2016 Presidential Horse Race

[kmoose]

Bringing Africa into the argument is absolutely a straw man.

Also basic needs are the same between the USA and Africa, they need food, water, protection from the elements and a chance to better themselves (basic education) (and I think it is pretty reasonable to add healthcare into it as well, though you obviously disagree). Those are the same across all 50 of our states. Above and beyond I am open for it going to the states.

FIFY...

 

[RDU Irish]

It's really a shame he never got more traction. There are 3 candidates in this election: Bernie Sanders (socialist, ultra liberal), Rand Paul (libertarian), and everyone else (liberal). He is the ONLY candidate who actually respects the Constitution and the liberties it affords the people. He is the ONLY candidate who remotely cares about the proper use of a warrant. He is the ONLY candidate who seriously talked about devolving power away from the federal government and back to the states (see 10th Amendment). He is the ONLY candidate who would recognizes that government isn't the solution and would scale back the size of government.

Ted Cruz uses the Constitution when it's convenient or when he needs to talk tough and whip a crowd into an anti-Obama frenzy. He's a classic Tea Party conservative. "Constitution? You mean an easy, intangible tool to bludgeon Obama? Oh yeah that thing! I like that!"

The rest of the candidates wouldn't know that document from "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie" which is basically their platform to varying degrees.

It's really sad that the Paul family is viewed as politically backwards rather than politically integrous.

Wait - I thought you only made jokes around here? Dead on assessment.

 

[Rack Em]

Wait - I thought you only made jokes around here? Dead on assessment.

Typically, yes. Law school pushed me into the Libertarian bucket and out of typical conservative grouping.

 

[Rack Em]

"If you give a mouse a cookie, he'll probably want you to arm various religious sects in Syria to combat the radical jihadist group that spawned from the half-assed attempt to overthrow a dictator which actually started a civil war"

^ Platform of everyone not named Bernie

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Bringing Africa into the argument is absolutely a straw man.

Also basic needs are the same between NY and Arkansas, they need food, water, protection from the elements and a chance to better themselves (basic education) (and I think it is pretty reasonable to add healthcare into it as well, though you obviously disagree). Those are the same across all 50 of our states. Above and beyond I am open for it going to the states.

I'll address the larger point below, but let's take a moment to recognize that the Federal government does not simply provide for "basic needs". It regulates virtually every aspect of American life these days; and even in those few spheres where the Supreme Court still deigns to limit its authority, the Feds simply extort the states into doing what they want anyway. There are hundreds of thousands of Federal criminal statutes and administrative regulations carrying criminal penalties alone...

This is the crux of our issue. Many states wouldn't take care of their poor people (either because they aren't willing or because they could afford it, just look at how many states get way more back in Federal dollars in comparison to what they put in). This creates haves and have nots for the poor people. For someone like you or many on this board (including me) we could easily just move to another state and find a job without an issue (a state that had what we wanted). For the poorest that isn't an option, they are the ones who would be most harmed (if they are in one of the have not states). Some states show that by under funding things such as education already or have politicians that want to reduce things such as food stamps. If you want to make an argument that anything above the basics should be handled local, then I might agree but the basics should be there for all citizens of the U.S.

You know what's even more crucial than food, water, shelter, education, or healthcare? The right of every child to a loving parent. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, there are a lot of bad parents out there. But Western societies have rightfully refused to violate that sacred bond except in the most extreme cases of abuse or neglect.

The right to communal self-determination and governance is in the same category. Yet you're willing to run roughshod over it because some states would inevitably fail to care for their poor people as well as they should. I wonder how quick you'd be to part a child from a parent under less than ideal circumstances.

Also I think that you are drawing an odd conclusion by tying welfare programs to the American family being in worse shape. I think that the rise in the attitude "that I need to get mine and fuck the others" has led the breakdown of the family unit, the rise of consumerism, etc. Welfare programs have had to increase due to the people who are being left behind in the "grab all that you can" culture. Unfortunately I don't think that it will change, though I think that it will eventually tear the country apart.

Where do you think that culture comes from? It aint just the GOP. I've argued many times here before that it's a problem inherent with political liberalism itself, which includes both of our mainstream parties. The autonomous individual is at the heart of liberalism, which is why selfish anti-social behavior is becoming normalized, and Western society continues to atomize. It's in that already atomized social landscape that massive corporate and governmental institutions spring up and thrive; such leviathans simply don't exist in more communitarian and sustainable societies.

