Amazing. He gave a passing grade to the person leading in the polls, a B to the person second in the polls and everyone else who doesn't have a chance failed. That's some in depth reporting there Mr Halperin. the most telling comment of the night, to me, came from Lincoln Chafee who said, "I didn't leave the Republican party, they left me". IMO, if he is now running as a Democrat, that says to me the Democrats, as a party, have traveled far enough right to now be where moderate Republicans used to be and IMO, no one represents that shift better than Hillary Clinton. Whereas Hillary had plenty of cool and calmness to defend her flip flops, Bernie point out quite inconveniently that for decades, he has been where she now claims to be. Despite the fact that many Democrats would likely agree with Bernie on positions, he will lose because he didn't vote yes on the Brady Bill, and because he won't say he is a Wall Street, fixed game, capitalist like Hillary is. If this is the litmus test for Democrats, I hope they just shut up when she grants another tax break for the rich, signs another bad trade deal and allows the leverage of shadow banking to keep on rolling til the next blow up. Not that I feel very strongly about it.
Your points are well taken. I thought the most interesting thing about the parts I watched was the lack of name calling and grand standing by the candidates. It is a lot more entertaining when you have a Trump on board. On the other hand I felt that the Democrats actually discussed some of the real issues, which was refreshing (except for illegal aliens of course).
They observed Reagan's 11th commandment, which is, speak no ill of party candidates. But, it sorta doesn't matter and this is what depresses me. The rise of Trump and Carson, IMO, springs from a dissatisfaction that has some basis in reality, but proportionally is at a level of bloodthirst. Like that idiot who stood up at the Trump rally calling Obama a Muslim who believes there are secret re-education camps. These people are so pissed off but to me, they seem to be hyperventilating about issues that really have no bearing on their everyday life. Put another way, if a senior is worried about losing SS benefits, that has direct bearing on their life. If a shift worker is worried about another trade deal that sends their job away, that has bearing on their life. Obsessing about Obama being only half black and likely a Muslim is just pure crazy shit. Trump and Carson do not have to talk any policy, Fiorina can continue her false claim that a PP video showed a partial birth abortion when it didn't. That people will lap that stuff up and just show up to scream scares me a lot.last point, Mathews talked to Wayne Newton of all people who said, "The Democrats tonight showed that they are more concerned about their party than they are one individual. The Republicans don't get that message"
Despite the voters expressing disgust with politicians and Washington in general, the viewer ratings have broken all previous records. Why is that? In the case of the Republicans, I believe that Donald Trump has turned the debates into reality show episodes.
I keep thinking a step deeper than that though, why is it that the Republican electorate wants a reality show star as their top candidate rather than someone who could be a genuine leader.
I have a guy at work who predicts it will be Trump against Sanders. This Max goes right to your Wayne Newton message, The pubs don't really seem to know how the system works. It is not a popularity contest or the flavor of the week. you look for the candidate with the best ideas to solve the problems you personally have. And you look for consistency of the message. That is where Obama really shined. If you go back and listen to his speeches in 2008 you won't find one word out of place over the whole campaign. he found a message that resonated with people, (I might add one based on reality) and he pounded pounded pounded. Not even the Clintons could overcome that. Hilary seems to have learned her lesson and can now stay on message once this witch hunt ends in a few days.
If people can set aside the socialist term (which is kind of moot because they won't) the reality is that Bernie has been a true democrat for the entirety of his time in Washington. Whereas Hillary has to explain her flip flops, Bernie can let his votes speak for themselves. As the Boomers retire, both Republican and Democrat, they are going to demand massive programs to cater to them, AKA socialism, and they are going to get them. Bernie, IMO, was just about the most honest person on that stage.
Stalin was an honest Marxist also.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Then again, its not really about who won the debate... Hillary won the debate... and she will win the next 5 debates because the DNC is doing to democrats exactly what the Republican party does to its base. The DNC will pick your candidate, not you and because the DNC's hierarchy is women... your candidate will be a woman. It doesn't matter what she has or hasn't done... it doesn't matter what she does or doesn't stand for...We argue about who we are going to vote for and the only real question is... are you voting for the one already chosen for you....
Lotta truth there TS. This is not really a detraction, but an acknowledgement that the media is going to cover whoever generates buzz, which is also a bullshit premise. Maybe they are doing it at the behest of the DNC, but I tend to think there are a lot of reporters out there and they all need to generate hits. Essentially, we are letting the free market decide. IE those with a lot of money or those who can generate money for a network, will get coverage a plenty.
Addendum, it's interesting that in Trump, we have a guy who has always been a social liberal who is promising he will raise taxes on himself and in Clinton, we have the wife of a POTUS who was arguably a moderate Republican while in office. These are not two people, IMO, who really represent what each party is allegedly about. I don't think the RNC is enjoying that their party has a candidate who does not have to consider them.
That's true... and I think that the media, at least the big players, are fairly will lined up behind the parties. Last cycle, before the republican nominee had been selected the RNC decided to throw their weight and funding behind Romney... the party nod carries a lot of weight. We just saw the other day some rather shoddy setup work with a Jeb worker and CNN... it didn't go well but it sure showed the emperors wardrobe...
Mr Sanders does seem to be a principled individual but I think that he is somewhat confused by his beliefs and intentions. Bernie has advocated for free college. He says that he will fund it though a tax on ‘Wall Street speculation’. He has made previous statements about the scourge of this speculation by saying that it was economically destructive. As a principled individual, I would assume that the main purpose of his tax would be to punish something he thinks to be harmful to the American economy and make the practice no longer profitable. If of course he is successful, funds obtained from the tax will dry up and so will the funds for ‘free’ college.
Yeah, but again TS, and I'm not saying this angrily, but you are talking about textbook logic there. It makes total sense, but likely will never work that way in the real world. I don't think college, at the university level, should automatically be free for everyone. I would much rather see individuals work their way through Jr. colleges with decent grades to get free tuition. I think it should also be on a sliding scale relative to performance. Admittedly, this would punish those who generally do well, but are not at the very top, but that's a reality of capitalist based society. I don't know yet that Bernie has really fleshed this out entirely, and it would still have to get through a congress who, because of lobbyists, will have a vested interest in maintaining the franchise of scum bag student loans with ridiculously high interest rates. I think there is plenty we can do to restructure our upper education system. If Bernie's plan ended the kind of speculation that drove us into collapse, I'd be okay with paying more taxes to see others get educated.
All of your studies have left you in a bitter state towards textbooks lately... Anything is possible when most of your support comes from people looking for free and besides... who would have ever thought 'Hope' would have meant open borders... who would have ever thought 'Change' would have meant a middle east in flames... especially at the direction of a Noble Peace Prize Winner.All bets are off since Bush.
Here is one thing we can do to 'restructure' the upper education system... as tweeted by Bernie:"It makes no sense that students and their parents pay higher interest rates for college than they pay for car loans or housing mortgages."Has the boy never heard of the inherent risk differences between a secure and a non secured loan?... try to repossess a liberal arts degree..
"All of your studies have left you in a bitter state towards textbooks lately"I have to admit there is truth to that. What has always frustrated me beyond belief about school is the intoxication by those in the ivory to teach and grade you on information that simply does not hold up in the real world. Respectfully, your hope and change comment is just stupid. It's Fn old, it was never funny to begin with, and it resonates only with the goober's of the world. The middle east is in flames because of Obama? C'mon, that's just plain ignorant. this, like the academic stuff that is annoying me now, is a lot of hot air that does not remotely address the real world problem. The US, the Brits and several other nations have been heavy handedly inserting themselves there for decades. Our blunder in Iraq, which was supported by multiple Democrats, has exponentially made the matter worse. An adult, would accept some of what was discussed on the other thread with McNamara's lessons, one of which stipulated that sometimes you just have to live with an untidy situation. We refuse to do this for some reason and even Rand Paul one famously pointed out that is seems we kind of arm both sides over there. Your point about non secured loans: once again, on paper this makes sense. In the real world, people who have a home or car repossessed are probably the type who has not taken care of the payments or the asset in question, so the bank gets to repossess a beat up asset. Also, while on paper it is totally true that you cannot repossess a liberal arts degree, you also cannot discharge student debt as a result of reform of our bankruptcy laws. For what it's worth, I thought it was kind of ridiculous to give Obama a peace prize.
Not every debt goes to bankruptcy... some companies just spend a fortune hiring debt collection people and they spend and spend trying to collect... again, you can’t repossess something you can’t wrap your mitts around and that risk alone raises the interest rates. A person many never get a job after walking away from the debt but that doesn’t mean the lender isn’t out of pocket at the end of the day.A goober... ain’t heard that in a while... OK... sometimes I might be... But HOPE AND CHANGE.. and black, got him elected.I will give you that we have had a long history in the region but you gotta admit that this president’s foreign policy causes one to raise their eyebrow.Russia will go in and kill people and get the job done... collateral damage is not an issue. On a human rights level one has to think about it but it has become our biggest achilles heel. Perhaps we should use collateral damage as the counter balance to involving ourselves in the first place and that should require the vote of congress.... The war powers act needs a revisit.The Nobel committee has stated its regrets and Alfred ... he is shuttering. Of course rumor is that they might double down and give one to Kerry for the Iran deal... their credibility will be shot when that one comes apart...
Short guy hires four midgets to walk into a pickup bar with him,,,,,
"But HOPE AND CHANGE.. and black, got him elected."And respectfully, that is another stupid statement that is nothing but hot air. "I will give you that we have had a long history in the region but you gotta admit that this president’s foreign policy causes one to raise their eyebrow."True, because raising an eyebrow while never offering an alternative is what conservatives do best. George Bush set a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, and Obama honored it. When we send troops, we win select battles and are left with the same Fn problem every time, which is that we win things for our benefit and expect that others will fight and die for our benefit. I'm trying to be serious here TS, this is essentially what the US and the Brits have been doing in the ME for what, a good 80 years or so? We are talking about little factions there who have been fighting each other forever. I have listened to this "Old guys in the balcony at the muppets show" bitching about Obamas weakness and I'm just tired of hearing the crap. I'm not happy with his choices either. He has been conduction plenty of acts of war without authorization with his drone strikes, he's impugned the sovereignty of multiple nations, and we continue to treat a country like Saudia Arabia, in all of their beheading fucking glory as some kind of morally equal partner. The entire thing is absurd. The lofty, no make that smarmy taunts from the right with nothing but big ball swagger talk solves nothing. The war powers act does indeed need a revisiting. Now we are going to leave more troops in Afghanistan, as if that is really going to change anything. We made a major strategic blunder invading Iraq and at this point, it really doesn't matter who clambered for it (although Bernie wasn't one of them). How many troops are you willing to send to die for the sake of toppling Assad? How many troops are you willing to send to die to fight ISIS? Is it perhaps time to step back and let them fight it out amongst themselves or should we keep stepping into it because OUR freedom is somehow worth more than the life of some smelly goat herder?