Democrat Presidential Debate

[Zoraptor]

I actually tend to agree, though I have no idea what to give as a shorthand label to the current situation. But, someone on the economic left is far more likely to label the current situation as being laissez faire much as someone on the economic right is likely to label it as socialism or similar. Both are wrong, but that would be their honestly held opinion.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Interesting, is the most recent thing a dissertation written about him from the 80's?

He stopped telling the truth since he started running for office, which is to be expected as you've observed. He's never changed his own label or said he changed his philosophy in any way so far as I know. I tend to take him at his word, being a radical from young age, having studied Marx and idolized Eugene V Debs he would know what socialism actually is, so if he says he's a socialist, he is a socialist. As far as Social Democrat, from what I read there are two types, ones who believe in regulated and redistributive capitalism and ones who see that stage as a way point to true socialism. I can believe Sanders is the second type, but not the first.

[Calax]

 

Interesting, is the most recent thing a dissertation written about him from the 80's?

He stopped telling the truth since he started running for office, which is to be expected as you've observed. He's never changed his own label or said he changed his philosophy in any way so far as I know. I tend to take him at his word, being a radical from young age, having studied Marx and idolized Eugene V Debs he would know what socialism actually is, so if he says he's a socialist, he is a socialist. As far as Social Democrat, from what I read there are two types, ones who believe in regulated and redistributive capitalism and ones who see that stage as a way point to true socialism. I can believe Sanders is the second type, but not the first.

 

So here's a question for you. Assuming that Sanders makes it into office, do you actually think he can turn the entire economy of the United States to a socialist one in the 4/8 years he gets?

[Guard Dog]

 

 

Interesting, is the most recent thing a dissertation written about him from the 80's?

He stopped telling the truth since he started running for office, which is to be expected as you've observed. He's never changed his own label or said he changed his philosophy in any way so far as I know. I tend to take him at his word, being a radical from young age, having studied Marx and idolized Eugene V Debs he would know what socialism actually is, so if he says he's a socialist, he is a socialist. As far as Social Democrat, from what I read there are two types, ones who believe in regulated and redistributive capitalism and ones who see that stage as a way point to true socialism. I can believe Sanders is the second type, but not the first.

 

So here's a question for you. Assuming that Sanders makes it into office, do you actually think he can turn the entire economy of the United States to a socialist one in the 4/8 years he gets?

 

Considering he will be facing a solid Republican House and maybe Senate I'd say nope. As long as the government is divided freedom and liberty are relatively safe. It's when one party control everything that we need to sweat.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

Interesting, is the most recent thing a dissertation written about him from the 80's?

 

He stopped telling the truth since he started running for office, which is to be expected as you've observed. He's never changed his own label or said he changed his philosophy in any way so far as I know. I tend to take him at his word, being a radical from young age, having studied Marx and idolized Eugene V Debs he would know what socialism actually is, so if he says he's a socialist, he is a socialist. As far as Social Democrat, from what I read there are two types, ones who believe in regulated and redistributive capitalism and ones who see that stage as a way point to true socialism. I can believe Sanders is the second type, but not the first.

So here's a question for you. Assuming that Sanders makes it into office, do you actually think he can turn the entire economy of the United States to a socialist one in the 4/8 years he gets?

Considering he will be facing a solid Republican House and maybe Senate I'd say nope. As long as the government is divided freedom and liberty are relatively safe. It's when one party control everything that we need to sweat.

That's rather idealistic, considering that bipartisan laws that tend to pass are stuff like the Patriot/Freedom Act, CISA, and TPP.

[Guard Dog]

 

 

 

 

Interesting, is the most recent thing a dissertation written about him from the 80's?

He stopped telling the truth since he started running for office, which is to be expected as you've observed. He's never changed his own label or said he changed his philosophy in any way so far as I know. I tend to take him at his word, being a radical from young age, having studied Marx and idolized Eugene V Debs he would know what socialism actually is, so if he says he's a socialist, he is a socialist. As far as Social Democrat, from what I read there are two types, ones who believe in regulated and redistributive capitalism and ones who see that stage as a way point to true socialism. I can believe Sanders is the second type, but not the first.

So here's a question for you. Assuming that Sanders makes it into office, do you actually think he can turn the entire economy of the United States to a socialist one in the 4/8 years he gets?

Considering he will be facing a solid Republican House and maybe Senate I'd say nope. As long as the government is divided freedom and liberty are relatively safe. It's when one party control everything that we need to sweat.

That's rather idealistic, considering that bipartisan laws that tend to pass are stuff like the Patriot/Freedom Act, CISA, and TPP.

 

Good point

[Hurlshort]

Yeah but the "socialist" programs Bernie wants are clearly not bipartisan.  

 

Really it is fairly surprising what is partisan politics.  You would think that it would be fairly obvious that the 100+ people hanging out in Gitmo need to be put on trial at some point.  It's the basic premise Habeas Corpus.  It was something the President said he would do in his first year in office, and yet it continues to get blocked by the opposing party.  7+ years of that ridiculousness. 

