2016 Presidential Horse Race

[woolybug25]

Look at you all whine about the government being corrupt! Wiz gets belittled to no end and then you turn around and whine about the exact thing that your philosophies create.

What is the quote from Churchill? Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others?

Geez... you're so dramatic. Nobody is whining or banging on Wiz. Everyone seems to be having some pretty good dialogue today. It's just a thread about politics, where we are all discussing politics. If this is what you consider unreasonable discourse, then there are literally zero days where this thread is for you.

 

[wizards8507]

Look at you all whine about the government being corrupt! Wiz gets belittled to no end and then you turn around and whine about the exact thing that your philosophies create.

Isn't that beautiful? Government abuses its power so we should fix it by... giving the government more power. Wut?

 

[RDU Irish]

BO was a generational JFK type candidate. Immensely likable (initially), charismatic, and an amazing orator. I wouldn't chalk up Romney's loss as a sign that moderates can't win anymore.

Chalk it up to Americans being easily duped sheep. Spin me a good yarn, be likeable and you can be president, zero executive experience required. And if Joe Biden is surprised with how well spoken you are a colored fella than you can get a free pass.

Rubio falls in the same camp. Resume is seriously lacking - spend 10-15 years getting real experience and call back, IMO. However to the idiot electorate that really isn't necessary.

 

[Rizzophil]

Go back to your bunker, Rizzo... You're drunk.

Isn't it amazing that those claiming to be the most 'fair' are the least tolerant?

 

[wizards8507]

Rubio falls in the same camp. Resume is seriously lacking - spend 10-15 years getting real experience and call back, IMO. However to the idiot electorate that really isn't necessary.

I don't buy that argument. I don't care how much experience someone has as a senator or governor or CEO or anything else. Nobody has any kind of experience that compares to being President of the United States except for a sitting President of the United States running for reelection. Barack Obama has been President for seven years and he's still terrible at it. His failures (IMO) are not due to lack of experience, but because he was successful in implementing harmful policies. If Obama had been Governor of Illinois for eight years and senator for twelve years, he still would have implemented the same harmful policies.

 

[RDU Irish]

Isn't it amazing that those claiming to be the most 'fair' are the least tolerant?

LOL! good discourse = echo chamber

 

[tussin]

I don't buy that argument. I don't care how much experience someone has as a senator or governor or CEO or anything else. Nobody has any kind of experience that compares to being President of the United States except for a sitting President of the United States running for reelection. Barack Obama has been President for seven years and he's still terrible at it. His failures (IMO) are not due to lack of experience, but because he was successful in implementing harmful policies. If Obama had been Governor of Illinois for eight years and senator for twelve years, he still would have implemented the same harmful policies.

I was just typing basically the same thing.

Experience really has nothing to do with it. Both of the leading candidates right now are horrible and are polar opposites from an experience standpoint. I just want someone who is a leader, a uniter, and who believes in the same principles that I do. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Huh, care to explain that more?

I don't think that the middle ages is exactly a time where we can say that the "elites" took care of the poor.

I have no idea how much you've read about the period, or what your frame of reference is, but the Catholic Church established the first welfare systems in medieval Europe through compulsory tithes collected by the crown. This was a major new development in human history, which you likely take for granted now since they're commonplace in the West. But when Christianity is no longer culturally normative, it becomes nearly impossible to make the elite serve the poor, instead of visa versa.

I would also add that Christianity is more and more often being used as a cover to take advantage of the poor and to use them to benefit the elite. I think that sometimes you see Christianity (mostly Catholicism) through rose colored glasses.

That's the danger of heresy. We're a nation of heretics, and always have been (see Kurth's "The Protestant Deformation"). Apostolic teaching has always been the true measure of Christian faith, and it remains the best way for individuals to attain peace/ purpose, and for societies to organize themselves justly. But we're getting far afield here. Suffice it to say that Jesus probably didn't intend for there to be 30,000 different takes on Christianity, and that a lot of them do more harm than good.

 

[woolybug25]

Isn't it amazing that those claiming to be the most 'fair' are the least tolerant?

