Print Page | Close Window

American Politics the 2016 edition

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=105931
Printed Date: April 29 2024 at 08:24
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: American Politics the 2016 edition
Posted By: micky
Subject: American Politics the 2016 edition
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 07:58
Seems we do need a dedicated thread for this stuff... I think it is going to be one heck of an interesting year..

Bush is out  *sounds of millions and millions around the world cheering*

so that leaves 3 realistic choices for the GOP...

the McBreakdown quick hits

Trump -  and you thought Bush was not up to the job?
Cruz - the answer to the question of what it would take for a old northeastern liberal to win a general election
Rubio - the epitome of american politics.. not a thought in his head.. only canned soundbites programmed in by his advisers

3 wonderful choices.. LOL Good to see the GOP didn't disappoint me this year and reaffirms my faith they are the party of the loony and sh*t house crazy...

on the Democratic side

Hillary - yeah you can't trust her..  but wake up.. what politician can you trust. And anyone that gets Bill Clinton back into the White House gets my vote.. and should get yours..

Sanders - in my youth I'd bleed and make others bleed for this guy.. I like what he has to say. One thing about NOT being young.. is realizes it is a real war out there. Electability matters and denying the GOP the ability to wreck this country further with insane policies by getting the Presidency.  Is it a culture and ideological war dividing this country. Some realize it, some have their head in the sand and don't. What matters is he simply isn't electable unless running against a real lunatic like Cruz.





-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip



Replies:
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 08:17
here is the McMatrix of political predictions

                 Trump                Cruz                     Rubio
Clinton        Clinton        Clinton landslide       tight Clinton
Sanders      Trump             Sanders            Rubio landslide


as most do think...  I think Rubio is the most electable thus most dangerous.. though exposed for an unexperienced political shrill.. it was done early. He has time to be better coached up by his handlers and puppeteers for a general election. 


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 08:52
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ But since Hillary will probably be president, it'll be even worse for the GOP if the Senate forces a delay.  Then they get a Clinton appointee and they look bad.


She'd walk the dog against against of those knuckleheads the GOP can't decide between... but question is. 

Does she get past Sanders for the nomination. If not... does an old white male northeaster liberal win a general election?...

Yes she does and no he doesn't.



bumping this over David.

I do think it will be tight.. as I noted earlier.. I think enough will realize that elecatability does matter.

The vacancy in the Supreme Court... a swing vacancy at that.. plus the rather... extreme nature of the GOP 3 make this a 'must win' election. While Hillary is by FAR the most experienced and capable of actually being a good President (hell it isn't even close) she does have a big problem with unlikeableness and IMO that will keep the Democratic nomination process from being a done deal/coronation tour.. the notion that Sanders won't win against the GOP unless they descend to even further than plausible levels of stupidity and nominates a complete lunatic like Cruz as its candidate.. he won't win.


Now as far as the GOP side.  It really does look like Trump doesn't it.  Bush is out but it does look like Rubio and Cruz are in it for the long haul and that will split the Anti-Trump/ideologically pure votes from the far right.  So it sure looks like we are heading we are heading for a Trump-Clinton matchup.

I think the moderates will decide this.. of course the far right will vote against Clinton even if it doesn't think Trump cares about what they care about.. and liberals on the left even though they don't think Hillary liberal enough and a slave to big money will NEVER stomach having another Bush in the white house. Someone completely unsuited for the job. So it will up to the moderates.. and I do believe down deep in my heart.. and in my mind that when they enter the voting booth they will realize.. if they hadn't previously that Trump simply is not suitable for the job.  What has he done to make people think he would be a good President.. running a business ... just like the GOP to think that leading a country is akin to running a business.  Not anything like it.

between the two of them.  Hillary wins, not particulary big, nor particularly tight. The south and midwest will go GOP as they always have.. always will. Hillary takes the big blue states and the rapidly emerging blue swing states like Colorado, Virginia, and North Carolina. Tight.. very tight popular vote. Not particularly close in the electoral college.  That is what poli sci people have seen .. the math really does favor the democratic side in close matchups. It should be a lot of fun .. and will be to see Trump and Clinton go toe to toe. Oh I do have a thing for Hillary.. always have.. but damn.. that woman is tougher than most men I know. I wouldn't want to meet her in a dark alley... unless was wearing leather and carrying a whip LOL

-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 09:44
I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:01
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


yeah that is one bright side Jean... I'm still a couple of years from being able to become an exile. Still a few more productive years here left in me if my.. hmmm...  dangerous job... hard living and bad habits don't catch up to me first  hahah

 If Trump wins.. I think Raff leaves and (hopefully) takes me with her LOLThumbs Up


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:04
I'm actually not happy about Bush leaving the race. Now all establishment votes will go to Rubio, and he is the only one that can actually beat Hillary, and we may end up with a president that looks young but has more retrograde ideas even than Trump himself (except the racism of course).

-------------


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:07
the establishment didn't help Bush at all... nor will it help Rubio Teo IMO.  What it is all about ...is Trump..he has definitely established himself as the frontrunner.  Who becomes the anti Trump. If Cruz and Rubio split that and both stay in for a good spell (like they wouldn't.. neither strikes me as the type to fall upon their swords for the good of the party haha) then Trump wins.. no matter who the establishment wants.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:12
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


yeah that is one bright side Jean... I'm still a couple of years from being able to become an exile. Still a few more productive years here left in me if my.. hmmm...  dangerous job... hard living and bad habits don't catch up to me first  hahah

 If Trump wins.. I think Raff leaves and (hopefully) takes me with her LOLThumbs Up

well, Trump is outrageous enough to pass a bill that forbids Americans to go into exile. "a true American stays in his country, no matter what" is just the stupid kind of thing he might utter


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:15
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


yeah that is one bright side Jean... I'm still a couple of years from being able to become an exile. Still a few more productive years here left in me if my.. hmmm...  dangerous job... hard living and bad habits don't catch up to me first  hahah

 If Trump wins.. I think Raff leaves and (hopefully) takes me with her LOLThumbs Up


Not leaving until he gives me cause, as in discriminating against foreign-born people. Just sitting down with a king-size bucket of popcorn, and waiting for Americans (not all of them, of course) to eat all the nasty words they leveled at Italians for electing Berlusconi as PM three times. As much as I detest Berlusconi, the President of the USA is much more powerful, and much more likely to do widespread damage.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:18
editted  LOL

bah...


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:26
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


yeah that is one bright side Jean... I'm still a couple of years from being able to become an exile. Still a few more productive years here left in me if my.. hmmm...  dangerous job... hard living and bad habits don't catch up to me first  hahah

 If Trump wins.. I think Raff leaves and (hopefully) takes me with her LOLThumbs Up


Not leaving until he gives me cause, as in discriminating against foreign-born people. Just sitting down with a king-size bucket of popcorn, and waiting for Americans (not all of them, of course) to eat all the nasty words they leveled at Italians for electing Berlusconi as PM three times. As much as I detest Berlusconi, the President of the USA is much more powerful, and much more likely to do widespread damage.


there would be a certain karma to that wouldn't there.  For all the laughter here over what your fellow Italians subjected themselves to... I agree.. many many MANY times worse if it happens here.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:46
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he
is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be
proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they
are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.
<div ="msg">
if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


Jean. You and the other participants in this thread are educated, intelligent, pleasant people who live a relatively nice life and enjoy a decent lifestyle in nice liberal societies.

In other words, precisely the type of people who establishment politicians, mainly metropolitan liberals, such as Clinton, Cameron, Merckel, and the rest try to appeal to.

Those "uneducated masses", as you put it, are, in my opinion, the very people whom recent generations of politicians have unutterably failed, leaving them to the cruel consequences of a global economy dominated by big business, and driving wages and living standards ever downwards. In other words, the old working class.

For these people, nice liberal governments have been an utter disaster. For those reasons, it is entirely understandable that such people find nut jobs such as Trump, and the more colourful loonies in Europe, appealing. They talk their language in a way the liberal elite ceased to do many years ago.

Unless we change this, we are, I believe, in great danger, from a heady mix of demagogues driven by hatred and, ultimately, war. Why do you think Putin does so well in Russia? Is it because, perhaps, the "uneducated masses" there took fright at what they were becoming in a post Soviet society?

What is worse than a loony such as Trump in power? Simple, the continuation in power of a global liberal elite massively out of touch with the hopes and fears of ordinary people. Unless we find a middle, and new, way of governing, we are all in for very difficult times.

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:47
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.

if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


yeah that is one bright side Jean... I'm still a couple of years from being able to become an exile. Still a few more productive years here left in me if my.. hmmm...  dangerous job... hard living and bad habits don't catch up to me first  hahah

 If Trump wins.. I think Raff leaves and (hopefully) takes me with her LOLThumbs Up


Not leaving until he gives me cause, as in discriminating against foreign-born people. Just sitting down with a king-size bucket of popcorn, and waiting for Americans (not all of them, of course) to eat all the nasty words they leveled at Italians for electing Berlusconi as PM three times. As much as I detest Berlusconi, the President of the USA is much more powerful, and much more likely to do widespread damage.


there would be a certain karma to that wouldn't there.  For all the laughter here over what your fellow Italians subjected themselves to... I agree.. many many MANY times worse if it happens here.


