eroding since 1979-80 when the wage gap became exacerbated.

 

[Perknose]

I would have but I've been working this whole weekend. Someone post some highlights.

This post from Subyman isn't a highlight, but is a decent, imho, summary:

I watched it last night. I thought it was a good debate and a breath of fresh air. They actually talked about issues instead of raging out. You can tell both actually know the ins and outs of the various bills and issues that they were asked about. Specific details. Sanders more so than Hillary in many cases.

I didn't watch the entire debate, but one highlight for me was when one of the moderators asked each candidate what personal blind spot they might have about racism/being black. To my mind, neither answered the question head on, but rather responded with their history of actively confronting racism politically.

I think the reason for this is a) at the end of the day, both are politicians and b) any more frank response would provide an oppo research sound bite that would be taken out of context and used in an attack ad during the general election. Just so you know, I think PACs on both sides have and will employ this tactic.

 

[Perknose]

Why, its just going to be softball questions to make sure Hillary looks good.

Not what happened at all towards either candidate, during the parts I watched.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

College and health care is free in every other modern nation. Sounds like you are just selfish. Free healthcare and college for poor people benefits you.

Less morons will inhabit your country, and healthcare should be a right, in a country this rich like it is in others. You are simply voting to not pay your fair share. That is your reason in every post.

In ww2 the tax rate was 90% for a short time for anyone making over 250K a year.

Defunding the government is the primary republican strategy, because that way it removes safety nets and reduces the ability of the government to protect its citizens. Republicans want this because taking advantage of the less fortunate is their goal.

It has worked because people dont like the idea of giving up money. But in exchange for living in a modern democracy that has allowed you to become wealthy, you pay back some of the wealth to allow the government to govern.

The GOP is a pox on our nation. They stand for greed and racism, authoritarianism, bigotry and hate. But mostly greed.

They trick the stupidest among us to vote against our own interests and then blame the other party.

But this is getting harder and harder to do in modern times. The GOP is just about over. By 2020 most likely they will no longer have the population to ever win a general election ever again, and they only win local elections due to gerrymandering which we will fix when the supreme court is 6-3 liberal within the next 8 years.

The republican party is going to deny trump the nomination, already cruz is closing in with delegates and rubio and kasich's delegates will go to cruz. Trump has already lost but his supporters dont realize it yet. Cuz well...they are either stupid or selfish and unwilling to admit they are wrong until forced by reality, at which point the blame game begins.

Modern conservatism has ended.

1) College is already free for many students, provided they have financial need and/or excellent grades worthy of support

2) We have more graduates than many of the European countries like Germany that are so often praised for their free education; if you want to just pay for everyone's tuition while keeping our system as it is, it's going to cost a crapload more than what it costs in Germany

3) That $250,000 in the 40s/50s would be the equivalent of about $2 million today; not denying that taxes were higher then, but it still wasn't as high as you seem to think it was

4) We now exist in an international economy instead of one where the entire, war-devastated world was buying or loaning things from us; do you think businesses would hesitate to move to China or elsewhere if you try taxing them at WW2 levels?

 

[Jhhnn]

4) We now exist in an international economy instead of one where the entire, war-devastated world was buying or loaning things from us; do you think businesses would hesitate to move to China or elsewhere if you try taxing them at WW2 levels?

Ah, yes, the old Europe in rubble canard-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/the-europe-in-rubble-excuse/?_r=0

Business doesn't move to China. They rather perform a straddle where they get the labor & environmental advantages of China with the US legal system & military protecting their interests.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Ah, yes, the old Europe in rubble canard-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/the-europe-in-rubble-excuse/?_r=0

Business doesn't move to China. They rather perform a straddle where they get the labor & environmental advantages of China with the US legal system & military protecting their interests.

Nice, a graph. Now tell me, what percentage of the world's economy did America comprise in the 40s and 50s? Just because a greater portion of our economy involved intranational trade back then doesn't mean that our level of exports relative to the world has increased since then.

Whether a business moves wholesale or only its labor/manufacturing seems like a moot point. "Hey buddy, we're shipping your job and a thousand others to Mexico, but don't worry, we're still paying American corporate taxes!"

EDIT: Here's another graph for you to get an idea

 

[x26]

Why, its just going to be softball questions to make sure Hillary looks good.

Just a Competition for: : Who is gonna give away the most Stuff to the FSA.