Relax, Rizzo.... It was a joke... like the "Go home, you're drunk" meme?

Never hear of it? ok then...

Your original post was talking about WWIII and how all was lost. I simply made a joke about your exaggeration. Sorry if that was "intolerant". lol

 

[RDU Irish]

I don't buy that argument. I don't care how much experience someone has as a senator or governor or CEO or anything else. Nobody has any kind of experience that compares to being President of the United States except for a sitting President of the United States running for reelection. Barack Obama has been President for seven years and he's still terrible at it. His failures (IMO) are not due to lack of experience, but because he was successful in implementing harmful policies. If Obama had been Governor of Illinois for eight years and senator for twelve years, he still would have implemented the same harmful policies.

You echoing Rubio now? "He knows exactly what he is doing"......

After proving his incompetence through 2012 he curb stomped Romney - who really is an extremely well qualified candidate for any logic driven, non-ideological observer. Not an inspiring figure though. Charisma is #1 in presidential politics and I don't see how anyone could argue Trump lacks in that category. Same reason Cruz sucks, charisma = to gum stuck on your shoe.

Americans can't differentiate from voting for Prom King/Queen and Student Council President - just look at what we have been served up.

As for voters - three questions in English on top of every ballot (multiple choice). 1) Who is the current POTUS, 2) Who is the current governor of your state, 3) who are your current sitting Senators. --- Seriously, if you can't answer that, wtf are you doing in that voting booth?

 

[NDohio]

It's a start right? Every bit will help get people more informed, even something that shows proposed tax brackets at different income levels, healthcare plans, broad social stances, etc.

The broader point is that it's amazing how many people know seemingly nothing about politics. I was on Facebook yesterday and somebody posted a general election Presidential voting poll --- 100 people responded and ~60% went to Trump. These are college educated people with decent jobs. These are the voters that can swing an election. What are they thinking? I just don't get it.

This is what I don't get as well. I am more amazed everyday by the Trump phenomenon. Also. many of these folks could probably pass the test you want to implement.

As an aside - being someone that does read about politics and actively works to be an informed voter, none of the current crop of candidates does a single thing for me.

 

[wizards8507]

I have no idea how much you've read about the period, or what your frame of reference is, but the Catholic Church established the first welfare systems in medieval Europe through compulsory tithes collected by the crown. This was a major new development in human history, which you likely take for granted now since they're commonplace in the West. But when Christianity is no longer culturally normative, it becomes nearly impossible to make the elite serve the poor, instead of visa versa.

We need to be careful with the language we use here. Premodern welfare (and welfare properly understood) involves taking care of basic needs. Postmodern welfare goes way beyond that, including a level of comfort that rids poverty of its ugliness to the point that we can't recognize real poverty. It's a bizarre commentary that there's an obesity problem among "poor" people in this country. We've come a long way from 2 Thessalonian' 3.

You echoing Rubio now? "He knows exactly what he is doing"......

I think he was spot-on, and it's a shame that the focus became his rhetorical malfunction and not the substance of what he said. Donald Trump, for example, has no ideological qualms about government-run healthcare, he just things he can design the system that allows it to be run efficiently. The problem is not that Obama sucks at hiring administrators to run health insurance, it's that government-run health insurance is a fundamentally flawed concept, regardless of the effectiveness of its implementation.

 

[NDohio]

Aye yai yai

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/trump-congressional-endorsements-170503088.html

California Rep. Duncan Hunter announced on Wednesday that he will support the billionaire real estate mogul’s presidential bid.

“We don’t need a policy wonk as president,” Hunter told Politico. “We need a leader as president.”

“I don’t think Trump wants my endorsement, and that’s one reason why I like him,” he continued, adding: “I think you have more Trump supporters in Congress. They just have to come out of the closet, so to speak.”

Earlier Wednesday, New York Rep. Chris Collins, became the first sitting member of Congress to endorse Trump for president.

