2016 Presidential Horse Race

[Hammer Of The Gods]

And what is your true cost per hour when you account for unemployment, FICA and benefits?

Wage creep is the term you are eluding to. Paying the lowest ranking employee $15/hour means each grade needs to move up as well to validate their value above that of a "minimum" worker.

Also consider the motivation to skip high school or college to better yourself because the new $15/hour minimum wage seems like a better option than going to school to train for a real career.

Jesus, lets not even go there. I'm out of bourbon at home. Its depressing and maddening.

 

[connor_in]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Failure to report donations on taxes? Check.
Illegal private email server? Check.
Shell company to hide income? CHECK <a href="http://t.co/U1ePn40yxd">http://t.co/U1ePn40yxd</a></p>— RB (@RBPundit) <a href="https://twitter.com/RBPundit/status/603277870270717953">May 26, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Oh, those crazy Clintons! Who knows what goofy unethical scheme they'll come up w/ next? Rascals" - the media</p>— Political Math (@politicalmath) <a href="https://twitter.com/politicalmath/status/603293386519552003">May 26, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[dshans]

"It's the political math stupid."

 

[Buster Bluth]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Failure to report donations on taxes? Check.
Illegal private email server? Check.
Shell company to hide income? CHECK <a href="http://t.co/U1ePn40yxd">http://t.co/U1ePn40yxd</a></p>— RB (@RBPundit) <a href="https://twitter.com/RBPundit/status/603277870270717953">May 26, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Oh, those crazy Clintons! Who knows what goofy unethical scheme they'll come up w/ next? Rascals" - the media</p>— Political Math (@politicalmath) <a href="https://twitter.com/politicalmath/status/603293386519552003">May 26, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Get ready for the Clinton Triangulation Strangulation™.

 

[wizards8507]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/26/politics/rand-paul-book-gop-brand-election-2016/

I love this guy.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Rand Paul: Republican brand 'sucks' and is 'broken' - CNNPolitics.com

I love this guy.

"It boggles my mind to think that somehow Republicans have been branded as a party that doesn't like the environment," he said, pointing to avowed conservationist Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.

Are there two Republican Presidents more disowned by libertarians than those two? One was the initial progressive President and both drastically increased the power of the federal government.

 

[Black Irish]

And what is your true cost per hour when you account for unemployment, FICA and benefits?

Wage creep is the term you are eluding to. Paying the lowest ranking employee $15/hour means each grade needs to move up as well to validate their value above that of a "minimum" worker.

Also consider the motivation to skip high school or college to better yourself because the new $15/hour minimum wage seems like a better option than going to school to train for a real career.

I forget who to attribute the quote to, and I'm paraphrasing "If pay brain surgeons and garbage men the same, everyone will want to be a garbage man."

 

[wizards8507]

Are there two Republican Presidents more disowned by libertarians than those two? One was the initial progressive President and both drastically increased the power of the federal government.

It doesn't bean every idea they had was bad. Besides, Rand is taking about branding, not policy.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[Black Irish]

Interesting article about income inequality.

sharing-economy-increasing-income-inequality-nishant-bhajaria

A quick summary: The author's hypothesis is that the sharing economy is benefitting the middle to upper class not only on the demand side, but the supply side as well. To drive for Uber, for instance, you need a late model car. So that restriction not only pushes out the cab drivers, who are usually low-end blue-collar workers, but also shuts out the working poor who have cars that are too old to qualify for Uber service.

It's an interesting take on the debate. To my mind, it certainly has merit. Pinning income gaps on greedy CEOs or pandering politicians is too pat. The market is always a player in these developments, and less easy to fight against. What presidential candidate is going to stump against Uber for costing cab drivers money or Craigslist for taking revenue away from newspaper classified sections? Talk about turning the clock back.

 

[NDohio]

Get ready for the Clinton Triangulation Strangulation™.

Even the Clintons are part of the FIFA scandal.

Jackie Kucinich, senior politics editor for the Daily Beast, is drawing a line between Bill Clinton, Fifa and Qatar’s World Cup bid.

The Clinton global charity has received between $50,000 and $100,000 from soccer’s governing body and has partnered with the Fédération Internationale de Football Association on several occasions, according to donor listings on the foundation’s website.

...

When the U.S. lost the 2022 bid to Qatar, Clinton was rumored to be so upset he shattered a mirror.

But apparently Qatar tried to make it up to him.

The Qatar 2022 Supreme Committee, partnering with the State of Qatar, “committed to utilizing its research and development for sustainable infrastructure at the 2022 FIFA World Cup to improve food security in Qatar, the Middle East, and other arid and water-stressed regions throughout the world,” according to the Clinton Foundation website.