And who the Biggest Victims are: Women, Blacks or Midgets.

 

[realibrad]

Ah, yes, the old Europe in rubble canard-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/the-europe-in-rubble-excuse/?_r=0

Business doesn't move to China. They rather perform a straddle where they get the labor & environmental advantages of China with the US legal system & military protecting their interests.

Not sure what is going on with Paul K. but he has been doing off the deep end for a while now.

So, the graph you used is trade vs gdp. That would mean that its just a ratio. If the gdp of the us were to surge, the ratio could be flat and never reflect a growth in gdp. It does nothing to explain why he is right, but its a graph with pretty lines so...

He also has amazingly stupid logic about the industry being ruined, and those also being the US customers. Their industry was destroyed but they still had capital to buy things. With money to buy, but no means to make, they import.

Its a fact that 2 world wars had held back most of Europe. Even still, up until the middle and end of WWII, Germany was the industrial powerhouse. Post WWII, it was not. Europe had lost millions of lives, and its industrial centers were attacking during the war.

It still amazes me that people somehow think that you could destroy all of that, and it meant little to nothing.

 

[SP33Demon]

This post from Subyman isn't a highlight, but is a decent, imho, summary:



I didn't watch the entire debate, but one highlight for me was when one of the moderators asked each candidate what personal blind spot they might have about racism/being black. To my mind, neither answered the question head on, but rather responded with their history of actively confronting racism politically.

I think the reason for this is a) at the end of the day, both are politicians and b) any more frank response would provide an oppo research sound bite that would be taken out of context and used in an attack ad during the general election. Just so you know, I think PACs on both sides have and will employ this tactic.

Wrong, being black wasn't even part of the question. They only gave black examples because that is who the majority of the audience were. Who are the real racists again? Remind me. Last I checked black people weren't the only race in this country. :biggrin:

 

[SP33Demon]

Here is an example of how republicans lie and mislead because the truth doesnt fit them, the policy of defunding the government has succeeded to the detriment of all but the wealthiest Americans.

Conservatism in general fails everywhere, cutting taxes for the richest has led to economic collapse. The most prosperous times in US history were always under democrat presidents due to tax raises allowing the government to operate properly.

But as usual reality does not affect the republican mindset. What they have decided to think is the only thing that matters regardless of truth.

An argument that concentrating all wealth at the top and leaving the rest to die makes for a prosperous country is obviously wrong since there are numerous examples to the contrary.

The reason it works so easily in those other countries is because most of the citizens are the same race. They want to help their fellow man. In this country, you can just think that whoever needs help isnt like you and so fuck them.

If there are a bunch of rich people and then just poor people you get a shithole country with a few rich people who eventually leave. like mexico and india etc. (no offence to those countries lol) If you think its ok to dumb down the populace then let the rich take all the money and leave, AS IS HAPPENING, then you are a traitor to America helping its destruction.

The reality is that conservatives hate democracy and want monarchy/oligarchy. They do everything in their power to achieve this.
Such as defunding the government so the rich rule.

Let me ask you a question: Have you ever started a business? No? Then why are you complaining about the rich getting richer? Go grab a piece of the pie and stop whining about it. Not everyone is a blob who wants to be a lazy fuck every day and watch TV on the couch. The leaders are taking risks and many of you and your Dem friends know nothing about risk because... reasons.

 

[Perknose]

Wrong, being black wasn't even part of the question.

It was exactly the question. When you pointedly ask two white candidates debating in Flint, MI what racial blind spots they might have, what is it about the core of that question that you don't get?

 

[chucky2]

It was exactly the question. When you pointedly ask two white candidates debating in Flint, MI what racial blind spots they might have, what is it about the core of that question that you don't get?

Why the question in the first place?

 

[Perknose]

Why the question in the first place?

I believe it was to show that even these two candidates, both of whom had actively and demonstrably worked for racial equality in their lives, could have or have had racial insensitivities or blind spots, which would speak to and underscore the deep divide on the experience of race relations in America between those who grew up white and those who grew up black . . . let alone those many, many, many on the right who trumpeted that since we'd elected a half black as president, that n*gger now being Prez showed -- presto chango -- that we now lived in a post-racial society and don't understand that the phrase "black lives matter" does not mean that white lives don't matter, but that the long, ugly, determined and deleterious effects of structural racism in America still need to be addressed.