The only difference is that Italians don't believe themselves to be better than everyone else (quite the opposite, I would say). I've never heard talk of Italian exceptionalism or all that bunk, thank heavens.  As far as I'm concerned, I think people should get what they want, and then pay the price for it, instead of whining about being victims of the bad politicians. Last time I looked, no one forces anyone else at gunpoint to vote for X rather than Y.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:50
no doubt darling.. but I think Steve hit that particular nail directly on the head in his post prior to yours.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 10:58
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

I fear Donald Trump has a good chance to become the next president. he
is just the right candidate for the uneducated masses who want to "be
proud to be Americans again", whatever stupid thing that is. and they
are exactly the clientele he is aiming for.
<div ="msg">
if I weren't already an American living in exile him becoming president would make me one


Jean. You and the other participants in this thread are educated, intelligent, pleasant people who live a relatively nice life and enjoy a decent lifestyle in nice liberal societies.

In other words, precisely the type of people who establishment politicians, mainly metropolitan liberals, such as Clinton, Cameron, Merckel, and the rest try to appeal to.

Those "uneducated masses", as you put it, are, in my opinion, the very people whom recent generations of politicians have unutterably failed, leaving them to the cruel consequences of a global economy dominated by big business, and driving wages and living standards ever downwards. In other words, the old working class.

For these people, nice liberal governments have been an utter disaster. For those reasons, it is entirely understandable that such people find nut jobs such as Trump, and the more colourful loonies in Europe, appealing. They talk their language in a way the liberal elite ceased to do many years ago.

Unless we change this, we are, I believe, in great danger, from a heady mix of demagogues driven by hatred and, ultimately, war. Why do you think Putin does so well in Russia? Is it because, perhaps, the "uneducated masses" there took fright at what they were becoming in a post Soviet society?

What is worse than a loony such as Trump in power? Simple, the continuation in power of a global liberal elite massively out of touch with the hopes and fears of ordinary people. Unless we find a middle, and new, way of governing, we are all in for very difficult times.

I partially agree with that. it should however not mean stooping down to appealing to the lowest instincts as Trump does. and mark that I do not equalize "uneducated" with "stupid", though there certainly is some overlapping between the two


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: Prog Snob
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 11:01
Speaking as a staunch Libertarian, I'm so disgusted by these primaries. I can't believe I live in a country where Donald Trump is actually the favored nominee.

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 11:03
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

no doubt darling.. but I think Steve hit that particular nail directly on the head in his post prior to yours.


Agreed. However, many of those people are also those who in the past repeatedly voted for the people Steve listed, and fell for bunk such as the American dream. This country (the US) is built on the worship of wealth and success, and it is not surprising that the strongest elements in society have taken advantage of it to the detriment of the rest of the population. Unfortunately, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the American model has been left alone to hold sway all over the world - with the consequences we see now.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 11:05
Originally posted by Prog Snob Prog Snob wrote:

Speaking as a staunch Libertarian, I'm so disgusted by these primaries. I can't believe I live in a country where Donald Trump is actually the favored nominee.


the really scary part is man... other than the Kasich dude who doesn't have a chance in hell....

In all honesty if one was to be honest... he is the best 'worst case' Non-Democratic potential President.  At least he as a brain.. and is independent of the insidious right wing political machine LOL Cruz is a fricking lunatic... and Rubio is Bush pt2. Pretty face and nothing inside the head and what we get... will be what his puppetiers give us.. so chalk up another war... and attempts to set this country back 20 years in running up the debt as he cuts taxes yet spends far more than we bring in.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 11:10
mark also that it is by far not only the "nice liberal ones" that have failed these people. I sincerely doubt anyone would coin George W. Bush a "nice liberal", but he has failed these people just the same


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 11:27
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

no doubt darling.. but I think Steve hit that particular nail directly on the head in his post prior to yours.


Agreed. However, many of those people are also those who in the past repeatedly voted for the people Steve listed, and fell for bunk such as the American dream.


nah.. I don't think anyone falls for that crap. It's just something we tell ourselves to make us feel superior but no one really believes that.  During Reagan we started the slide and it continues today into a country of haves.. and have nots. The destruction of the middle class has in all honesty been the one aspect of society that worrys me the most... yet seems completely unimporant to most.

Again.. someone remind me.  Time to enlist our right wing friends on the forum.. we know you are out there. Don't be shy...

so why on earth do people, the core GOP voter, who are generally uneducated low wage earners support these jokers.  I heard a un PC but all too true comparison to 'southern Wal-Mart worker voting GOP makes as much sense as a member of a certain religion hailing a certain historical figure.

It makes no sense... and thus the GOP was empowered to wreck the middle class. Enriching their real support big business.. all while getting the votes of those hurt most by it.

my god.. say what you will about the GOP.  But man oh man are there some smart devious folk over there. How they pulled off that one.. making people care more about if two men are married than if they can move out of their frickin mobile homes into ... you know.. real houses and actually earn a good living instead of seeing what I read about yesterday. A company loses millions... workers pay the price..  thousands laid off.. the CEO?  Millions of dollars in bonus's.  That is the GOP economic model.. and their core voters lap it up...

whatever...


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:13
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

mark also that it is by far not only the "nice liberal ones" that have failed these people. I sincerely doubt anyone would coin George W. Bush a "nice liberal", but he has failed these people just the same



I said the metropolitan liberal establishment, not liberal in terms of political factions. There is a difference, and Bush was as establishment as you can get, supported, as he was, by big corporations and the like.

Also, by the way, I didn't equate uneducated with stupid. Indeed, the anti establishment waves coming over the working class indigenous populations is, if anything, an entirely rational and sensible thrust against how they are being treated.

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org


Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:16

^ My late brother, a  liberal democrat, used to ask me that same question all the time. Why do these white low wage earners (and many middle class people) vote for these rich Republicans who could care less for them? Why do they vote against their best interests when it's the Dems who have probably helped them far more over the years?  Never had a good  answer for him.



-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:28
I don't think there is an answer...   it is likely the greatest political scam ever conceived.  You read it here first

The GOP somehow convinced people that is was more important to be concerned about what other people were doing in their own personal lives ..people you don't even know ..what they were doing to their bodies.. who they  were sleeping with or even marrying than they are about their own financial well being.. or even that of their children.

brilliant man... got to give it to them. And you thought those who gave us Willie Horton were brilliant.. it was only the opening move of the triumph of politics of fear over the politics of self preservation LOL




-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:29
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

mark also that it is by far not only the "nice liberal ones" that have failed these people. I sincerely doubt anyone would coin George W. Bush a "nice liberal", but he has failed these people just the same


I said the metropolitan liberal establishment, not liberal in terms of political factions. There is a difference, and Bush was as establishment as you can get, supported, as he was, by big corporations and the like.

Also, by the way, I didn't equate uneducated with stupid. Indeed, the anti establishment waves coming over the working class indigenous populations is, if anything, an entirely rational and sensible thrust against how they are being treated.
you said "For these people, nice liberal governments have been an utter disaster", and I would not call the Bush government that. no-one who releases anything like the patriot act (which should better be called "unpatriot act" since it is against everything the USA is supposed to stand for; it reminds me of the McCarthy era) can be called liberal, in whatever sense of the word


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:52
Remember that the European meaning of "liberal" is not the same as it is here in the US. Here it is more or less synonymous with progressive, while in Europe it stands more for "free-market supporter".

As to the reason why white low-wage earners vote GOP, I think it was John Steinbeck who said something about American poor seeing themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires - which  brings me back to the whole lot of bunk called the American dream, and this country's self-destructive worship of wealth and success.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 12:56
hahahha... I like that.  I am going to make a label for my shirt pocket at the next corporate meeting..

goodby Michael.. hello temporarily embarrassed millionaire

-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:04
Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

mark also that it is by far not only the "nice liberal ones" that have failed these people. I sincerely doubt anyone would coin George W. Bush a "nice liberal", but he has failed these people just the same


I said the metropolitan liberal establishment, not liberal in terms of political factions. There is a difference, and Bush was as establishment as you can get, supported, as he was, by big corporations and the like.

Also, by the way, I didn't equate uneducated with stupid. Indeed, the anti establishment waves coming over the working class indigenous populations is, if anything, an entirely rational and sensible thrust against how they are being treated.
you said "For these people, nice liberal governments have been an utter disaster", and I would not call the Bush government that. no-one who releases anything like the patriot act (which should better be called "unpatriot act" since it is against everything the USA is supposed to stand for; it reminds me of the McCarthy era) can be called liberal, in whatever sense of the word




Jean, I will make one more attempt to explain myself. You are referring to Bush, correctly, as a Conservative politician. Clinton, by contrast, was a Liberal politician. Note the capital letters. They describe their factional politics.

