Democrat Presidential Debate

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

Makes sense since he's no longer either Republican or Democrat, but down the middle where supposedly most of the votes are.

 

At this point, I'm probably voting for someone outside of the parties myself.  Unfortunately most folks will just blindly for red or blue, regardless of who wins the primary.  It would be astonishing if people decided to flee the two party system in droves.

 

But the fact that people basically vote for two parties is only due to the electoral systems used, where the "winner takes it all" (and in the case of a presidential election, you can only have one winner, but you could for example have transferrable votes...). There is no point in voting for a third, smaller party, because you're only taking away votes from the one of the two big sides you're closest to. That is, if you feel it doesn't matter which of the big sides win you could of course vote for a third party. Sadly, this will likely not result in you getting any representation at all for your opinions.

 

You should really not call it two-party system, but "simple plurality FPTP" which is the actual system making people vote for two parties only.

 

 

Compared to our superior scando-system, where everyone is invited to take part in the concensus, the anglos in UK and US have zero tolerance for giving people who do not win in a winner takes it all-environment any political power.

 

You just need to convince them that being a loser is ok.

 

 

But at least US has system in presidential elections where one can be winner even if they don't get majority of popular votes. So all is not lost for non-popular kids

 

 

Touché!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

So a search for "Bernie Sanders" reveals several articles supporting Clinton as "the true progressive choice" and wanting to fight the "woman-haters" that make up Sanders' supporters. Can't say I'm surprised that certain individuals would support a Wall Street crony because said crony is a woman.

[Namutree]

So a search for "Bernie Sanders" reveals several articles supporting Clinton as "the true progressive choice" and wanting to fight the "woman-haters" that make up Sanders' supporters. Can't say I'm surprised that certain individuals would support a Wall Street crony because said crony is a woman.

To be fair she kind of is the, "true progressive choice" since identity politics is now very much a part of the progressive movement. 

[Meshugger]

[Guard Dog]

In case no one noticed Lincoln Chafee has dropped out. But then again no one really noticed he was running. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

https://www.rt.com/usa/319896-senate-passes-cisa-strikes-amendments/

 

CISA passed, Sanders was the only presidential candidate to vote against. I suppose Paul would be against, but he wasn't present. Privacy was nice while it lasted I suppose.

[Elerond]

https://www.rt.com/usa/319896-senate-passes-cisa-strikes-amendments/

 

CISA passed, Sanders was the only presidential candidate to vote against. I suppose Paul would be against, but he wasn't present. Privacy was nice while it lasted I suppose.

 

EU's cloud service providers probably sent their regards, as this probably means that new safe harbor deal becomes even harder.

[Meshugger]

It practically means that most of us are ****ed either way at the moment, since almost all of us have most likely private information stored on american sites/servers. Going off the grid becomes more attractive by each day.

 

//edit, I mean what the ****:

 

 

The Franken amendment was put forth by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) to narrow the bill’s definitions of “cybersecurity threat.” It would have limited that designation to actions that are “reasonably likely to” cause damage to the company’s network, as opposed to CISA’s default “may.” The provision would also limit an aspect of the definition of “cyber threat indicator” to include only information necessary to describe actual harm caused by an incident, not “potential harm,” as in the original bill.

The Franken amendment failed 35 to 60.

 

Paging Gromnir for comments the judicial means for "may" or "reasonably likely to" in Federal law.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Meshugger

[Namutree]

https://www.rt.com/usa/319896-senate-passes-cisa-strikes-amendments/

 

CISA passed, Sanders was the only presidential candidate to vote against. I suppose Paul would be against, but he wasn't present. Privacy was nice while it lasted I suppose.

More big government violations of basic decency. Par the course nowadays. 

[Longknife]

 

 

What I wanna know is....

 

At that point if you're a Senator, what on earth do you need all this money and prestige for? It's sort of crazy to me that the very people who seem most likely to give into bribes and pressure and potential profit are those who don't desperately need it. I would expect corruption is easier at the bottom, yet it's obvious that no, plenty of senators will gladly feast on the corruption pie if it means they get....what, their fourth Ferrari? What is worth all this ****?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Bump for tonight's debate.

 

 

Bernie won, the commie tsunami can't be stopped.

 

 

[Barothmuk]

 

Another landslide victory for Clinton!