The cost of the two-year project is not listed on the Clinton Foundation website, but the Qatar 2022 committee gave the foundation between $250,000 and $500,000 in 2014 and the State of Qatar gave between $1 million and $5 million in previous, unspecified years.

 

[wizards8507]

2016 GOP field grows more crowded | TheHill

Who on planet Earth is clamoring for Lindsay Graham or Rick Santorum to be POTUS?

 

[Black Irish]

2016 GOP field grows more crowded | TheHill

Who on planet Earth is clamoring for Lindsay Graham or Rick Santorum to be POTUS?

Their egos.

 

[GoIrish41]

O'Malley in on Team Dem. I wish Warren would reconsider. I think she would give Hillary a tough test. The good thing about the contenders is that they will probably push Hillary to the left. I actually like both Sanders and, to a lesser extent, O'Malley better than Clinton even if they do not have much of a shot at winning the nomination. Warren would be a stronger challenger and could actually win the nomination. At the very least a strong challenge will make Hillary a better candidate for the general election. I do not see a Republican candidate who would stand a chance against Hillary in the general election. I am not sure that is the case with the other Dem candidates. So the good news ( for Democrats) is we are well positioned to retain the White House .... The bad news (IMHO) is that the least ideal of the candidates will probably sit in the Oval Office.

 

[Black Irish]

Hillary better hope that she doesn't have a tough time with the Dem nomination process. She is a strong candidate, but vulnerable. IMO, she can either weather a rough Dem nomination fight OR a tough general election. I doubt she can go through two knock-down-drag-outs and still come out ahead. Why do you think she's practically in hiding from the media regarding her campaign? Hillary's far from a Teflon candidate; too many direct hits and that ship sinks.

 

[EddytoNow]

O'Malley in on Team Dem. I wish Warren would reconsider. I think she would give Hillary a tough test. The good thing about the contenders is that they will probably push Hillary to the left. I actually like both Sanders and, to a lesser extent, O'Malley better than Clinton even if they do not have much of a shot at winning the nomination. Warren would be a stronger challenger and could actually win the nomination. At the very least a strong challenge will make Hillary a better candidate for the general election. I do not see a Republican candidate who would stand a chance against Hillary in the general election. I am not sure that is the case with the other Dem candidates. So the good news ( for Democrats) is we are well positioned to retain the White House .... The bad news (IMHO) is that the least ideal of the candidates will probably sit in the Oval Office.

Agreed. Hillary will most likely be the Democratic candidate. As more Democrats enter the field, they take votes away from each other. Hillary has a fairly large support base among the Democratic primary voters. Those who aren't happy with Hillary will split their votes between Sanders and O'Malley. Now if Jim Webb decides to enter the race, that would make things interesting as he could chip away at Hillary's support among more moderate Democrats.

 

[GATTACA!]

Only in America could someone like Hillary Clinton be a serious candidate. Absolutely astonishing.

 

[EddytoNow]

Hillary better hope that she doesn't have a tough time with the Dem nomination process. She is a strong candidate, but vulnerable. IMO, she can either weather a rough Dem nomination fight OR a tough general election. I doubt she can go through two knock-down-drag-outs and still come out ahead. Why do you think she's practically in hiding from the media regarding her campaign? Hillary's far from a Teflon candidate; too many direct hits and that ship sinks.

The media has been all over Hillary, and every Republican candidate can get media attention now by taking shots at her. As soon as the Republicans select a candidate, the media will focus its attention on pointing out all the flaws in the Republican standard-bearer. Right now there are too many Republican primary candidates for the media to focus on. Once that field is whittled down to a single candidate, that man or woman will have the same scrutiny that Hillary is receiving now. It's probably to Hillary's benefit that all this is being discussed at this time. By the time the presidential campaign gets into full swing, all of her current flaws as a candidate will be old news.

 

[IrishLax]

I strongly dislike O'Malley as a candidate. He was horrendous in Maryland despite overwhelming initial support in a very blue state. He pretty much had free reign to govern how he wanted and all it did was drive businesses out of Maryland to Virginia, piss off residents, and ruin cities.

Supposedly, he's a good person but he has no idea what he's doing when it comes to governmental management, taxes, etc.

But if you're a very progressive person that believes in his ideas (that failed miserably on a state level) he's probably a solid choice for you because, again, most people I know who've met/know him personally say he's not borderline evil like many alternative options for President.

 

[Wild Bill]

O'Malley in on Team Dem. I wish Warren would reconsider. I think she would give Hillary a tough test. The good thing about the contenders is that they will probably push Hillary to the left. I actually like both Sanders and, to a lesser extent, O'Malley better than Clinton even if they do not have much of a shot at winning the nomination. Warren would be a stronger challenger and could actually win the nomination. At the very least a strong challenge will make Hillary a better candidate for the general election. I do not see a Republican candidate who would stand a chance against Hillary in the general election. I am not sure that is the case with the other Dem candidates. So the good news ( for Democrats) is we are well positioned to retain the White House .... The bad news (IMHO) is that the least ideal of the candidates will probably sit in the Oval Office.

Walker and Rand could work Hilary like a two dollar hooker if they get money backing and they're willing to roll up their sleeves.

That's a big if regarding money.

 

[GoIrish41]

Walker and Rand could work Hilary like a two dollar hooker if they get money backing and they're willing to roll up their sleeves.

That's a big if regarding money.

Neither of them will win the nomination.

 

[Wild Bill]

Neither of them will win the nomination.

Unfortunately, you're probably right.

 

[wizards8507]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/the-moment-rand-paul-has-been-waiting-for-118449.html

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[wizards8507]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/fox-news-poll-coverage-omits-rand-paul-207928.html?ml=po

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[EddytoNow]

Walker and Rand could work Hilary like a two dollar hooker if they get money backing and they're willing to roll up their sleeves.

That's a big if regarding money.

Someone like Walker would bring the Obama coalition back together to support any of the Democratic candidates. He is detested by the poor, the working class, and much of the middle class. His nomination would give the Democrats ammunition to brand the Republicans as the party of the wealthy once again.

Rand would actually appeal to many Democratic voters, especially those who oppose the government spying on its own citizens and those who view war as a last resort. However, those last two policy positions will keep Rand Paul from getting anywhere near the Republican nomination. Rank-and-file Republicans are not going to vote for anyone opposed to the surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act or opposed to using our military strength to police the world.

 

[connor_in]

Someone like Walker would bring the Obama coalition back together to support any of the Democratic candidates. He is detested by the poor, the working class, and much of the middle class. His nomination would give the Democrats ammunition to brand the Republicans as the party of the wealthy once again.

Rand would actually appeal to many Democratic voters, especially those who oppose the government spying on its own citizens and those who view war as a last resort. However, those last two policy positions will keep Rand Paul from getting anywhere near the Republican nomination. Rank-and-file Republicans are not going to vote for anyone opposed to the surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act or opposed to using our military strength to police the world.

Wow...who new there were so many rich people in WI that could elect and re-elect him

 

[wizards8507]

Rand would actually appeal to many Democratic voters, especially those who oppose the government spying on its own citizens and those who view war as a last resort. However, those last two policy positions will keep Rand Paul from getting anywhere near the Republican nomination. Rank-and-file Republicans are not going to vote for anyone opposed to the surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act or opposed to using our military strength to police the world.

I think (hope) you're misunderstanding the GOP base. The Tea Party has kind of been taken over by the Bible thumpers but it started with the libertarians. Rand could play a huge strategic role in making young voters an asset to the party instead of a liability, especially against Hillary. I have to think the party has fatigue from back to back establishment nominees.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[Wild Bill]

Someone like Walker would bring the Obama coalition back together to support any of the Democratic candidates. He is detested by the poor, the working class, and much of the middle class. His nomination would give the Democrats ammunition to brand the Republicans as the party of the wealthy once again.

Yeah. Hillary is a working class gal.

 

[Black Irish]

Someone like Walker would bring the Obama coalition back together to support any of the Democratic candidates. He is detested by the poor, the working class, and much of the middle class. His nomination would give the Democrats ammunition to brand the Republicans as the party of the wealthy once again.

Rand would actually appeal to many Democratic voters, especially those who oppose the government spying on its own citizens and those who view war as a last resort. However, those last two policy positions will keep Rand Paul from getting anywhere near the Republican nomination. Rank-and-file Republicans are not going to vote for anyone opposed to the surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act or opposed to using our military strength to police the world.

In reference to the bolded, I think it's more the GOP establishment that won't cotton to those positions. I'm confident that many rank-and-file Republican voters won't find a quasi-isolationist position hard to get behind. Plenty of people on the right are tired of the U.S. military getting committed to every flare-up in the world. Being pro-military and thinking our troops should be the world's police force are not the same thing.

 

[EddytoNow]

Yeah. Hillary is a working class gal.

Scott Walker's and Hillary Clinton's personal wealth is not the issue. The difference is in their policies. Scott Walker has been no friend to the poor and working class. And while there are better options for poor and working class voters among the Democrats, Clinton is a far better choice than Walker for those voting their pocket book. The key factor is turnout.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Scott Walker's and Hillary Clinton's personal wealth is not the issue. The difference is in their policies. Scott Walker has been no friend to the poor and working class. And while there are better options for poor and working class voters among the Democrats, Clinton is a far better choice than Walker for those voting their pocket book. The key factor is turnout.

Based on what?