What unites them? They are both part of the metropolitan liberal establishment. It was that I meant by nice liberal governments. I used the lower case very deliberately, and I believe that most people who have even a passing interest in societal politics will understand the very distinct difference between the lower and upper case. For example, although both would try to persuade the populace that they were, in their Liberal and Conservative politics, "radical", and changed society indubitably for the better, they were not, and did not. Neither changed the overall consensus of big business and rich, powerful, elites governing and shaping us one jot. Why? Well, because they were both a product of said establishment, as is, of course, Hilary. In this country, swap Clinton and Bush for Blair and Cameron/Osbourne.

Would Trump be any better? Nope. Trump is a chancer who sees his chance to tap into that zeitgeist. Worse, he appears to be a genuine demogogue. However, the masses who appear to be flocking to his standard represent a very real, and growing, disenchantment with the established order. One day, that movement will win power in a mature democracy, and then we will see politics become rather interesting again.

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:04
I think this sums it all: http://www.temporarilyembarrassedmillionaires.org/" rel="nofollow - http://www.temporarilyembarrassedmillionaires.org/


Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:04
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Remember that the European meaning of "liberal" is not the same as it is here in the US. Here it is more or less synonymous with progressive, while in Europe it stands more for "free-market supporter".

As to the reason why white low-wage earners vote GOP, I think it was John Steinbeck who said something about American poor seeing themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires - which  brings me back to the whole lot of bunk called the American dream, and this country's self-destructive worship of wealth and success.

Well, in Germany we have the FDP, "Freie Demokratische Partei". "Free (or Liberal. though in German "liberal" is not the immediate association with "Frei") Democratic Party", our liberals) that stands for both meanings of the word "liberal".


-------------


BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:07
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by BaldJean BaldJean wrote:

mark also that it is by far not only the "nice liberal ones" that have failed these people. I sincerely doubt anyone would coin George W. Bush a "nice liberal", but he has failed these people just the same


I said the metropolitan liberal establishment, not liberal in terms of political factions. There is a difference, and Bush was as establishment as you can get, supported, as he was, by big corporations and the like.

Also, by the way, I didn't equate uneducated with stupid. Indeed, the anti establishment waves coming over the working class indigenous populations is, if anything, an entirely rational and sensible thrust against how they are being treated.
you said "For these people, nice liberal governments have been an utter disaster", and I would not call the Bush government that. no-one who releases anything like the patriot act (which should better be called "unpatriot act" since it is against everything the USA is supposed to stand for; it reminds me of the McCarthy era) can be called liberal, in whatever sense of the word




Jean, I will make one more attempt to explain myself. You are referring to Bush, correctly, as a Conservative politician. Clinton, by contrast, was a Liberal politician. Note the capital letters. They describe their factional politics.

What unites them? They are both part of the metropolitan liberal establishment. It was that I meant by nice liberal governments. I used the lower case very deliberately, and I believe that most people who have even a passing interest in societal politics will understand the very distinct difference between the lower and upper case. For example, although both would try to persuade the populace that they were, in their Liberal and Conservative politics, "radical", and changed society indubitably for the better, they were not, and did not. Neither changed the overall consensus of big business and rich, powerful, elites governing and shaping us one jot. Why? Well, because they were both a product of said establishment, as is, of course, Hilary. In this country, swap Clinton and Bush for Blair and Cameron/Osbourne.

Would Trump be any better? Nope. Trump is a chancer who sees his chance to tap into that zeitgeist. Worse, he appears to be a genuine demogogue. However, the masses who appear to be flocking to his standard represent a very real, and growing, disenchantment with the established order. One day, that movement will win power in a mature democracy, and then we will see politics become rather interesting again.

I fully understood you; I just don't agree with your terminology


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:33
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

What is worse than a loony such as Trump in power? Simple, the continuation in power of a global liberal elite massively out of touch with the hopes and fears of ordinary people. Unless we find a middle, and new, way of governing, we are all in for very difficult times.
 
Perceptive as always, Steve. I find the choices in U.S. elections, whether Demoblican or Republocrat, drifting further and further from the sort of person that I would prefer to vote for. Things are getting so divisive that even mentioning finding a middle ground or bipartisanship translates into capitulation bordering on treason. Working for the greater good of most Americans is no longer even feasible. Politics is now the art of making the possible impossible.
 
And what do we get? Congress tries to override Obamacare more than 50 times, although everyone involved openly acknowledges such a bill won't pass. Congress spends more time worrying about women's vaginas and what adult gay couple's prefer to do in the privacy of their own home, rather than fixing the nation's crumbling infrastructure of highways and bridges. The middle class has eroded to the point that real wages can purchase far less than what one could in the 1990s, but CEOs and the top 1% of earners have had decades of obscene profit, aided by slush funds from shadowy sources that are now openly flaunted as the pimp plutocrats whore out their prostitute politicians (and both Republicans and Democrats suck at the same Wall Street teat).
 
I'm sick of it.


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 13:38


Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 15:41
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

What is worse than a loony such as Trump in power?


A theocrat.




-------------
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 15:44
Originally posted by zappaholic zappaholic wrote:

Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

What is worse than a loony such as Trump in power?


A theocrat.

but Trump is a theocrat; he believes in the God Mammon



-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 15:48
next i will make a thread about Norwegian politics :D

-------------


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 17:10
Originally posted by Icarium Icarium wrote:

next i will make a thread about Norwegian politics :D


pfffff... sounds like a yawn fest.   I'll give you all credit enough to not have the same sh*t house crazy candidates and wacky irrational voters that support them there that we have here. Politics isn't simply politics here.. it is the 3rd wheel of all things entertainment.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 17:32
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ But since Hillary will probably be president, it'll be even worse for the GOP if the Senate forces a delay.  Then they get a Clinton appointee and they look bad.
She'd walk the dog against against of those knuckleheads the GOP can't decide between... but question is. 

Does she get past Sanders for the nomination. If not... does an old white male northeaster liberal win a general election?...

Yes she does and no he doesn't.
bumping this over David.

I do think it will be tight.. as I noted earlier.. I think enough will realize that elecatability does matter.

The vacancy in the Supreme Court... a swing vacancy at that.. plus the rather... extreme nature of the GOP 3 make this a 'must win' election. While Hillary is by FAR the most experienced and capable of actually being a good President (hell it isn't even close) she does have a big problem with unlikeableness and IMO that will keep the Democratic nomination process from being a done deal/coronation tour.. the notion that Sanders won't win against the GOP unless they descend to even further than plausible levels of stupidity and nominates a complete lunatic like Cruz as its candidate.. he won't win.

Now as far as the GOP side.  It really does look like Trump doesn't it.  Bush is out but it does look like Rubio and Cruz are in it for the long haul and that will split the Anti-Trump/ideologically pure votes from the far right.  So it sure looks like we are heading we are heading for a Trump-Clinton matchup.

I think the moderates will decide this.. of course the far right will vote against Clinton even if it doesn't think Trump cares about what they care about.. and liberals on the left even though they don't think Hillary liberal enough and a slave to big money will NEVER stomach having another Bush in the white house. Someone completely unsuited for the job. So it will up to the moderates.. and I do believe down deep in my heart.. and in my mind that when they enter the voting booth they will realize.. if they hadn't previously that Trump simply is not suitable for the job.  What has he done to make people think he would be a good President.. running a business ... just like the GOP to think that leading a country is akin to running a business.  Not anything like it.

between the two of them.  Hillary wins, not particulary big, nor particularly tight. The south and midwest will go GOP as they always have.. always will. Hillary takes the big blue states and the rapidly emerging blue swing states like Colorado, Virginia, and North Carolina. Tight.. very tight popular vote. Not particularly close in the electoral college.  That is what poli sci people have seen .. the math really does favor the democratic side in close matchups. It should be a lot of fun .. and will be to see Trump and Clinton go toe to toe. Oh I do have a thing for Hillary.. always have.. but damn.. that woman is tougher than most men I know. I wouldn't want to meet her in a dark alley... unless was wearing leather and carrying a whip LOL


Oh I wouldn't want to cross her.   She'll kill you.   Makes Trump look like Mr. Rogers ... or like a little girl.

And yeah presumably Rubio is the most electable, but that's because he's the most intelligent and that usually doesn't count.   Frankly I'm surprised Cruz has gotten so far, he's like an evangelist.   Gimme a break.





-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 18:05
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

here is the McMatrix of political predictions

                 Trump                Cruz                     Rubio
Clinton        Clinton        Clinton landslide       tight Clinton
Sanders      Trump             Sanders            Rubio landslide


as most do think...  I think Rubio is the most electable thus most dangerous.. though exposed for an unexperienced political shrill.. it was done early. He has time to be better coached up by his handlers and puppeteers for a general election. 

So far in the polls I've seen, Sanders wins against all GOP candidates by a wider margin than Clinton. Of course, those kinds of polls are not very useful at this stage, but still.


Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 18:14
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Remember that the European meaning of "liberal" is not the same as it is here in the US. Here it is more or less synonymous with progressive, while in Europe it stands more for "free-market supporter".

As to the reason why white low-wage earners vote GOP, I think it was John Steinbeck who said something about American poor seeing themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires - which  brings me back to the whole lot of bunk called the American dream, and this country's self-destructive worship of wealth and success.

I've always thought that the American Dream was a way rich people trick poor people into making them richer.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 18:32
^ The difference is that we applaud and admire that.