“Donald Trump has clearly demonstrated that he has both the guts and the fortitude to return our nation’s jobs stolen by China, take on our enemies like ISIS, Iran, North Korea and Russia, and most importantly, reestablish the opportunity for our children and grandchildren to attain the American Dream,” Collins said in a statement to the Buffalo News. “That is why I am proud to endorse him as the next President of the United States.”

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

I don't buy that argument. I don't care how much experience someone has as a senator or governor or CEO or anything else. Nobody has any kind of experience that compares to being President of the United States except for a sitting President of the United States running for reelection. Barack Obama has been President for seven years and he's still terrible at it. His failures (IMO) are not due to lack of experience, but because he was successful in implementing harmful policies. If Obama had been Governor of Illinois for eight years and senator for twelve years, he still would have implemented the same harmful policies.

What about Hillary then? She lived in the white house. Her husband was president, she could lean on him for advice. He's obviously experienced. She was secretary of state, she has the foreign policy experience.

Is she experienced?

Experience obviously isn't the end all be all, for either those with too little experience or for those with a lot.

I agree that Rubio is inexperienced, so was Obama, but, I don't think that makes them any worse off than Hillary.

As far as I'm concerned, Hillary almost has "too much experience". She's had her chances, and she's sucked.

 

[wizards8507]

I agree that Rubio is inexperienced, so was Obama, but, I don't think that makes them any worse off than Hillary.

That's my point. "Qualifications" and "experience" don't mean dick if your polices suck.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Aye yai yai

Can't stump the Trump, baby.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

That's my point.

I know that's your point, I said I agreed, and I elaborated further.

 

[pkt77242]

I have no idea how much you've read about the period, or what your frame of reference is, but the Catholic Church established the first welfare systems in medieval Europe through compulsory tithes collected by the crown. This was a major new development in human history, which you likely take for granted now since they're commonplace in the West. But when Christianity is no longer culturally normative, it becomes nearly impossible to make the elite serve the poor, instead of visa versa.



That's the danger of heresy. We're a nation of heretics, and always have been (see Kurth's "The Protestant Deformation"). Apostolic teaching has always been the true measure of Christian faith, and it remains the best way for individuals to attain peace/ purpose, and for societies to organize themselves justly. But we're getting far afield here. Suffice it to say that Jesus probably didn't intend for there to be 30,000 different takes on Christianity, and that a lot of them do more harm than good.

I have read a lot of history of that time period and while I agree that the Church tried to take care of the poor, that my point "that elites in the middle ages did not care about the poor" stands. Most of the elites of the day did not care about the poor, did they tithe, sure, did some even help the church collect tithes, sure, but not because they cared about the poor (mostly, there are some exceptions) did it to stay on the right side of the church, not out of caring for the poor.

 

[wizards8507]

Can't stump the Trump, baby.

I wish someone would GIF the CBS debate. The background matches his complexion so well.

 

[pkt77242]

We need to be careful with the language we use here. Premodern welfare (and welfare properly understood) involves taking care of basic needs. Postmodern welfare goes way beyond that, including a level of comfort that rids poverty of its ugliness to the point that we can't recognize real poverty. It's a bizarre commentary that there's an obesity problem among "poor" people in this country. We've come a long way from 2 Thessalonian' 3.


I think he was spot-on, and it's a shame that the focus became his rhetorical malfunction and not the substance of what he said. Donald Trump, for example, has no ideological qualms about government-run healthcare, he just things he can design the system that allows it to be run efficiently. The problem is not that Obama sucks at hiring administrators to run health insurance, it's that government-run health insurance is a fundamentally flawed concept, regardless of the effectiveness of its implementation.

Huh? The government doesn't provide insurance under the ACA (which is probably one of its biggest flaws), so unless you are talking about Medicare and Medicaid, not sure what you are talking about.

 

[RDU Irish]

Can't stump the Trump, baby.

Great gif - Trump is such a self absorbed ass.

As for the experience discussion - agree to disagree. Great ideas are worthless if you can't get them implemented, bad ideas can get much worse with poor implementation. Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration and all.

 

[wizards8507]

Huh? The government doesn't provide insurance under the ACA (which is probably one of its biggest flaws), so unless you are talking about Medicare and Medicaid, not sure what you are talking about.