[ShadySands]

I didn't even know there was a debate until I saw this thread had been bumped

[Meshugger]

I didn't even know there was a debate until I saw this thread had been bumped

[Leferd]

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

[BruceVC]

I didn't even know there was a debate until I saw this thread had been bumped

Don't feel guilty, I would say this is normal because the reality is the Democrats have there candidate and they dont seem to differ on major issues. so I find the Republican discussions more entertaining 

[BruceVC]

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

[Elerond]

 

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

 

 It is probably because her best quality is one that many people at least publicly dislike.

 

She is full blooded career politicians that bases her agenda to what she thinks public wants and she relies heavily on experts and other interested parties to form her answers and solutions instead of her own personal thinking, which make her look a person that is cold and who don't have solid foundation to her beliefs.

Although when you add her understanding of law, political process of making laws and quite long experience of foreign politics to her ability to be "sock puppet", then she makes a excellent candidate for president, especially if you are liberal conservative. But as said she appearance may give cold and calculating expression to people, meaning that her personal charisma, which is for some people much important persons efficiency in job, may cause them seek some other candidate. Of course Hillary isn't best candidate for people that seek change in how politics are played in USA. For those Sanders is much better option if they want USA to take more socialistic approach, and for those who seek something else republican candidates may be only options.

[Leferd]

Excited? Hardly. I don't hate Hillary Clinton. I just don't like her. She's a politician's politician with all its baggage, connotations, and inherent disingenuousness. 

 

Her asinine support of Jack Thompson  and declaring video games as a moral power play on the corruption of youth culture and violence in society just smacks of how out of touch she was. She'll likely get my vote, but she ain't getting any time or dime from me as other democratic candidates have gotten. That being said, I have no problem with her as my President and I think she's qualified and will be a fine enough leader. 

 

And no, I won't be betting money on her either. 1) Terrible, TERRIBLE payoff. 2) It is illegal to bet on elections in the U.S.

 

*edit* Also what Elerond said.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Leferd

[BruceVC]

 

 

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

 

 It is probably because her best quality is one that many people at least publicly dislike.

 

She is full blooded career politicians that bases her agenda to what she thinks public wants and she relies heavily on experts and other interested parties to form her answers and solutions instead of her own personal thinking, which make her look a person that is cold and who don't have solid foundation to her beliefs.

Although when you add her understanding of law, political process of making laws and quite long experience of foreign politics to her ability to be "sock puppet", then she makes a excellent candidate for president, especially if you are liberal conservative. But as said she appearance may give cold and calculating expression to people, meaning that her personal charisma, which is for some people much important persons efficiency in job, may cause them seek some other candidate. Of course Hillary isn't best candidate for people that seek change in how politics are played in USA. For those Sanders is much better option if they want USA to take more socialistic approach, and for those who seek something else republican candidates may be only options.

 

 

 

Excited? Hardly. I don't hate Hillary Clinton. I just don't like her. She's a politician's politician with all its baggage, connotations, and inherent disingenuousness. 

 

Her asinine support of Jack Thompson  and declaring video games as a moral power play on the corruption of youth culture and violence in society just smacks of how out of touch she was. She'll likely get my vote, but she ain't getting any time or dime from me as other democratic candidates have gotten. That being said, I have no problem with her as my President and I think she's qualified and will be a fine enough leader. 

 

And no, I won't be betting money on her either. 1) Terrible, TERRIBLE payoff. 2) It is illegal to bet on elections in the U.S.

 

*edit* Also what Elerond said.

Okay guys thanks for explaining, I get your concern

 

Its funny how I'm sure all three of us have very similar views on politics yet we differ on Hilary, I don't see her as false but of course there is always an element of how all politicians pander to certain political views..this is normal to me 

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

 

 It is probably because her best quality is one that many people at least publicly dislike.

 

She is full blooded career politicians that bases her agenda to what she thinks public wants and she relies heavily on experts and other interested parties to form her answers and solutions instead of her own personal thinking, which make her look a person that is cold and who don't have solid foundation to her beliefs.

Although when you add her understanding of law, political process of making laws and quite long experience of foreign politics to her ability to be "sock puppet", then she makes a excellent candidate for president, especially if you are liberal conservative. But as said she appearance may give cold and calculating expression to people, meaning that her personal charisma, which is for some people much important persons efficiency in job, may cause them seek some other candidate. Of course Hillary isn't best candidate for people that seek change in how politics are played in USA. For those Sanders is much better option if they want USA to take more socialistic approach, and for those who seek something else republican candidates may be only options.

 

What's a liberal conservative?

[Namutree]

 

 

 

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

 

 It is probably because her best quality is one that many people at least publicly dislike.

 

She is full blooded career politicians that bases her agenda to what she thinks public wants and she relies heavily on experts and other interested parties to form her answers and solutions instead of her own personal thinking, which make her look a person that is cold and who don't have solid foundation to her beliefs.

Although when you add her understanding of law, political process of making laws and quite long experience of foreign politics to her ability to be "sock puppet", then she makes a excellent candidate for president, especially if you are liberal conservative. But as said she appearance may give cold and calculating expression to people, meaning that her personal charisma, which is for some people much important persons efficiency in job, may cause them seek some other candidate. Of course Hillary isn't best candidate for people that seek change in how politics are played in USA. For those Sanders is much better option if they want USA to take more socialistic approach, and for those who seek something else republican candidates may be only options.

 

What's a liberal conservative?

 

He's likely referring to classical liberals.

[Elerond]

 

 

 

From PaddyPower:

 

Odds on winning the Democrat nomination

 

Hillary Clinton - 1/12(!!!)

Bernie Sanders - 6/1

Martin O'Malley 100/1

 

Bookmakers have the line for Hillary Clinton as the 1 to 12 favorite to win the nomination. That means you need to put down $12 to win $1 when betting on Hillary. There's absolutely no value play for Bernie Sanders at 6 to 1. NONE. Not with those monster odds for Clinton.

Leferd please tell me you at least are excited about  Hilary Clinton..I am worried how no one on this forun seems to like or support her ?

 

 It is probably because her best quality is one that many people at least publicly dislike.

 

She is full blooded career politicians that bases her agenda to what she thinks public wants and she relies heavily on experts and other interested parties to form her answers and solutions instead of her own personal thinking, which make her look a person that is cold and who don't have solid foundation to her beliefs.

Although when you add her understanding of law, political process of making laws and quite long experience of foreign politics to her ability to be "sock puppet", then she makes a excellent candidate for president, especially if you are liberal conservative. But as said she appearance may give cold and calculating expression to people, meaning that her personal charisma, which is for some people much important persons efficiency in job, may cause them seek some other candidate. Of course Hillary isn't best candidate for people that seek change in how politics are played in USA. For those Sanders is much better option if they want USA to take more socialistic approach, and for those who seek something else republican candidates may be only options.

 

What's a liberal conservative?

 

 

 

"As the conservative ideology in democratic countries embraced typical liberal institutions such as the rule of law, private property, the market economy, and constitutional representative government, the liberal element of liberal conservatism became consensual outside of the socialist camp. This consensus has been so complete in some countries (e.g. the United States) that the term liberal conservatism came to be understood simply as conservatism in popular culture, prompting some conservatives who embraced more strongly classical liberal values to call themselves libertarians. Nevertheless, the liberal conservative tradition in the United States often combines the economic individualism of the classical liberals with a Burkean form of conservatism that emphasizes the natural inequalities between men, the irrationality of human behavior as the basis for the embrace of traditional ethics, the human drive for order and stability, and the rejection of natural rights as the basis for government."  - An Introduction to Political Science. Cengage Learning, 2011

Edited November 15, 2015 by Elerond

[Wrath of Dagon]

I've heard of Classical Liberals and Neoliberals but never of Liberal Conservatives. I still don't understand the difference between any of those, but I'm sure Hilzilla is none of them. She's just a regular old liberal (in modern American sense, sometimes called Progressives) with a very flexible believe system, i.e. whatever gets her elected.

 

Edit: Rejection of natural rights? So far as I know all American conservatives believe in the pre-amble to the Declaration of Independence "are endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights"

Edited November 15, 2015 by Wrath of Dagon

[Elerond]

I've heard of Classical Liberals and Neoliberals but never of Liberal Conservatives. I still don't understand the difference between any of those, but I'm sure Hilzilla is none of them. She's just a regular old liberal (in modern American sense, sometimes called Progressives) with a very flexible believe system, i.e. whatever gets her elected.

 

I don't think that Clinton is that keen to social and economical equality like real liberal would do, but she maybe more European in her thinking and support for moderate forms of social safety net and of environmentalism.

 

But word like Classical Liberals, Neoliberals, Liberal Conservatives, Liberals, Conservatives, Social Liberals, Conservative liberals, Libertarian conservatives, etc. don't really have consistent meaning outside Political Science, so it is quite hard to use them in such way that two people using same words mean same thing.

 

But in short I would say that Clinton mostly supports how things are currently run, which I would say makes her quite conservative, but also somewhat liberal as foundation and culture of USA is quite liberal. I could do more in depth analysis her views, but I don't think I have such interest in me that I could ever do it way that it would have anymore value than me saying that she is Liberal Conservative.