-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 21 2016 at 21:36
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

no doubt darling.. but I think Steve hit that particular nail directly on the head in his post prior to yours.


Agreed. However, many of those people are also those who in the past repeatedly voted for the people Steve listed, and fell for bunk such as the American dream. This country (the US) is built on the worship of wealth and success, and it is not surprising that the strongest elements in society have taken advantage of it to the detriment of the rest of the population. Unfortunately, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the American model has been left alone to hold sway all over the world - with the consequences we see now.

America is built on the hard work of generations of common people. America is not responsible for the entire world's problems. People are the same worldwide, to think differently is ridiculous.


Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 12:30
Thanks Steven.

Love you Raff but I have to disagree on some of your points.

I don't believe this country is built on "the worship of wealth and success".  Actually there are huge numbers of fundamentalist evangelicals who believe it was built on bent-knee deference to an ancient Jewish rabbi.  And in their defense, many of them practice what they preach and eschew wealth and material success in favor of more ethereal goals.

There is a strong argument to be made that the U.S. was built on principles of personal liberties and, hand-in-hand with that, personal responsibility, but that's probably a topic for a different thread.

And sure, there are a few powerful and often unscrupulous people who take advantage of an economic and political system for personal gain, but how is that different than every society that has ever existed in civilized history?  Why a different standard for the U.S. than for everyone else when it comes to greedy and self-serving members of society?  Part of personal responsibility is not letting oneself become a victim.

And the "American Dream" as it was taught to me wasn't about getting rich or powerful.  The point was that anyone could come from anywhere and change their circumstances here, and there wasn't anyone who could legally or morally stop them.  That doesn't mean a guarantee of wealth or success or power or prestige or fame, just an opportunity.

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not a flag-waver or one of Trump's "poorly educated" minions.  But I do believe that Dream still exists because I lived it.  My wife lived it.  And my parents lived it.  We came from very little, worked hard, and now have something to show for it and some measure of respect in our communities.  And we've raised kids who both contribute to, and get something back from, their communities.  That's the whole point, nothing more.

But back to the 2016 election - man, what a mess.  The best people in our country are all unfortunately too smart to run for public office, so this is what we're left with.

Worst-case scenario:

a) Republicans decide to have a brokered convention and nominate Rubio (Rubio is already trying to arrange this).

b) Democrats nominate Hillary thanks to all her insider super delegates, even though Sanders is much more popular with younger, more educated and party-base voters (seems almost certain to happen).

c) Trump runs as an independent and wins in a landslide thanks to both Republican and Democratic voters who are sickened by the insider dealing and having their parties abandon them by not allowing the more popular candidates to gain nominations.

Could happen ...



-------------
"Peace is the only battle worth waging."

Albert Camus


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 12:39

Our founders certainly never intended for a permanent class of elitists to rule over us.



http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-18/79-members-congress-have-been-office-least-20-years


Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 12:55
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

Our founders certainly never intended for a permanent class of elitists to rule over us.

 
 
That may be true philosophically but weren't most of them  elitists themselves so to speak regarding their education, holdings , and positions...?
 
Wink


-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 13:03
Politics I guess is the rich man's game.



Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 13:06


-------------
Websites I work with:

http://www.progressor.net
http://www.houseofprog.com

My profile on Mixcloud:
https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 14:14
Originally posted by A Person A Person wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

here is the McMatrix of political predictions

                 Trump                Cruz                     Rubio
Clinton        Clinton        Clinton landslide       tight Clinton
Sanders      Trump             Sanders            Rubio landslide


as most do think...  I think Rubio is the most electable thus most dangerous.. though exposed for an unexperienced political shrill.. it was done early. He has time to be better coached up by his handlers and puppeteers for a general election. 

So far in the polls I've seen, Sanders wins against all GOP candidates by a wider margin than Clinton. Of course, those kinds of polls are not very useful at this stage, but still.


just goes to how worthless polls are..  I'll put it on record here... for all to see.Thumbs Up

I buy a 6 pack of whatever beer you want.. for everyone on this damn forum if Sanders became President LOL

Just as this country will never elect a far right wing wacko.. they'll especially never elect one seen as a leftist liberal.  Obviously I don't think he is...compared to the rest ..even Hillary he will sure be seen that way and this country has a natural 'righty' lean to start with and is more prone to elect someone more to edge of hard right than hard left. Regarless of what he really ..perception is often reality when it comes to politics. Only Cruz would make him look less extreme mainly because I think even right leaning voters think Cruz is f**king lunatic. LOL


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 14:25
Originally posted by ClemofNazareth ClemofNazareth wrote:

Thanks Steven.

Love you Raff but I have to disagree on some of your points.

I don't believe this country is built on "the worship of wealth and success".  Actually there are huge numbers of fundamentalist evangelicals who believe it was built on bent-knee deference to an ancient Jewish rabbi.  And in their defense, many of them practice what they preach and eschew wealth and material success in favor of more ethereal goals.

There is a strong argument to be made that the U.S. was built on principles of personal liberties and, hand-in-hand with that, personal responsibility, but that's probably a topic for a different thread.

And sure, there are a few powerful and often unscrupulous people who take advantage of an economic and political system for personal gain, but how is that different than every society that has ever existed in civilized history?  Why a different standard for the U.S. than for everyone else when it comes to greedy and self-serving members of society?  Part of personal responsibility is not letting oneself become a victim.

And the "American Dream" as it was taught to me wasn't about getting rich or powerful.  The point was that anyone could come from anywhere and change their circumstances here, and there wasn't anyone who could legally or morally stop them.  That doesn't mean a guarantee of wealth or success or power or prestige or fame, just an opportunity.

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not a flag-waver or one of Trump's "poorly educated" minions.  But I do believe that Dream still exists because I lived it.  My wife lived it.  And my parents lived it.  We came from very little, worked hard, and now have something to show for it and some measure of respect in our communities.  And we've raised kids who both contribute to, and get something back from, their communities.  That's the whole point, nothing more.

But back to the 2016 election - man, what a mess.  The best people in our country are all unfortunately too smart to run for public office, so this is what we're left with.

Worst-case scenario:

a) Republicans decide to have a brokered convention and nominate Rubio (Rubio is already trying to arrange this).

b) Democrats nominate Hillary thanks to all her insider super delegates, even though Sanders is much more popular with younger, more educated and party-base voters (seems almost certain to happen).

c) Trump runs as an independent and wins in a landslide thanks to both Republican and Democratic voters who are sickened by the insider dealing and having their parties abandon them by not allowing the more popular candidates to gain nominations.

Could happen ...



great post Bob Clap

let me pick something out of that to take this further...

the "American Dream" as it was taught to me wasn't about getting rich or powerful.  The point was that anyone could come from anywhere and change their circumstances here

do you really think that still applies today.. it seems to me (and others) to not be the case. Ie there are a lot of people and one political party with a vested interest in playing the politics of fear and division... and forgetting about the American dream unless one is white and born here...

I do hear the sentiment that this country is not what it was when they were younger and things have changed here and NOT for the better.. yes I do blame the GOP for it but that is beside the point, who might be responsible for it.  The point of contention is ... those admirable notions are one of the core founding aspects of this country. A good number of people think we have completely lost track of that.. and NOT coincidentally....not being less a nation to be proud of having lost sight of what once made this country great. 

thoughts?


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 15:42
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:



great post Bob Clap

let me pick something out of that to take this further...

the "American Dream" as it was taught to me wasn't about getting rich or powerful.  The point was that anyone could come from anywhere and change their circumstances here

do you really think that still applies today.. it seems to me (and others) to not be the case. Ie there are a lot of people and one political party with a vested interest in playing the politics of fear and division... and forgetting about the American dream unless one is white and born here...

I do hear the sentiment that this country is not what it was when they were younger and things have changed here and NOT for the better.. yes I do blame the GOP for it but that is beside the point, who might be responsible for it.  The point of contention is ... those admirable notions are one of the core founding aspects of this country. A good number of people think we have completely lost track of that.. and NOT coincidentally....not being less a nation to be proud of having lost sight of what once made this country great. 

thoughts?

Is the country a better place than it was in the past?  I'm not sure.  Certainly an argument can be made either way.  There certainly have been plenty of darker days in our history.

- 85 years ago the unemployment rate was over 25% and we were living through the biggest financial crisis in history.  Today unemployment is a fraction of that and inflation is almost non-existent.

- in the 1950s more than half of blacks in the U.S. lived below the poverty level.  Today that rate is about 24%.

- in 1945 we killed or injured more than 300,000 Japanese civilians in the name of "peace".  A couple years before that we rounded up 120,000 Americans and put them in internment camps just because of their ethnicity.

- in the 1960s we saw the murders of John F Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and scores of civil rights workers and protesters throughout the South.  Lots of countries have had coups and assassinations and political upheaval since 1963, but in that half-century the worst political issue we've had is a bunch of idiots running the country. 

- also in the 1960s the president had to send federal troops to escort little girls to school just to ensure they were allowed in because they were the 'wrong color'.

- in the 1980s the federal government had to take control of the public schools in Kansas City because the city was enforcing segregation and unequal education.  This was in 1985, not 1885!