 

[chucky2]

I believe it was to show that even these two candidates, both of whom had actively and demonstrably worked for racial equality in their lives, could have or have had racial insensitivities or blind spots, which would speak to and underscore the deep divide on the experience of race relations in America between those who grew up white and those who grew up black . . . let alone those many, many, many on the right who trumpeted that since we'd elected a half black as president, that n*gger now being Prez showed -- presto chango -- that we now lived in a post-racial society and don't understand that the phrase "black lives matter" does not mean that white lives don't matter, but that the long, ugly, determined and deleterious effects of structural racism in America still need to be addressed.

I just took it as a question thrown out there so they could both pontificate why they need the Black vote, but I know the Dems would never stoop so low as to do that...

I mean, if these two really cared about Blacks, why would they be so in support of the illegal invasion? How are they helping Blacks by flooding the working person market with cheap and eager labor? It would actually be a really interesting question to them, don't you think: Can either of you explain why you're allowing tens of Millions of illegal invaders to directly compete with us for working class jobs? Why you're further going to screw our children by having even more competition in the job market from the initial illegal invaders plus their now legal/DREAM kids?

It's funny you never hear that asked isn't it?

 

[Perknose]

I just took it as a question thrown out there so they could both pontificate why they need the Black vote, but I know the Dems would never stoop so low as to do that...

I mean, if these two really cared about Blacks, why would they be so in support of the illegal invasion? How are they helping Blacks by flooding the working person market with cheap and eager labor? It would actually be a really interesting question to them, don't you think: Can either of you explain why you're allowing tens of Millions of illegal invaders to directly compete with us for working class jobs? Why you're further going to screw our children by having even more competition in the job market from the initial illegal invaders plus their now legal/DREAM kids?

It's funny you never hear that asked isn't it?

The fight for racial justice in America is not a zero-sum game.

 

[chucky2]

The fight for racial justice in America is not a zero-sum game.

Well, for Blacks depending on Dems to have their back, it's a negative sum game for the general Black populace, and for Black Leadership, well, they get a little fluff behind the scenes in the 'How much will I get if I endorse/promote you?' game.

I live in a majority black area, and it's certainly not rich (I'd say it's low income to at best ((in much less %'s)) low-mid income). Do you know how many roof crews, painting crews, framing crews, drywall crews, etc. I see that are all/mostly/half mix of Blacks? Hardly any. They're all Latino. Yet we're paying out social service bennies like crazy. The Dems are no friend of Blacks, regardless of what rosy picture they want to paint on how Oh wow, gee, I'm so for your rights! Look at me having a fun night and doing an exciting sit in! Oh I look so young in that picture!

Give me a break...

 

[SP33Demon]

It was exactly the question. When you pointedly ask two white candidates debating in Flint, MI what racial blind spots they might have, what is it about the core of that question that you don't get?

Wrong, they asked for racial blindspots. The two candidates couldve mentioned any race but they chose blacks because of the audience. Only the Dems ask candidates how they consider themselves racist because they're white. #Whiteguiltisplayedout

Last, why didn't they ask hillary about the super predators statement that she wish she never said? Sanders is a pussy and didn't hit her with that. Low blow? Yes, but extremely effective and insightful into just how prejudiced Clinton was in the 90's against blacks.

 

[ivwshane]

I just took it as a question thrown out there so they could both pontificate why they need the Black vote, but I know the Dems would never stoop so low as to do that...

I mean, if these two really cared about Blacks, why would they be so in support of the illegal invasion? How are they helping Blacks by flooding the working person market with cheap and eager labor? It would actually be a really interesting question to them, don't you think: Can either of you explain why you're allowing tens of Millions of illegal invaders to directly compete with us for working class jobs? Why you're further going to screw our children by having even more competition in the job market from the initial illegal invaders plus their now legal/DREAM kids?

It's funny you never hear that asked isn't it?

You do realize that illegals that are here and already working, that if they were allowed to be legal it would instantly raise wages and some of these business owners just might prefer a poor black person (why you think only black people are poor or why you think they would disproportionately be affected is beyond me) to do the job instead of a poor English speaking former illegal.

But hey, go on and tell us how dems don't care about black people, as if there is a better alternative.

Yeah, so give me a break!