So when Progressives suggest that a larger welfare state is the solution to (instead of a symptom of) the problem, I cringe. It wouldn't be necessary in a healthy society, and it's very existence makes it harder for us as Americans to address the ideological rot that is killing our culture.

 

[RDU Irish]

"To me the Catholic teaching on Human Dignity, says you take care of those people, that the poor aren't someone that we just throw money at, but someone that we partner with and help them to rise up from where they are at currently. I guess, how do you reconcile your beliefs that we don't need to help them with their basic needs with your beliefs as a Catholic? "

Then actively give time and money to Catholic Charities to facilitate this noble work. Why is government taking the place of charity? When government provides this assistance it is faceless and dehumanized with the community removed.

This whole debate between kmoose and others seems to beg the question, where does separation of church and state step in? Great, you feel morally obligated - why is that religious belief being thrust upon government for action? We conveniently grasp onto religious obligation when expanding government into creating a welfare state of dependency but the minute religion gets in the way it is cast aside in a church vs state defense.

 

[wizards8507]

"To me the Catholic teaching on Human Dignity, says you take care of those people, that the poor aren't someone that we just throw money at, but someone that we partner with and help them to rise up from where they are at currently. I guess, how do you reconcile your beliefs that we don't need to help them with their basic needs with your beliefs as a Catholic? "

Then actively give time and money to Catholic Charities to facilitate this noble work. Why is government taking the place of charity? When government provides this assistance it is faceless and dehumanized with the community removed.

This whole debate between kmoose and others seems to beg the question, where does separation of church and state step in? Great, you feel morally obligated - why is that religious belief being thrust upon government for action? We conveniently grasp onto religious obligation when expanding government into creating a welfare state of dependency but the minute religion gets in the way it is cast aside in a church vs state defense.

Absolutely this. Charity and stewardship for the poor are good and virtuous moral obligations of those of us able to practice them. Coerced participation in those activities (i.e. tax-and-spend, confiscate-and-redistribute) is no virtue. Yes, we have obligations to one another as people, but government has no business enforcing those obligations. Why? Because there's no guarantee that the federal apparatus will always be controlled by those who share the values on which those obligations are built. Giving them the power to enforce "noble goals" means they also have the power to enforce horrifying goals. An easy example is the federal funding of abortion in the name of "women's health."

All of this speaks to whether the government should be allowed to do these things in the first place, without even touching the fact that they suck at it. Even if we all conceded that the government has a role to play in providing healthcare, there are mountains of evidence that they're not any good at administering these types of programs with any amount of fairness or efficiency.

 

[phgreek]

"To me the Catholic teaching on Human Dignity, says you take care of those people, that the poor aren't someone that we just throw money at, but someone that we partner with and help them to rise up from where they are at currently. I guess, how do you reconcile your beliefs that we don't need to help them with their basic needs with your beliefs as a Catholic? "

Then actively give time and money to Catholic Charities to facilitate this noble work. Why is government taking the place of charity? When government provides this assistance it is faceless and dehumanized with the community removed.

This whole debate between kmoose and others seems to beg the question, where does separation of church and state step in? Great, you feel morally obligated - why is that religious belief being thrust upon government for action? We conveniently grasp onto religious obligation when expanding government into creating a welfare state of dependency but the minute religion gets in the way it is cast aside in a church vs state defense.

...ah yes the end always justify the means...

Say whatever they must, foist faith-based guilt in whatever way meets their need, use labels, coopt words, apply labels, create new vicitm territory, villainize people of principle, weaponize government all to "FIX" things....because it is all justified if the world looks like what they think it should...

 

[connor_in]

 

[connor_in]

 

[connor_in]

 

[connor_in]

 

[phgreek]

don't give Trump any ideas ...

I'll try...

Ribbing all in good fun, but I sense you think immigration reform isn't a big issue. It is. It just would not tip me in this election given all the other flaming dumpster fires needing attention. Now, I don't think Kasich is real clear on what he wants to do...not sure if he is signaling an area of compromise or he just sees it as a giant moral and ethical cluster that has no bumper sticker solution. Either way, I think he is in the camp of secure the damned border...shut down the flow of illegals, and then address the illegals that are here...somehow. I think the somehow musings are what make people nervous. Don't blame them...

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I'll try...