So yeah, a lot of things suck in the U.S. today.  Could be worse, and it has been.  That's not an excuse of course, but I think sometimes we have to take a broader view.  Today I've been married for almost 30 years to an immigrant minority and nobody bats an eyelash.  That wasn't true even when we got married.  Home ownership rates in the U.S. are among the highest in the world.  We have the oldest working constitution and continuous government of any country in the world.

So like I said, things could definitely be better, but if I had to pick a time to live in the U.S. I'm not sure I can think of a better one.  Glass half full, I guess ...

Smile


-------------
"Peace is the only battle worth waging."

Albert Camus


Posted By: garfunkel
Date Posted: February 24 2016 at 18:23
Please skip this post! It's stupid.

Most of y'all are left-leaning, so I'm just looking for an opinion in where I stack up against right-wingers, and if I would be a candidate as a possible friend with you LOL LOL  ... This site labels me as a Centrist/Libertarian. 

http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1966454820" rel="nofollow - http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1966454820

I don't really 'side' with any candidate too heavily. Highest is 73% Rubio, and a couple spots down 69% Sanders Wacko

My mind is boggled regarding politics right now and I doubt I'll vote, unless Zappa comes back from the dead.  I don't like any of the these candidates at all really.






Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 15:36
^ *sounds of crickets chirping*   btw.. in the wild west days of this site we didn't limit our search and destroy missions to 'DT fan'  we also took great pleasure in trying to eradicate libertarians.  LOL

yeah.. politics can be pretty mind boggling.  If one tries to take a view that candidates should be likeable and the kind of people you'd consider having a friend. Pfff..  they are all crooks, cheats and the highest from of leaches of the taxpayer dollar.

Don't not vote.  It is as much a duty as well as a responsibility IMO. I assume you have opinions on your economic welfare...  the state of this nation. Take stock of where your heart and/or your mind is taking you.. and you vote/support will follow.




-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 15:48
Methinks that they need to change the voting options to include "None of the Above".  I'm pretty sure that if all of the people who don't vote and came out to vote to choose "None of the Above" since that was the reason they weren't voting, "None of the Above" would win every time.


-------------


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 15:48
Originally posted by ClemofNazareth ClemofNazareth wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:



great post Bob Clap

let me pick something out of that to take this further...

the "American Dream" as it was taught to me wasn't about getting rich or powerful.  The point was that anyone could come from anywhere and change their circumstances here

do you really think that still applies today.. it seems to me (and others) to not be the case. Ie there are a lot of people and one political party with a vested interest in playing the politics of fear and division... and forgetting about the American dream unless one is white and born here...

I do hear the sentiment that this country is not what it was when they were younger and things have changed here and NOT for the better.. yes I do blame the GOP for it but that is beside the point, who might be responsible for it.  The point of contention is ... those admirable notions are one of the core founding aspects of this country. A good number of people think we have completely lost track of that.. and NOT coincidentally....not being less a nation to be proud of having lost sight of what once made this country great. 

thoughts?

Is the country a better place than it was in the past?  I'm not sure.  Certainly an argument can be made either way.  There certainly have been plenty of darker days in our history.

- 85 years ago the unemployment rate was over 25% and we were living through the biggest financial crisis in history.  Today unemployment is a fraction of that and inflation is almost non-existent.

- in the 1950s more than half of blacks in the U.S. lived below the poverty level.  Today that rate is about 24%.

- in 1945 we killed or injured more than 300,000 Japanese civilians in the name of "peace".  A couple years before that we rounded up 120,000 Americans and put them in internment camps just because of their ethnicity.

- in the 1960s we saw the murders of John F Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and scores of civil rights workers and protesters throughout the South.  Lots of countries have had coups and assassinations and political upheaval since 1963, but in that half-century the worst political issue we've had is a bunch of idiots running the country. 

- also in the 1960s the president had to send federal troops to escort little girls to school just to ensure they were allowed in because they were the 'wrong color'.

- in the 1980s the federal government had to take control of the public schools in Kansas City because the city was enforcing segregation and unequal education.  This was in 1985, not 1885!

So yeah, a lot of things suck in the U.S. today.  Could be worse, and it has been.  That's not an excuse of course, but I think sometimes we have to take a broader view.  Today I've been married for almost 30 years to an immigrant minority and nobody bats an eyelash.  That wasn't true even when we got married.  Home ownership rates in the U.S. are among the highest in the world.  We have the oldest working constitution and continuous government of any country in the world.

So like I said, things could definitely be better, but if I had to pick a time to live in the U.S. I'm not sure I can think of a better one.  Glass half full, I guess ...

Smile


excellent post again Bob. Clap Indeed glass half full...

It is definitely worth noting that indeed things have been a lot worse here in the past and we have made some progress in those things.  Where the glass is half empty is completely regressing in other areas. 

Economic mobility being a prime one in my mind, thus a vital component of the 'american dream' is rendered moot unless one considers progress... and the american dream to move here from some sh*t hole to perhaps not have your life outrightly threatened.. but to be still treated as a outsider, invader and corruptor of core american values. Assuming of course one was able to navigate the miles and miles of roadblocks this country has thrown in potential immigrants paths.  I would think that most of us could and would agree that we have become a much more clearly delinated society of haves and have nots and with ongoing 30 year war, and resulting shrinking of the middle class, there is much less chance today of ecomomic mobility. Hard work  gets you survival for many.. not a way up the ladder. Smile


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 15:55
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

Methinks that they need to change the voting options to include "None of the Above".  I'm pretty sure that if all of the people who don't vote and came out to vote to choose "None of the Above" since that was the reason they weren't voting, "None of the Above" would win every time.


Clap  that sounds like the best option from the GOP field doesn't it  LOL  I'd even vote Republican for the first time in my life just to cast that vote....

I don't vote candates btw.. it isn't a dog and pony popularly show. You don't have to like them. I often shook my head about those who voted for W because.. I liked him.. the guy of kine I'd have a beer with. REALLY! LOL



I vote for the candidate/party that mirror my views ..  even if they don't act or follow through.. at least the other side isn't in charge.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 16:29
As a white middle-class/upper-middle-class professional male, it is in my best interest to vote Republican...but I have always been a Social Democrat.  It just sits better with my belief system...but sadly most things that matter don't really matter to me personally. 

I'll never need an abortion.
I'm not ever marrying another dude.
I'm not an immigrant and have little concern of illegal immigrants taking my job. 
I am not a minority.
My employers have always provided me with health insurance so I'm actually a little worse off because of ObamaCare.
I don't believe that I will ever do anything that will result in me facing the death penalty.
Although I support gun control...the reality is that cat got out of the bag long ago and the truth is that if "you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns".  I respect people's rights to own guns and living 8 miles from the city of Detroit, I fully understand why "normal" citizens would want to own guns to protect their families.
I've never collected unemployment nor welfare...I appreciate the safety net being there, but fully believe that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.  Something needs to be done to make abusers employable.
I am not in the military and currently do not have any family members in the military so war or no war has no personal effect on me.  I believe that peaceful means and diplomacy is generally the right way of things, but sometimes, whether we like it or not, the USA needs to step in and be the "parent" to make the misbehaving "children" behave.  Yes, that is US arrogance, but that is the role that our ancestors have chosen for us to be the world's policeman. 

Everything screams at me that I should be a Republican, but aside from arguably being more fiscally responsible, nothing about the Republican side appeals to me.  Number one on my list being the religious fanatics.  Being Agnostic, every phony religious thing that comes out of Republican politicians mouths irks me.  From my point of view, they are either smart enough to know better and are lying through their teeth or they are gullible and have no business governing over men.  I respect people's rights to believe in the flying spaghetti monster or whatever else you want to believe in but don't force your beliefs upon me.  The sad part is that many of those beliefs are actually not really such a bad thing...i.e. the ten commandments.  Teaching people morals is actually a good thing, for the most part.  etc. etc. etc.







-------------


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 16:52
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

As a white middle-class/upper-middle-class professional male, it is in my best interest to vote Republican...but I have always been a Social Democrat.  It just sits better with my belief system...but sadly most things that matter don't really matter to me personally. 

I'll never need an abortion.
I'm not ever marrying another dude.
I'm not an immigrant and have little concern of illegal immigrants taking my job. 
I am not a minority.
My employers have always provided me with health insurance so I'm actually a little worse off because of ObamaCare.
I don't believe that I will ever do anything that will result in me facing the death penalty.
Although I support gun control...the reality is that cat got out of the bag long ago and the truth is that if "you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns".  I respect people's rights to own guns and living 8 miles from the city of Detroit, I fully understand why "normal" citizens would want to own guns to protect their families.
I've never collected unemployment nor welfare...I appreciate the safety net being there, but fully believe that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.  Something needs to be done to make abusers employable.
I am not in the military and currently do not have any family members in the military so war or no war has no personal effect on me.  I believe that peaceful means and diplomacy is generally the right way of things, but sometimes, whether we like it or not, the USA needs to step in and be the "parent" to make the misbehaving "children" behave.  Yes, that is US arrogance, but that is the role that our ancestors have chosen for us to be the world's policeman. 