 

[ivwshane]

Wrong, they asked for racial blindspots. The two candidates couldve mentioned any race but they chose blacks because of the audience. Only the Dems ask candidates how they consider themselves racist because they're white. #Whiteguiltisplayedout

Last, why didn't they ask hillary about the super predators statement that she wish she never said? Sanders is a pussy and didn't hit her with that. Low blow? Yes, but extremely effective and insightful into just how prejudiced Clinton was in the 90's against blacks.

They did you God damn ignorant fuck!

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/...flint-hillary-clinton-super-predators-sot.cnn

 

[Perknose]

Last, why didn't they ask hillary about the super predators statement that she wish she never said?

Uh, they did, and rather pointedly, too. Try to keep up, k?

 

[chucky2]

You do realize that illegals that are here and already working, that if they were allowed to be legal it would instantly raise wages and some of these business owners just might prefer a poor black person (why you think only black people are poor or why you think they would disproportionately be affected is beyond me) to do the job instead of a poor English speaking former illegal.

First, I don't think only black people are poor (there are a f*ckton of poor whites as well), but in my area, Blacks are very much affected. Nationally, Blacks are worse off than Whites. The question to the candidates in that setting wasn't about any poor people, it was about Blacks.

Second, No. Business owners aren't going to magically start hiring Blacks when they've been employing Latinos if all the illegals are made legal. Why? Because by far and large, Latinos are bust @ss workers. You seriously think a roofing company is going to get rid of their now legal bust @ss Latino workers and hire the multigenerational welfare Black? I don't know what kind of sh1t you're using, but, take a break from it, it cannot be good for you. Blacks have built themselves a horrible reputation the past 30 years, Latinos (other than their illegal invasion) have built the exact opposite.

But hey, go on and tell us how dems don't care about black people, as if there is a better alternative.

By far and large, they don't. For the past how many decades have they been not going nuclear against the illegal invasion, which is directly F'ing over no/lower income US citizens and then their children? A better alternative? Rather than voting for the same group that's been stabbing you in your back your entire lives, stop. Go nuclear on them with your vote until they prove they'll do something positive (for no/low income US citizens that is) about the problem. You act like the Dems couldn't have got the border invasion stopped over decades...come now, you can't believe this, right?

Yeah, so give me a break!

We're back to giving me a break...

 

[SP33Demon]

Uh, they did, and rather pointedly, too. Try to keep up, k?

I didn't watch the debate. /meme "Ain't got no time for that".

 

[Jhhnn]

Not sure what is going on with Paul K. but he has been doing off the deep end for a while now.

So, the graph you used is trade vs gdp. That would mean that its just a ratio. If the gdp of the us were to surge, the ratio could be flat and never reflect a growth in gdp. It does nothing to explain why he is right, but its a graph with pretty lines so...

He also has amazingly stupid logic about the industry being ruined, and those also being the US customers. Their industry was destroyed but they still had capital to buy things. With money to buy, but no means to make, they import.

Its a fact that 2 world wars had held back most of Europe. Even still, up until the middle and end of WWII, Germany was the industrial powerhouse. Post WWII, it was not. Europe had lost millions of lives, and its industrial centers were attacking during the war.

It still amazes me that people somehow think that you could destroy all of that, and it meant little to nothing.

Both imports & exports are graphed the same. If we had been exporting more than we imported it would show, but it doesn't. If the original contention were true the graph would be different.

Capische?

 

[Sonikku]

I watched the CNN 3 min version. Bernie said he's a one issue candidate, restoring the Middle Class. Hillary says he's a one trick pony and voted to shut down the car industry. Bernie will probably win because you have to be able to think to see the real issues.

The thing is he supported bailing out of the auto industry but voted against the bill when it was bundled with bailing out wallstreet. Hillary is doing what the Republicans do. Bundle something like helping out vets with a wish list of goodies the establishment wants then when the prez vetoes it because of the goodies the headline is "Prez votes down bill that would have helped Vets" or something similarly retarded.

 

[Jhhnn]

The thing is he supported bailing out of the auto industry but voted against the bill when it was bundled with bailing out wallstreet. Hillary is doing what the Republicans do. Bundle something like helping out vets with a wish list of goodies the establishment wants then when the prez vetoes it because of the goodies the headline is "Prez votes down bill that would have helped Vets" or something similarly retarded.

As if both bailouts weren't absolutely necessary.