Edited November 26, 2015 by Hurlshot

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Yeah but the "socialist" programs Bernie wants are clearly not bipartisan.

 

Being consistently against the three policies mentioned is enough for me to be willing to vote for him.

 

Alas, Clinton will grab the nomination and her position shifts on a daily basis.

[Hurlshort]

Well if you are in the middle class, I don't understand why you would vote for anyone but Bernie Williams.  If I ran a corporation, sure, I'd vote for Clinton.  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Well if you are in the middle class, I don't understand why you would vote for anyone but Bernie Williams.  If I ran a corporation, sure, I'd vote for Clinton.  

Bernie Williams? Is this a clone of Robin Williams and Bernie Sanders?

[Ineth]

Being consistently against the three policies mentioned is enough for me to be willing to vote for him.

 

Yes, a President Sanders would be an insurance against more evil of the "Freedom Act and TPP" kind. This is one of the two things in his favor.

 

The second is the fact that his presidency might sever the historic entanglement of the Democratic Party with Wall Street. This unholy relationship has already been outwardly downplayed ever since the Occupy protests, but a Sanders presidency might end if for real.

 

[Calax]

Well if you are in the middle class, I don't understand why you would vote for anyone but Bernie Williams.  If I ran a corporation, sure, I'd vote for Clinton.  

Technically I'm lower class due to my income status, but I'd vote for Hillary because I think she'd get more done on a range of topics. A President Sanders seems like he'd get one or two items on his agenda done, but doggedly block anything that ran mildly contrary to his ideals. Meaning the gridlock that we've been dealing with as part of the democratic system just lodges itself harder in Washington.

[Leferd]

Well if you are in the middle class, I don't understand why you would vote for anyone but Bernie Williams.  If I ran a corporation, sure, I'd vote for Clinton.  

 

 

Bernie Williams approves this message.

[Hurlshort]

 

Well if you are in the middle class, I don't understand why you would vote for anyone but Bernie Williams.  If I ran a corporation, sure, I'd vote for Clinton.  

Bernie Williams? Is this a clone of Robin Williams and Bernie Sanders?

 

 

[Hurlshort]

Leferd beat me.  

[Longknife]

Guys did you hear Hilary has a vagina

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Guys did you hear Hilary has a vagina

Yes, I believe it's the only consistent position she's held.

[Zoraptor]

Is Hilary related to Bernie Wiliams?

 

(She was, after all, named after world famous Hamiltron apiarist Edmund Hillary, who reinforced his fame by climbing Everest a few years after her birth)

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yeah but the "socialist" programs Bernie wants are clearly not bipartisan.  

 

Really it is fairly surprising what is partisan politics.  You would think that it would be fairly obvious that the 100+ people hanging out in Gitmo need to be put on trial at some point.  It's the basic premise Habeas Corpus.  It was something the President said he would do in his first year in office, and yet it continues to get blocked by the opposing party.  7+ years of that ridiculousness.

Habeas Corpus doesn't apply to enemy combatants, especially illegal ones. You may be aware that German prisoners of war were held for the duration of the war without any trial. The opposing party did not block trials for the Gitmo detainees. Obola started out by tearing down the legal structure which was set up by Bush and Congress for such trials, then his gang of incompetent loonies couldn't come up with anything that would be legal.

[Hurlshort]

Uh, illegal ones?  You understand that the vast majority of people held in Gitmo were captured in Afghanistan.  Actually only 3 were even captured by US forces.  

 

Habeas Corpus can apply to anyone we want it to apply to.  The point is to put them on trial for their crimes, not to be held indefinitely without any due process. Considering the Afghanistan war started in 2001, it is fairly ridiculous they haven't been put on trial.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Uh, illegal ones?  You understand that the vast majority of people held in Gitmo were captured in Afghanistan.  Actually only 3 were even captured by US forces.

lol, do you think I'm talking about illegal aliens? They're illegal because they were not fighting for a recognized state, but instead for terrorist organizations.

 

Habeas Corpus can apply to anyone we want it to apply to.

That's not how laws work, it doesn't matter what you want.

 

The point is to put them on trial for their crimes, not to be held indefinitely without any due process. Considering the Afghanistan war started in 2001, it is fairly ridiculous they haven't been put on trial.

They're not held for punishment, they're held because they're likely to take up arms against US if released, just like any prisoner of war. Edited November 28, 2015 by Wrath of Dagon

[Hurlshort]

So...you just want to hold these people indefinitely without a trial?

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Trials are unamerican.

[Wrath of Dagon]

So...you just want to hold these people indefinitely without a trial?

 

Beats them going back to kill some more Americans, doesn't it?

[Namutree]

So...you just want to hold these people indefinitely without a trial?

 

Not saying I agree or disagree with your sentiment. I just liked the kitty.