Everything screams at me that I should be a Republican, but aside from arguably being more fiscally responsible, nothing about the Republican side appeals to me.  Number one on my list being the religious fanatics.  Being Agnostic, every phony religious thing that comes out of Republican politicians mouths irks me.  From my point of view, they are either smart enough to know better and are lying through their teeth or they are gullible and have no business governing over men.  I respect people's rights to believe in the flying spaghetti monster or whatever else you want to believe in but don't force your beliefs upon me.  The sad part is that many of those beliefs are actually not really such a bad thing...i.e. the ten commandments.  Teaching people morals is actually a good thing, for the most part.  etc. etc. etc.







Scott, you will know that we will disagree regarding the religious bit, but I have to say that I love this post. Extremely thoughtful and considered

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org


Posted By: Drew
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 16:56
I say give Obama another 4 years (just make it happen somehow) 


We are screwed. I cant stand that not matter who is a candidate, we show allegiance, despite how awful the whole lot can be. 


I'm avoiding the news at all costs until this abomination of an election is over. This is the best we can do??


-------------





Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 17:07
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

As a white middle-class/upper-middle-class professional male, it is in my best interest to vote Republican...but I have always been a Social Democrat.  It just sits better with my belief system...but sadly most things that matter don't really matter to me personally. 

I'll never need an abortion.
I'm not ever marrying another dude.
I'm not an immigrant and have little concern of illegal immigrants taking my job. 
I am not a minority.
My employers have always provided me with health insurance so I'm actually a little worse off because of ObamaCare.
I don't believe that I will ever do anything that will result in me facing the death penalty.
Although I support gun control...the reality is that cat got out of the bag long ago and the truth is that if "you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns".  I respect people's rights to own guns and living 8 miles from the city of Detroit, I fully understand why "normal" citizens would want to own guns to protect their families.
I've never collected unemployment nor welfare...I appreciate the safety net being there, but fully believe that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.  Something needs to be done to make abusers employable.
I am not in the military and currently do not have any family members in the military so war or no war has no personal effect on me.  I believe that peaceful means and diplomacy is generally the right way of things, but sometimes, whether we like it or not, the USA needs to step in and be the "parent" to make the misbehaving "children" behave.  Yes, that is US arrogance, but that is the role that our ancestors have chosen for us to be the world's policeman. 

Everything screams at me that I should be a Republican, but aside from arguably being more fiscally responsible, nothing about the Republican side appeals to me.  Number one on my list being the religious fanatics.  Being Agnostic, every phony religious thing that comes out of Republican politicians mouths irks me.  From my point of view, they are either smart enough to know better and are lying through their teeth or they are gullible and have no business governing over men.  I respect people's rights to believe in the flying spaghetti monster or whatever else you want to believe in but don't force your beliefs upon me.  The sad part is that many of those beliefs are actually not really such a bad thing...i.e. the ten commandments.  Teaching people morals is actually a good thing, for the most part.  etc. etc. etc.




Clap  damn right Scott.  I vote my conscious .. not as something as selfish as my pocketbook.

I'll never be a woman (try as I did), never be gay (even though many have thought I was) nor black (though I have as much SOUL baby as any) but damnit man... my conscious.. and my strong sense of right and wrong.. AND very strongly held notion of what this country.. was and no longer is.. tells me that my personal concerns are petty.  My vote is for a better .. more socially diverse country where who you are, or who you choose to sleep with means NOTHING to anyone but ones selves and should never EVER be grounds for discrimation.

and don't buy the crap Scott...  the days of fiscal responsibility being a corner stone of conversative (GOP) poitics are many years and many Presidents in the past. Yes they will cut taxes for you... but it only runs up the deficit when you don't bring in enough to cover what the government is supposed to do.. provide for its people.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 17:39
oh and getting back on topic.. though off topic divergence is always welcome here ( it is my thread of course and have made a career here of going off topic)

it looks like the Trump v. Rubio (movements orchestrated by his puppeteers and words written by his handlers in the GOP establishment) bloodbath has begun in earnest. LOL This will be fun... American scorched Earth politics at its best.

time to break out the popcorn.. and the (craft) beer! Beer


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 17:50
The 2016 Presidential election has been described as the Countdown to Extinction.
 
Why don't you immigrate to somewhere saner and safer Australia even, you could wrestle crocs for free that must be safer than Detroit.
 
Or Just change your leaders every time the wind changes, like we do in Oz.

We've had 5 in 5 years, good going I say- don't let 'em settle into anything they can only cause harm......

Our last outgoing Leader Tony Abbott's said on being kicked out  "a febrile media culture has developed that rewards treachery"?

You gotta love the way pollies speak, keep em on there toes I say.
 
 


-------------
"Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes"
and I need the knits, the double knits!


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 18:38
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

As a white middle-class/upper-middle-class professional male, it is in my best interest to vote Republican...but I have always been a Social Democrat.  It just sits better with my belief system...but sadly most things that matter don't really matter to me personally. 

I'll never need an abortion.
I'm not ever marrying another dude.
I'm not an immigrant and have little concern of illegal immigrants taking my job. 
I am not a minority.
My employers have always provided me with health insurance so I'm actually a little worse off because of ObamaCare.
I don't believe that I will ever do anything that will result in me facing the death penalty.
Although I support gun control...the reality is that cat got out of the bag long ago and the truth is that if "you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns".  I respect people's rights to own guns and living 8 miles from the city of Detroit, I fully understand why "normal" citizens would want to own guns to protect their families.
I've never collected unemployment nor welfare...I appreciate the safety net being there, but fully believe that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.  Something needs to be done to make abusers employable.
I am not in the military and currently do not have any family members in the military so war or no war has no personal effect on me.  I believe that peaceful means and diplomacy is generally the right way of things, but sometimes, whether we like it or not, the USA needs to step in and be the "parent" to make the misbehaving "children" behave.  Yes, that is US arrogance, but that is the role that our ancestors have chosen for us to be the world's policeman. 

Everything screams at me that I should be a Republican, but aside from arguably being more fiscally responsible, nothing about the Republican side appeals to me.  Number one on my list being the religious fanatics.  Being Agnostic, every phony religious thing that comes out of Republican politicians mouths irks me.  From my point of view, they are either smart enough to know better and are lying through their teeth or they are gullible and have no business governing over men.  I respect people's rights to believe in the flying spaghetti monster or whatever else you want to believe in but don't force your beliefs upon me.  The sad part is that many of those beliefs are actually not really such a bad thing...i.e. the ten commandments.  Teaching people morals is actually a good thing, for the most part.  etc. etc. etc.




Clap  damn right Scott.  I vote my conscious .. not as something as selfish as my pocketbook.

I'll never be a woman (try as I did), never be gay (even though many have thought I was) nor black (though I have as much SOUL baby as any) but damnit man... my conscious.. and my strong sense of right and wrong.. AND very strongly held notion of what this country.. was and no longer is.. tells me that my personal concerns are petty.  My vote is for a better .. more socially diverse country where who you are, or who you choose to sleep with means NOTHING to anyone but ones selves and should never EVER be grounds for discrimation.

and don't buy the crap Scott...  the days of fiscal responsibility being a corner stone of conversative (GOP) poitics are many years and many Presidents in the past. Yes they will cut taxes for you... but it only runs up the deficit when you don't bring in enough to cover what the government is supposed to do.. provide for its people.
Republicans are more fiscally responsible in the sense that they are budgeting the money to spend on things that in theory at least will grow the economy.  Spending money on the military budget does create jobs and create wealth (at least within that sector).  Lowering taxes on the wealthy does provide them with more money to invest (and create jobs) or spend (and create jobs).  Again, this is purely theory as Reagonomics is also known as trickle down economics because only a small amount trickled down. 

On the flipside, giving money to homeless people and welfare recipients and mental patients gives them money to spend, which in theory creates jobs.  But none of that gets invested.  And you are stuck with the dilemma of why should those that work hard (or were born into a family that once worked hard) and succeed be punished and forced to support those who are too "lazy" to work hard and are perfectly content to scam the system.  Isn't it the church's job to support these unfortunate souls who are down and out?  Congress gives us a tax incentive to volunteer and donate money to the church and other organization to help these less fortunate individuals.  If I don't choose to do this, then who gives the government the right to force me to do this.  (Playing Devil's Advocate, but I can understand this point of view).  And just to throw out another saying "give a person a fish they eat for a day, teach them to fish and they eat for a lifetime".  This is what is the most wrong about our welfare system.  I can't say that I am a big fan of Bernie promising free college education because again, why should I have to pay to send someone else's kids to school, but on the other hand at least it is helping "teach them how to fish" so maybe they will be able to "Eat for a lifetime" and someday help to pay for someone else's kid to go to college. LOL


-------------


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 18:44
Originally posted by EddieRUKiddingVarese EddieRUKiddingVarese wrote:

The 2016 Presidential election has been described as the Countdown to Extinction.
 
Why don't you immigrate to somewhere saner and safer Australia even, you could wrestle crocs for free that must be safer than Detroit.
 
Or Just change your leaders every time the wind changes, like we do in Oz.

We've had 5 in 5 years, good going I say- don't let 'em settle into anything they can only cause harm......