Health insurance marketplaces* then.

Regardless, we can throw out the ACA specifically and I'd make the same point about the supporters of single payer.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I have read a lot of history of that time period and while I agree that the Church tried to take care of the poor, that my point "that elites in the middle ages did not care about the poor" stands. Most of the elites of the day did not care about the poor, did they tithe, sure, did some even help the church collect tithes, sure, but not because they cared about the poor (mostly, there are some exceptions) did it to stay on the right side of the church, not out of caring for the poor.

Medieval elites were of course as fallible and naturally self-interested as human beings have always been, but I don't agree that they were simply "going through the motions" out of fear of the Church. There's ample evidence that, for all their faults, medieval society was deeply pious.

But putting that aside for a moment, you seem willing to concede that the normative status of Christianity in medieval Europe redounded in major ways to the benefit of the poor. Now that we live in a post-Christian society, what do you think will replace it as that which forces the wealthy and powerful to serve the poor? Liberalism clearly isn't up to the task.

 

[pkt77242]

Health insurance marketplaces* then.

Regardless, we can throw out the ACA specifically and I'd make the same point about the supporters of single payer.

The thing is that people are generally happy with "government insurance".

Americans With Government Health Plans Most Satisfied

 

[wizards8507]

The thing is that people are generally happy with "government insurance".

Americans With Government Health Plans Most Satisfied

Ha! That's rich. People who get shit for free are happy with the system that gives it to them at the expense of others. Shocker.

I bet people on food stamps are satisfied with the cost of groceries, too.

 

[IrishLax]

Ha! That's rich. People who get shit for free are happy with the system that gives it to them at the expense of others. Shocker.

This is (generally) what I was about to post. That kind of survey is effectively meaningless for a lot of reasons. It's not wrong... it just has no value in determining the effectiveness or merits of various systems.

 

[pkt77242]

Ha! That's rich. People who get shit for free are happy with the system that gives it to them at the expense of others. Shocker.

Medicare isn't free. Most (close to 100%) of people who are on Medicare paid into it while they worked (or their spouse worked if they stayed at home), so tell me how it is free? Also for people in the military it is a current benefit. Lastly, shouldn't we talk about the most shocking part of that survey, how are so many veterans happy with the VA?

 

[pkt77242]

Medieval elites were of course as fallible and naturally self-interested as human beings have always been, but I don't agree that they were simply "going through the motions" out of fear of the Church. There's ample evidence that, for all their faults, medieval society was deeply pious.

But putting that aside for a moment, you seem willing to concede that the normative status of Christianity in medieval Europe redounded in major ways to the benefit of the poor. Now that we live in a post-Christian society, what do you think will replace it as that which forces the wealthy and powerful to serve the poor? Liberalism clearly isn't up to the task.

Of course Christianity can be good (and has many times throughout history) been good for the poor but I think that one of the biggest problems with having Christianity as the basis for our society is that it has become divisive. Instead of bringing us together it is tearing us apart. I don't pretend to have all of the answers but I think we need to find something that binds us together not that creates divides. I am loathe to say nationalism because historically it has not worked out well and in the current environment I think that it would definitely not work well.


*The divisiveness isn't all caused by Christianity, some of it is being caused by secular people as well.

 

[wizards8507]

Medicare isn't free. Most (close to 100%) of people who are on Medicare paid into it while they worked (or their spouse worked if they stayed at home), so tell me how it is free?

I'm not talking about the legitimacy of whether they paid in or not, I'm talking about receiving benefits at no cost at the time of service. It looks and feels free (or subsidized).

Also for people in the military it is a current benefit. Lastly, shouldn't we talk about the most shocking part of that survey, how are so many veterans happy with the VA?

That's actually very surprising to me. A good friend of mine is an active duty Marine's wife, and her experience with military insurance is a nightmare. The restrictions they place on doctors and pharmacies is a constant headache for her family.

 

[NDRock]

Isn't that beautiful? Government abuses its power so we should fix it by... giving the government more power. Wut?

Agree, now we just need a political party that feels the same.