Ribbing all in good fun, but I sense you think immigration reform isn't a big issue. It is. It just would not tip me in this election given all the other flaming dumpster fires needing attention. Now, I don't think Kasich is real clear on what he wants to do...not sure if he is signaling an area of compromise or he just sees it as a giant moral and ethical cluster that has no bumper sticker solution. Either way, I think he is in the camp of secure the damned border...shut down the flow of illegals, and then address the illegals that are here...somehow. I think the somehow musings are what make people nervous. Don't blame them...

It's worth noting that the number of illegal immigrants in the US has declined by about 1 million since 2007. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do immigration reform. But the narrative should reflect the reality of the numbers.

 

[connor_in]

It's worth noting that the number of illegal immigrants in the US has declined by about 1 million since 2007. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do immigration reform. But the narrative should reflect the reality of the numbers.

Does it strike anyone as absurd that we know the number of illegal anything that exists?

 

[connor_in]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Always Trust <a href="https://twitter.com/hardball_chris">@hardball_chris</a>, He Does Political Analysis For A Living <a href="https://t.co/QQs1Eitsmn">https://t.co/QQs1Eitsmn</a></p>— Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) <a href="https://twitter.com/FreeBeacon/status/694992563502055425">February 3, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Not just ripping on CM, but this is why we shouldn't let talking heads be too much of an influence

 

[phgreek]

It's worth noting that the number of illegal immigrants in the US has declined by about 1 million since 2007. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do immigration reform. But the narrative should reflect the reality of the numbers.

Like I said...I'm probably not going to be tipped over by immigration reform this cycle, although the combination of it, and an ostrich approach to ISIS is a concern which adds to its priority.

To be clear I see immigration reform as less a priority than other issues, but something that needs to stop being a discussion every damned cycle. It is a good will drain on this nation. Further it is an issue wrought out of constantly being less a priority...

given what you do, you KNOW that there is a time component as well as a near term priority component to every initiative/issue...every...single...one. If you allow something to continue to be "on the Radar" and never address it, you lose credibility as a leader/manager...so...I don't blame anyone who has reached a point where the politicians no longer have any credibility because they let this issue continue to be out prioritized...so you get the Donald solution...don't blame folks for resonating with that, and making it a priority, because frankly the clock of acceptable resolution ran out two decades ago, and any politician employed over the last 20 years on capital hill should have their pension/benefits suspended to pay for implementing a solution.

 

[phgreek]

Does it strike anyone as absurd that we know the number of illegal anything that exists?

Yes...it is indeed a moral and ethical issue, and those keeping score to justify allowing illegal acts to continue are ???? .... YUP!

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Like I said...I'm probably not going to be tipped over by immigration reform this cycle, although the combination of it, and an ostrich approach to ISIS is a concern which adds to its priority.

I don't see how we have an ostrich approach to ISIS. We're doing extensive targeted bombing that has decimated them in many ways. Republicans are talking tough about them, but none of what they are saying (except for the implications of indiscriminate bombing without thoughts of civilian life), short of boots on the ground, is markedly different from what the Obama administration is already doing. We also blew up a ton of their money, which made them cut their fighters' salaries in half.

First on CNN: Video of bombing of 'millions' in ISIS cash - CNNPolitics.com

Pentagon Releases New Video Of ISIS Cash Going Up In Smoke | The Daily Caller

U.S. Army Col. Steve Warren said in late December that the Pentagon believes upwards of 90% of the ISIS oil revenue stream has been destroyed via coalition air strikes.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Like I said...I'm probably not going to be tipped over by immigration reform this cycle, although the combination of it, and an ostrich approach to ISIS is a concern which adds to its priority.

To be clear I see immigration reform as less a priority than other issues, but something that needs to stop being a discussion every damned cycle. It is a good will drain on this nation. Further it is an issue wrought out of constantly being less a priority...

given what you do, you KNOW that there is a time component as well as a near term priority component to every initiative/issue...every...single...one. If you allow something to continue to be "on the Radar" and never address it, you lose credibility as a leader/manager...so...I don't blame anyone who has reached a point where the politicians no longer have any credibility because they let this issue continue to be out prioritized...so you get the Donald solution...don't blame folks for resonating with that, and making it a priority, because frankly the clock of acceptable resolution ran out two decades ago, and any politician employed over the last 20 years on capital hill should have their pension/benefits suspended to pay for implementing a solution.

Is illegal immigration among the top 3 things our country should focus on? This question is being asked with no ill intent. I'm simply interested in how most voters view that topic right now.

 

[wizards8507]

Is illegal immigration among the top 3 things our country should focus on? This question is being asked with no ill intent. I'm simply interested in how most voters view that topic right now.

Illegal immigration is so important because it's not just an issue in a silo; it also bleeds over into many other issues, including national security, entitlement reform, crime, economics, and culture. You can't have national security without border security. You can't reform entitlements while importing a dependent underclass. You can't fight crime while importing criminals. You can't promote economic growth with an undocumented workforce. You can't foster assimilation and national identity with Balkanized communities separated from society by language and legal status.

 

[Booslum31]

Illegal immigration is so important because it's not just an issue in a silo; it also bleeds over into many other issues, including national security, entitlement reform, crime, economics, and culture. You can't have national security without border security. You can't reform entitlements while importing a dependent underclass. You can't fight crime while importing criminals. You can't promote economic growth with an undocumented workforce. You can't foster assimilation and national identity with Balkanized communities separated from society by language and legal status.

Good Post Wizards.

 

[GoIrish41]

I'll try...

Ribbing all in good fun, but I sense you think immigration reform isn't a big issue. It is. It just would not tip me in this election given all the other flaming dumpster fires needing attention. Now, I don't think Kasich is real clear on what he wants to do...not sure if he is signaling an area of compromise or he just sees it as a giant moral and ethical cluster that has no bumper sticker solution. Either way, I think he is in the camp of secure the damned border...shut down the flow of illegals, and then address the illegals that are here...somehow. I think the somehow musings are what make people nervous. Don't blame them...

I think immigration reform is a big issue, but I look at it from another perspective than locking down the borders, not letting any Muslims in, and the Mexican government is "sending" all of its thugs and rapists into the the United States because nobody is watching the store.

By most accounts, there are 11 million illegal immigrants in our country. Most came in through legal means and overstayed their visas. That isn't a problem that is solved by building a wall. Many of those 11 milllion people are working under the table, and they are working jobs that most Americans simply will not do -- harvesting crops, and working the dirtiest of construction jobs. Why are they doing that? The simple answer is because there is a market for workers who will work off the books for low wages.

Logistically, the United States is not going to round up 11 million people and ship them back to where they came from, and if they did the cost of new housing would spike, as would food prices. That is to say nothing about the moral implications of breaking up families who are made up partially of citizens and partially of illegal immigrants.

While I understand the strong thoughts of some on the topic who view this as an afront to our national security, I look at it from the standpoint of basic humanity. People come to this country and work our least desirable jobs because their prospects in the places they come from are terrible. They endure ridicule and lower class status, they hide in the shadows to avoid being deported, all so they can earn money to keep food on the tables of their families. I believe it is inhumane to deny people who want to do little more than to meagerly make their way in this world an opportunity to do so -- especially when there is a market for their labor here.

That said, if we want to control the flow of people coming in, remove the demand for such labor. Pay Americans a decent wage to do the work that these people do (and suck it up when prices go up as a result). The immigrants aren't the bad guys in all of this, the people who pay them starvation wages to work terrible jobs in horrid conditions to maintain their profit margains are. The tone of the national conversation on immigration is to demonize people who trying to make their way in the world, and ignoring the people who are exploiting them.

I'm for a path to citizenship, bringing 11 million more tax paying citizens into the fold to pay for the things that help all Americans -- rebuilding our infrastructure, providing for the poor, educating our children, enssuring our air, water and food do not harm us. Two of the leaders in the GOP race are the children of immigrants -- people who are the products of a society that has demonstrated throughout its history that hard working immigrants willing to push can provide a pathway for their children to some day have an opportunity to run for president of the United States, to serve as a senator. It's amazing to me that they lose site of the most imporatant lessons of their own stories to score cheap political points. It is the all too present, "I got mine, but screw everyone else" mentality that I find objectionable about Republican positions on a wide variety of issues.

 

[EddytoNow]

I think immigration reform is a big issue, but I look at it from another perspective than locking down the borders, not letting any Muslims in, and the Mexican government is "sending" all of its thugs and rapists into the the United States because nobody is watching the store.

By most accounts, there are 11 million illegal immigrants in our country. Most came in through legal means and overstayed their visas. That isn't a problem that is solved by building a wall. Many of those 11 milllion people are working under the table, and they are working jobs that most Americans simply will not do -- harvesting crops, and working the dirtiest of construction jobs. Why are they doing that? The simple answer is because there is a market for workers who will work off the books for low wages.

Logistically, the United States is not going to round up 11 million people and ship them back to where they came from, and if they did the cost of new housing would spike, as would food prices. That is to say nothing about the moral implications of breaking up families who are made up partially of citizens and partially of illegal immigrants.

While I understand the strong thoughts of some on the topic who view this as an afront to our national security, I look at it from the standpoint of basic humanity. People come to this company and work our least desirable jobs because their prospects in the places they come from are terrible. The endure ridicule and lower class status, they hide in the shadows to avoid being deported, all so they can earn money to keep food on the tables of their families. I believe it is inhumane to deny people who want to do little more than than to meagerly make their way in this world an opportunity to do so -- especially when there is a market for their labor here.

That said, if we want to control the flow of people coming in, remove the demand for such labor. Pay Americans a decent wage to do the work that these people do (and suck it up when prices go up as a result). The immigrants aren't the bad guys in all of this, the people who pay them starvation wages to work terrible jobs in horrid conditions to maintain their profit margains are. The tone of the national conversation on immigration is to demonize people who trying to make their way in the world, and ignoring the people who are exploiting them.

I'm for a path to citizenship, bringing 11 more tax paying citizens into the fold to pay for the things that help all Americans -- rebuilding our infrastructure, providing for the poor, educating our children, enssuring our air, water and food do not harm us. Two of the leaders in the GOP race are the children of immigrants -- people who are the products of a society that has demonstrated throughout its history that hard working immigrants who work hard can provide a pathway for their children to some day have an opportunity to run for president of the United States, to serve as senators. It's amazing to me that they lose site of the most imporatant lessons of their own stories to score cheap political points. It is the all too present, "I got mine, but screw everyone else" mentality that I find objectionable about Republican positions on a wide variety of issues.

Exactly, let's give immigrants the same opportunities either we or our ancestors had, nothing more than a chance to better themselves.

 

[phgreek]

Is illegal immigration among the top 3 things our country should focus on? This question is being asked with no ill intent. I'm simply interested in how most voters view that topic right now.

I like Wizzards answer...BTW.

for me, on its own/on its face no. But because it is SOOOOOO LOOOOOONG overdue, and it is a constant distraction and source of bad blood I'd like to see it dealt with sooner than later....and in a manner that leaves no more wiggle room...I want there to be clarity that even a recalcitrant president dare not fuck with by standing down associated departments. However, not changing my choice for president based only on it...this cycle.

 

[phgreek]

Exactly, let's give immigrants the same opportunities either we or our ancestors had, nothing more than a chance to better themselves.

our ancestors followed the rules/laws by and large...

 

[GoIrish41]

our ancestors followed the rules/laws by and large...

It takes two to tango. Someone in the United States is paying these people to work, and that is illegal, too. Wouldn't cracking down on their illegal behavior be easier than trying to focus on 11 million people at once? No matter, I suspect this issue will be put on the shelf AGAIN once all the votes are cast in the 2016 election. It's an issue that is easy to get people fired up about, but few that matter really want to be fixed.

 

[wizards8507]

It takes two to tango. Someone in the United States is paying these people to work, and that is illegal, too. Wouldn't cracking down on their illegal behavior be easier than trying to focus on 11 million people at once?

You're describing pretty much every Republican candidate's position except for Donald Trump. Secure the border to stop the flow of new illegal immigrants. Implement mandatory eVerify systems and crack down on companies that hire illegal immigrants. Then figure out what to do with the folks who are here already.

This is what Mitt Romney termed "voluntary deportation." Crack down on companies that hire illegally, the work dries up, and the incentive for illegal immigration vanishes.

 

[woolybug25]

So I heard on the radio a little while ago that they supposedly found that both Colin Powell and Condaleza Rice had confidential emails sent to their personal address. If true, what will be the response from those of you that constantly bang on Hillary for this?

Not a "gotcha" question. I'm honestly interested.

Condoleezza Rice Aides, Colin Powell Also Got Classified Info on Personal Emails - NBC News

 

[NorthDakota]

So I heard on the radio a little while ago that they supposedly found that both Colin Powell and Condaleza Rice had confidential emails sent to their personal address. If true, what will be the response from those of you that constantly bang on Hillary for this?

Not a "gotcha" question. I'm honestly interested.

Condoleezza Rice Aides, Colin Powell Also Got Classified Info on Personal Emails - NBC News

Prosecute it the same way you would if it was a regular guy.