Our last outgoing Leader Tony Abbott's said on being kicked out  "a febrile media culture has developed that rewards treachery"?

You gotta love the way pollies speak, keep em on there toes I say.
 
 
No crocs, but once in a while Detroit has an alligator story.  http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/alligator-dumped-in-east-detroit" rel="nofollow - http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/alligator-dumped-in-east-detroit   

The Republicans are definitely obsessed with pointing fingers at what they call the "Lame Stream" media.  I believe a term coined by the always good for a quote Sarah Palin.



-------------


Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 18:58
An Alligator, what a great idea for a Republican candidate and one from Detroit too
Would make the State of the Union address at least interesting........... 

-------------
"Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes"
and I need the knits, the double knits!


Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 21:48
Originally posted by EddieRUKiddingVarese EddieRUKiddingVarese wrote:

The 2016 Presidential election has been described as the Countdown to Extinction.
 
Why don't you immigrate to somewhere saner and safer Australia even, you could wrestle crocs for free that must be safer than Detroit.
 
Or Just change your leaders every time the wind changes, like we do in Oz.

We've had 5 in 5 years, good going I say- don't let 'em settle into anything they can only cause harm......

Our last outgoing Leader Tony Abbott's said on being kicked out  "a febrile media culture has developed that rewards treachery"?

You gotta love the way pollies speak, keep em on there toes I say.
 
 

Australia is full of crazy right wing nuts too tho :(


Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 21:53
Also since someone else posted theirs, here are my ISideWith results:
https://www.isidewith.com/results-image/elections/2016-presidential/1745281478.jpg
https://www.isidewith.com/results-image/1745281478.jpg


Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: February 26 2016 at 22:09
[/QUOTE]
Australia is full of crazy right wing nuts too tho :(
[/QUOTE]
 
Yea, pretty salty ones.........Big smile


-------------
"Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes"
and I need the knits, the double knits!


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 07:53
this one induced a chuckle this morning...

NAH!!!!!!!

"My party has gone batsh*t crazy," says South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 12:51
^ That was a gem.


-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: emigre80
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 13:48
Tisn't often I find myself agreeing with Lindsey Graham but in this case - spot on, mate.


Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 14:15
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:


Republicans are more fiscally responsible in the sense that they are budgeting the money to spend on things that in theory at least will grow the economy. Yup, in theory. Spending money on the military budget does create jobs and create wealth (at least within that sector). True enough. Lowering taxes on the wealthy does provide them with more money to invest (and create jobs) or spend (and create jobs). Indeed. But they will only invest if they can earn enough money to go with a solid profit, and the days when big investors felt an obligation to invest where they actually live seems to have disappeared. Tax cuts for the rich is what has made China a growing economic superpower of course, as well as quite a few other low wage cost countries worldwide.  Again, this is purely theory as Reagonomics is also known as trickle down economics because only a small amount trickled down.  And when it trickled down, it had a growing tendency to do so in various tax havens and their banking systems, sadly.

On the flipside, giving money to homeless people and welfare recipients and mental patients gives them money to spend, which in theory creates jobs. Indeed, that is a proven fact. But none of that gets invested. Not directly no, but just about all of the additional funds they have will go towards growing the local economy. And you are stuck with the dilemma of why should those that work hard (or were born into a family that once worked hard) and succeed be punished and forced to support those who are too "lazy" to work hard and are perfectly content to scam the system. That working hard stuff is mainly myth. Are you trying to tell me that a cleaning lady at a hotel or a typical McDonalds employee doesn't work hard? Or the guys that picks up your trash? I'll challenge anyone to try to work in those or other typical low paid  occupations for a few weeks.  Isn't it the church's job to support these unfortunate souls who are down and out? Should welfare to those in need be a matter of chance and luck? Congress gives us a tax incentive to volunteer and donate money to the church and other organization to help these less fortunate individuals. The church does a lot of good indeed, and they do it at a much lower cost than any business you could name when active in those fields, but they can only give as much aid out as they get money in. Which is and will always be a fundamental weakness to the work they do. If I don't choose to do this, then who gives the government the right to force me to do this.  (Playing Devil's Advocate, but I can understand this point of view). The key question is, of course, why should we help those unfortunate. Why spend resources to help the down and out drug addict who slowly destroys his life? Or the transgender kid who was abused, couldn't take the pain any more and escaped from reality by way of alcohol and narcotics.  And just to throw out another saying "give a person a fish they eat for a day, teach them to fish and they eat for a lifetime". But what about those unable to learn to fish?  This is what is the most wrong about our welfare system. A welfare system needs to have several goals in sight. All of them, ultimately, will be oriented towards reducing the cost for society as well as helping those in need. To help people to help themselves indeed, but also to understand that some are easier to enable than others, and some people just can't be helped. Not because of a lack of will actually, in most cases it will be a lack of actual intelligence, too many severe traumatic life experiences or too much physical and/or mental damage. To state an example: Do you expect the woman who was raped 40.000 times to actually be able to live a regular life afterwards?  I can't say that I am a big fan of Bernie promising free college education because again, why should I have to pay to send someone else's kids to school, tossing in a detail here: The free tuition is limited to public schools only. The private schools will still exist, and presumably they will build up a reputation of giving higher class or quality education, and the government will not fund the tuition of those who attend the private options. I would expect that all government direct and indirect funding of those private facilities would stop once the public option becomes free, and the net cost of that transition for the government wouldn't actually be all that great  but on the other hand at least it is helping "teach them how to fish" so maybe they will be able to "Eat for a lifetime" and someday help to pay for someone else's kid to go to college. LOL


Inserted a few comments as seen for the view of someone living in a social democracy (and politically I'm mainly regarded by others as a person with a centrum/libertarian/right stance, and slightly conservative, at that)


-------------
Websites I work with:

http://www.progressor.net
http://www.houseofprog.com

My profile on Mixcloud:
https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 14:29
ahh.. missed Scott's reply.  I'll get to that after I have pumped a couple of cups of coffee into me.

Being that this is a political thread.  In the attempt to keep it ..ahem.. fair and balanced and from a right wing shooting gallery.

I did like Scott's posts.  I like hearing what drives us. I did delete a post of mine earlier. I might try again later but I'd be curious to hear from you all. What drives YOU politically. Are you a moderate... a raving partisan like me. What was the first election cycle you voted in.  Tell me, tell us, what are you mr. and mrs. prog fan.

What are politics to you and what drives your vote and support.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 16:16
I'm not american, and not partisan. I'm fiscally conservative in many ways, but mostly because I like efficiency and don't like to see waste (the Conservative party here and in the US is not what I would call fiscally responsible). I have never voted conservative in Canada and would not in the US. For me, the most important issue is the environment, and the common conservative stance on that is one thing hat I really dislike about conservative parties in the US and here (doesn't help in the US that the Koch brothers contribute so much to the Republican campaign). Also, I would like to see religion kept out of politics as much as possible (I'm a church and temple going atheist, but don't push my beliefs or lack thereof).

I would vote for Bernie Sanders if I had the chance to.

Incidentally, I spend quite a lot of time looking up videos of a political nature and otherwise on youtube and am absolutely disgusted by the attitudes and comments of many people there. Good to see this civil discussion here.


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 16:20
Thumbs UpClap

-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 17:10
Y'know Mike, my problem is that though I have strong views, I also don't take to politics very well.   Or maybe I should say Politics.   It's just not a medium I'm comfortable in or relate to.   I respect it, I'm just not attracted to it.

As far as positions, I'm a JFK/Obama moderate progressive ... if there is such a thing.   I like Sanders a lot but the way I see it, Hillary is a fighter and if she's on your side, you have an advantage.   Like when we hired Willie Brown for SF mayor:  No one completely liked him, but we were all glad he represented us.




-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 17:48
Perhaps you are wise to be that way David. Heart I suppose I would classify myself as political junkie.

I remember very clearly... in that strange way that one's memory works.. my first election.  1976 and being the child of two fiercely proud liberals as well as socially conscious parents I suppose it was natural I would turn out the same so there I was haranguing my fellow grade school students to vote for Carter in my school's mock election held for the students. LOL

I'll never forget one day  in college when I grabbed an open microphone in front of the library and launched a fiery oratory against all the frickin fratboys out there playing Frisbee while our brothers were fighting and dying for their freedom in China. 

Needless to say that didn't go over well... I was pelted with water and soda bottles...Ouch

yeah.. politics is a part of my DNA I suppose.  A junkie. Politics facinates me, more than that. Voters facinate me, especially those on the right. LOL




-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 17:52
I can see that--  and much like voters, Juries fascinate me in a similar way, though more to do with judgement and human dynamics than with public policy.



-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 17:54
oh you are not kidding me.. most dread jury duty. I WANT to get it, and have completely enjoyed the couple times I've served on them.


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:00
Me too, highly interesting and educational, and yes, an honor.   Frankly I do dread the summons, but I'm also glad I served.




-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:01
Hillary Clinton is scrappy, but I feel that she's more of a fighter for herself. She's been so tainted with controversy, we'll have to see what transpires. Be interesting to see how the investigation goes. If she is indicted after winning the primaries, perhaps Joe Biden will become the candidate.

According to isidewith, I'm a left-wing authoritarian who supports Bernie Sanders the most. I thought Ted Cruz would be bottom for me, but he's second to last according to their questions.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:11
^ Oh I don't see any email investigation going anywhere or having much weight if it did.   It's largely what she keeps saying it is: trumped up politikal nonsense that any gov official could potentially face.   Have you looked at the evidence in question; as far as I can tell it's all declassified if sensitive stuff that others had access to and adds up to about zero.    But as you say, we'll see.




-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy


Posted By: micky
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:13
^ agreed. Just more political games being played by Congress


-------------
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:48
Term limits for Congress. Some have been in there 30 years. 


Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:57
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

Term limits for Congress. Some have been in there 30 years. 
 
 
Absolutely....it was time for this years ago. And term limits on Supreme Court judges also. None of these people need to be in there for life.


-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 18:59
John Mc Cain can go get a real job



Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 19:08
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ Oh I don't see any email investigation going anywhere or having much weight if it did.   It's largely what she keeps saying it is: trumped up politikal nonsense that any gov official could potentially face.   Have you looked at the evidence in question; as far as I can tell it's all declassified if sensitive stuff that others had access to and adds up to about zero.    But as you say, we'll see.


The email server investigation is ongoing (I don't expect her to be indicted), and a possible conflict of interest investigation when it came to Clinton Foundation donations is ongoing, as well as possible misuse of charitable funds. Certainly there is political motivation and collusion when it comes to such investigations.


Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 19:35
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

John Mc Cain can go get a real job


The rubber chicken circuit?


-------------
Ian

Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com

https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 27 2016 at 21:24
sounds about right


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 02:46
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

Term limits for Congress. Some have been in there 30 years. 
 
 
Absolutely....it was time for this years ago. And term limits on Supreme Court judges also. None of these people need to be in there for life.

oh, but we need them senile in the Supreme Court so that they will nod every bill through


-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 08:53
I think it is Congress that approves bills


Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 09:01
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

I think it is Congress that approves bills


As a Limey on the outside, that is what I thought as well

-------------
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 10:40
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

Term limits for Congress. Some have been in there 30 years. 
 
 
Absolutely....it was time for this years ago. And term limits on Supreme Court judges also. None of these people need to be in there for life.
Not that I entirely disagree, but the trouble with term limits is that by the time the elected officials figure out their jobs and gain power/respect in their respective chambers, they are on their way out because they are termed out.  You end up with a bunch of idealists with no experience.  You also end up with a lot of lame duck candidates who are looking for their next jobs.  Political office is a job, and it is good to have good, experienced people doing these jobs, but the folks who are doing a sh*tty job, definitely need to get voted out of office.  The nature of our political system is that each politician can get voted out of office every 2 years (House) or 6 years (Senate).  The fact that people are re-elected over and over again is the fault of the people who keep re-electing them.

-------------


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 10:44
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

I think it is Congress that approves bills


As a Limey on the outside, that is what I thought as well
Correct.  Congress approves the bills.  The Supreme Court doesn't make law, they just interpret the law that Congress has written and the President has signed off on.  However, as discussed previously, the Court judges have been know to interpret the Constitution to make the law in favor of whichever political parties' point of view they side on, which in effect does create law, despite what they say. 

-------------


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 10:47
interesting post^ I think I might prefer idealists with no experience over some of the old lifers who control the present Congress. I do see your point but because the voters in Arizona elect someone the whole country is stuck with it. That is just an example. I figure lobbyists and corporations are actually the handlers of these guys anyway.



Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:03
Regarding term limits we are talking about moderate terms like 6-8 years or so . If an intelligent politician (and we are assuming they have some political experience to begin with on some level) can't figure out their job in a couple of years then he or she probably doesn't belong there to begin with imho.
Being in there any longer breeds complacency, corruption , and contempt.
These Federal , State, and other political jobs have become careers to the extent that people want them to gain power and wealth and not for any public cause.
When it comes to president I don't really trust anyone who actually wants the job...that's more about ego imo, and not a sign of someone who is going to do the right thing in many cases.
 
 


-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:07
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

interesting post^ I think I might prefer idealists with no experience over some of the old lifers who control the present Congress. I do see your point but because the voters in Arizona elect someone the whole country is stuck with it. That is just an example. I figure lobbyists and corporations are actually the handlers of these guys anyway.

That is always the catch isn't it.  I have no ability to vote for or against John Boner or Paul Ryan, and yet most everything that happens in our government must run through them (formerly Boner)...and of course on the other side I have no ability to vote for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reed but I am stuck with them too. 

There is so much division in the US, we have kind of reached that point where we really should split into two or more countries with the blue states forming one country and the red states forming the other.  The sad part is, if that were to happen, it would only be a matter of time before these two new countries went to war with each other over their ideological differences.


-------------


Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:14
Quote
The email server investigation is ongoing (I don't expect her to be indicted), and a possible conflict of interest investigation when it came to Clinton Foundation donations is ongoing, as well as possible misuse of charitable funds. Certainly there is political motivation and collusion when it comes to such investigations.
 
There are always politics involved when these things happen and since Democrats are in charge right now it's unlikely they will indict her,  but the better question is why would someone as smart as Hilary Clinton even take the risk of getting using a  'private server' knowing it was against the rules for government officials in her area?  I'm not endorsing any of the GOP since I have pretty much always been a Dem but is she someone you want to vote for knowing she did this and then tried to cover it up? Is she the best we have to vote for? That's a sad comment imho.
Confused


-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin


Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:17
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

interesting post^ I think I might prefer idealists with no experience over some of the old lifers who control the present Congress. I do see your point but because the voters in Arizona elect someone the whole country is stuck with it. That is just an example. I figure lobbyists and corporations are actually the handlers of these guys anyway.

That is always the catch isn't it.  I have no ability to vote for or against John Boner or Paul Ryan, and yet most everything that happens in our government must run through them (formerly Boner)...and of course on the other side I have no ability to vote for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reed but I am stuck with them too. 

There is so much division in the US, we have kind of reached that point where we really should split into two or more countries with the blue states forming one country and the red states forming the other.  The sad part is, if that were to happen, it would only be a matter of time before these two new countries went to war with each other over their ideological differences.
It would be an interesting battle with no money to spend on combat, with the blue country handing out everything in entitlements and the red country having eliminated taxes on the people who can actually afford to pay taxes.


-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:22
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Regarding term limits we are talking about moderate terms like 6-8 years or so . If an intelligent politician (and we are assuming they have some political experience to begin with on some level) can't figure out their job in a couple of years then he or she probably doesn't belong there to begin with imho.
Being in there any longer breeds complacency, corruption , and contempt.
These Federal , State, and other political jobs have become careers to the extent that people want them to gain power and wealth and not for any public cause.
When it comes to president I don't really trust anyone who actually wants the job...that's more about ego imo, and not a sign of someone who is going to do the right thing in many cases.
 
 
Honestly, I don't think it really matters.  I think that we are screwed by out politicians either way.  Michigan has the strictest term limits in the country.  I have spoken with political analysts that have said that the term limits are actually bad for our state because of the turnover and the points that I described in my previous post.  You spend your first term learning the ropes and then in your 2nd term you have the power to do something because the 2nd term people were termed out the last time...but you are a lame duck politician so you are either passing laws to benefit your next employer or you are spending your term running for your next political office.  I definitely see both sides of the coin.  It is a shame that when you have an honest, good person doing the job they have to lose their job because of term limits and pass it on to who knows who.  

Depending on your point of view, term limits are what are getting us into this mess with our next president.  Honestly, if I had my druthers between another term of President Obama and any of the other candidates out there, I'd prefer President Obama.   Maybe its a good thing or maybe its a bad thing but basically right now, being a lame duck president, he is about as ineffective as he has ever been...but given that he and Congress have refused to work with each other for the last 5 years, what is another year. 


-------------


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:26
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

interesting post^ I think I might prefer idealists with no experience over some of the old lifers who control the present Congress. I do see your point but because the voters in Arizona elect someone the whole country is stuck with it. That is just an example. I figure lobbyists and corporations are actually the handlers of these guys anyway.

That is always the catch isn't it.  I have no ability to vote for or against John Boner or Paul Ryan, and yet most everything that happens in our government must run through them (formerly Boner)...and of course on the other side I have no ability to vote for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reed but I am stuck with them too. 

There is so much division in the US, we have kind of reached that point where we really should split into two or more countries with the blue states forming one country and the red states forming the other.  The sad part is, if that were to happen, it would only be a matter of time before these two new countries went to war with each other over their ideological differences.
It would be an interesting battle with no money to spend on combat, with the blue country handing out everything in entitlements and the red country having eliminated taxes on the people who can actually afford to pay taxes.
Actually, I figured that it would be a really quick battle with the Red Country spending all of their tax dollars on military and the Blue Country spending all of theirs on handouts, the Red Country should win that battle pretty easily.  But you could be right, that the Red Country wouldn't have any money to spend on the military since they wouldn't be collecting any taxes.  LOL

-------------


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: February 28 2016 at 11:31
The war has already begun



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk