Politics | 2016 | This thread is insulting to life

I'm consistently shocked at how no one says shit about north korea

By DY_nasty Go To PostI'm consistently shocked at how no one says shit about north korea

Right now everyone is collectively treating them as a loud barking dog without a bite, but the shit they're doing to their populace is violating so many international laws that it's shocking the world focuses their attention anywhere but North Korea.

By reilo Go To PostRight now everyone is collectively treating them as a loud barking dog without a bite, but the shit they're doing to their populace is violating so many international laws that it's shocking the world focuses their attention anywhere but North Korea.

Human Rights aside, they're the only country I can think of that has another at literal gunpoint and is actively working to include another. They're eventually gonna destabilize the entire pacific.

Syria has nothing on that.

The U.S. should be working with China to install a sane-but-pro-China government right now, but U.S.-China relations in general aren't tremendous right now.

PPP's newest New Hampshire poll finds Donald Trump leading in the state by 14 points. Trump's position in the state has been steady over the last three months- we found him at 28% in mid-October, 27% in early December, and we find him at 29% this month. 5 other candidates are in double digits but pretty closely clustered and all well behind Trump- Marco Rubio at 15%, Chris Christie and John Kasich at 11%, and Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz at 10%. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina at 4%, Rand Paul at 3%, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum at 1%, and Jim Gilmore with less than 1% round out the field.

Okay.

What:

-20% of GOP primary voters in the state say they think Obama is going to take all Americans' guns away during his final year in office to 64% who think he will not. Rubio voters (29%) are actually most likely to have this belief followed by 25% of Trump's, 24% each of Cruz and Christie's, then all the way down to 10% of Kasich's and 9% of Bush's.

-52% of GOP primary voters say they're offended by bilingual phone menus, to 40% who say they aren't. This is actually a big dividing line in the GOP race. Among voters who aren't offended by having to press 1 for English and 2 for Spanish, the race is tied with Rubio and Trump each at 19%, Bush at 14%, Kasich at 13%, Christie at 11%, and Cruz at just 6%. But among voters who are offended by such things, Trump leads with an overwhelming 36% to 13% for Cruz, 12% for Christie, 11% for Rubio, 8% for Kasich, and just 6% for Bush.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/01/trump-maintains-lead-in-nh-dem-race-close.html

I can see the US working with Iran to deal with ISIS.... Like, a way it could might maybe kinda possibly happen

Can't see China working with the US ever regarding NK

I bet all these peoples' immigrant ancestors spoke English when they came to the US too.

Everyone loved all those Irish people immigrating to the Northeast United States 100-200 years ago. Irish Catholic presidential candidates never faced any stigma, either. Glad all those voters remember those lessons.

The co-chair of Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign in Virginia cited some bogus statistics to argue that Christians must take over public education to stop the deception of children.

Cynthia Dunbar, who brags that she tried to correct a “biblically illiterate society” during her tenure the Texas State Board of Education, now works at Liberty University and serves as co-chair of the Texas Republican’s campaign in Virginia.

She took part recently in a “ProFamily Legislator’s Conference,” along with a number of conservative lawmakers, sponsored by anti-LGBT pseudo-historian David Barton — who heads the pro-Cruz Keep the Promise PAC, reported Right Wing Watch.

In a speech broadcast last week on Barton’s “Wallbuilders Live” program, Dunbar explained her obsession with the Genesis passage in which God vows to create hostility between Eve and the serpent who deceived her.

“It’s what I call the seed policy,” Dunbar said. “If you think about it, every major social issue you’re encountering as legislators actually directs back to what it talks about it in Genesis, ‘if I would put enmity between you and the seed of the woman.’ Because what happens, what is abortion? Abortion is the destruction of the seed. What is homosexuality? It is the prevention of the seed. And what is education? It is potential deception of the seed.”

Woman, just finger yourself to impregnation porn already. Stop this stuff:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/cruz-campaign-official-says-christians-must-take-over-public-schools-to-stop-deception-of-the-seed/#.Vo2AKBR29kY.twitter

Cynthia Dunbar, who brags that she tried to correct a “biblically illiterate society” during her tenure the Texas State Board of Education

oh my god that quote gives me nightmares

By DY_nasty Go To PostCan't see China working with the US ever regarding NK

China supports NK because they don't want us on their doorstep. China also supports NK because they don't want a refugee crisis. Beyond that, I don't think China really gives a fuck about NK. Depending on the deal, I could see us working together.

Been reading up on Debbie Wasserman Schultz (the DNC chair), what a scum fuck of a human being consistently throwing women under the bus all the while pretending to be championing their interests.

DWS talking about how drugs aren't a problem in suburbs makes me honestly wonder if she's been in a coma for the last two years. Heroin is one of the most talked about issue in suburbs in America right now...

I don't think many Dems like her at all. it's the one thing both Bernie and Hillary supporters unite on. -

She's up her own ass and from one of the things I read and took money from for profit prisons so there you go.

By Fenderputty Go To PostI don't think many Dems like her at all. it's the one thing both Bernie and Hillary supporters unite on. -

Considering how she's organized the primaries in order to help Clinton win, I doubt "Clinton supporters" should resent her. The party and its leadership have been limiting the number of debates for a reason.

By Gabyskra Go To PostConsidering how she's organized the primaries in order to help Clinton win, I doubt "Clinton supporters" should resent her. The party and its leadership have been limiting the number of debates for a reason.

The dislike comes from different places. Plenty of Clinton supporters didn't like the way she handled the Bernie data breech fiasco as well. Her insistence to prevent Bernie from accessing his own data only lead to more conspiracy theories. Strategically she's not done well for the DNC and plenty of people feel like she's just in this for herself. She pretty well disliked.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/democrats-debbie-wasserman-schultz-111077

By Fenderputty Go To PostThe dislike comes from different places. Plenty of Clinton supporters didn't like the way she handled the Bernie data breech fiasco as well. Her insistence to prevent Bernie from accessing his own data only lead to more conspiracy theories. Strategically she's not done well for the DNC and plenty of people feel like she's just in this for herself. She pretty well disliked.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/democrats-debbie-wasserman-schultz-111077

I don't know if this translates into english, but in french we say she's a fuse, someone you don't need anyway whose job is to take the blame when a scandal happens.

That makes a lot of sense. She's someone that you remove once it breaks cause it couldn't handle the electrical load.

Yeah, but in this case I would rather have someone competent running the DNC than a fall person to blame when crap goes wrong.

Good Job, Good Effort Oklahoma.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/oklahoma-cuts-public-school-funding-47-million-36152556

While it's too early to tell which districts may be forced to shut down or consolidate, department spokesman Phil Bacharach said it's possible some could happen before the end of the current school year.

Rather than impose across-the-board cuts, Hofmeister recommended a budget that imposes reductions to specific programs in order to cushion the pain for schools that use the per-student formula.

Deeper cuts were implemented for advanced placement teacher training and test-fee assistance (55 percent reduction), staff development for schools (50 percent) and school lunch matching funds (30 percent). Money for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, or STEM, education initiatives was completely eliminated.

Tax cuts at the top brackets and now the state will produce even less people with skills that matter ...

Tax cuts for the rich === school cuts for the kids

There's your slogan, DNC. Run with it.

Kids that needs school funded lunch matching programs just need to pick up their bootstraps ...

If it wasn't so sad I would laugh.

Was just about to post that article about the school districts. Holy shit. It's horrible how the article ends by saying that next year will be even worse for the schools.

By obijkenobi Go To PostWas just about to post that article about the school districts. Holy shit. It's horrible how the article ends by saying that next year will be even worse for the schools.

The really sad thing is that our economy was doing comparatively great during the depths of the Great Recession, so we could have used that opportunity to really improve state services and our educational system. We're going to have to diversify away from oil and gas eventually and that would have been a great opportunity to start the process.

Instead, Mary Fallin and her Derplahoman colleagues keep getting elected and pushing unneeded and unwanted tax cuts. There's a huge teacher shortage so they're alternatively certifying anyone with a pulse just to get people in classrooms.

My longtime, regular teachers in a medium-sized town in high school were pretty shitty already. Coaches who were more concerned about their sport than teaching were a common occurrence. I can't imagine what kind of clowns are getting into classrooms now.

I'd love to stay here but if I have kids the options are slim and getting slimmer if they want a decent education. Fucking sad and embarrassing. The state-level GOP "revolution" is a national tragedy.

A couple of scholars are coming out and doubting Cruz's qualifications to be president:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/11/laurence-tribe-ted-cruz-donald-trump-citizen-president

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/11/laurence-tribe-ted-cruz-donald-trump-citizen-president

Frankly I don't give a fuck about this matter and most of what I've read contradicts claims like this, but I won't be surprised if Trump REALLY turns up the heat on Cruz over this stuff.

By BertramCooper Go To PostFrankly I don't give a fuck about this matter and most of what I've read contradicts claims like this, but I won't be surprised if Trump REALLY turns up the heat on Cruz over this stuff.

Well considering his entire campaign is centered around xenophobia that's probably a good strategy.

Everyone knows who Trump is. Cruz is a Cuban-Canadian-American who tries to appeal to the rabble while secretly despising them, a guy who wears cowboy boots on the trail even though he's an Ivy Leaguer. Trying to sow doubts about his authenticity is smart.

excited about the unexpected Sanders surge--we need progression, even if contemporary politics prevents many of his ideas from coming to fruition, the political landscape could make it a reality for his successor

I worry about Sanders' electability, but maybe I am wrong on that one.

By reilo Go To PostI worry about Sanders' electability, but maybe I am wrong on that one.

He wouldn't lose Clinton votes, and she sure as hell is less popular than he could be among Republicans. Sanders could be appealing to non-voters who don't believe in politics too. He's crushing Clinton among the youth, who typically vote less and might vote more. All polls show him winning the general if he makes it there.

Relevant:
MoveOn endorses Sanders (80% of the members in favor), and will get involved.
http://www.thenation.com/article/moveon-endorses-sanders-after-he-wins-79-percent-support-in-member-vote/

My whole thing with Sanders isn't even electability anymore. Though I do still questions that to some extent, my main issue is that all the things that make him better than Clinton are mute considering Congress. When asked how he would combat this he responds by getting young people to protest on congresses footsteps. So I feel Clinton is a liberal's best shot at the nomination and with getting some policy past.

Sanders' supposed electability could change wildly once GOP opposition research folks really start digging into him. They simply haven't bothered at this point. It's naive to think that a self-described socialist doesn't have past ties that could haunt him in a presidential election.

Also his campaign staff sucks and would undoubtedly commit numerous and very damaging screwups during the general election, if their performance in the primary race is any indication.

By Fenderputty Go To PostMy whole thing with Sanders isn't even electability anymore. Though I do still questions that to some extent, my main issue is that all the things that make him better than Clinton are mute considering Congress. When asked how he would combat this he responds by getting young people to protest on congresses footsteps. So I feel Clinton is a liberal's best shot at the nomination and with getting some policy past.

Strange logic--as if Bernie wouldn't get "some policy passed". Not everything he tries to get pushed through will be only ideas that the extreme left will support.

Again--the idea is young voters who support Bernie and are the minority eventually become older voters. The landscape changes. You don't get all the policy through, but the landscape moves more to the left as a result of keeping up with the "will" of the people.

By BertramCooper Go To PostIt's naive to think that a self-described socialist doesn't have past ties that could haunt him in a presidential election.

What should haunt you as a voter is the way WalMart treated their workers when Clinton was part of their board of directors, and how she supported the Iraq war, amongst many other issues.

If this takes a backseat to your concerns, then you have your priorities wrong.

By Dark PhaZe Go To PostStrange logic–as if Bernie wouldn't get "some policy passed". Not everything he tries to get pushed through will be only ideas that the extreme left will support.

Again–the idea is young voters who support Bernie and are the minority eventually become older voters. The landscape changes. You don't get all the policy through, but the landscape moves more to the left as a result of keeping up with the "will" of the people.

It's not strange logic at all and the landscape is moving regardless. Sanders isn't getting free college through as an example. Hillary might get her idea about trading part time work for tuition through. I like Bernie's idea more from an ideological standpoint but Hillary's idea is much more likely to get votes. So many of the major differences between the two are mute when it comes to putting policy in place. Both will put liberal judges on. If congress wasn't so far to the right I would feel differently about Sanders.

By Fenderputty Go To PostIt's not strange logic at all and the landscape is moving regardless. Sanders isn't getting free college through as an example. Hillary might get her idea about trading part time work for tuition through. I like Bernie's idea more from an ideological standpoint but Hillary's idea is much more likely to get votes. So many of the major differences between the two are mute when it comes to putting policy in place. Both will put liberal judges on. If congress wasn't so far to the right I would feel differently about Sanders.

If your concerns are genuine, I wish you spent some time in a European country where people have been defending your strategy of the "useful vote" for decades, and it only led the center-Left to drift further to the Right over the long term. Clinton will accompany the worsening of inequalities, there is no doubt. Opposing Clinton is not just about the next four years, it is about giving traction to a longer term perspective.

By Gabyskra Go To PostIf your concerns are genuine, I wish you spent some time in a European country where people have been defending your strategy of the "useful vote" for decades, and it only led the center-Left to drift further to the Right over the long term. Clinton will accompany the worsening of inequalities, there is no doubt. Opposing Clinton is not just about the next four years, it is about giving traction to a longer term perspective.

Different systems. If people want more liberal legislation passed they need to vote in the primaries and change congresses make up. Getting liberal legislation passed won't happen if liberals only vote every 8 years. Other than SCOTUS appointees the next POTUS will be a veto machine if they're a dem.

By Fenderputty Go To PostDifferent systems.

How? America does not have a patent on bicameral legislative processes.

IMO, it's not even so much about the elections, it's about social movements. But I'd rather have someone talk about said social movements during the elections, than a dynasty imbedded in corporate interests hold power because you need to be more palatable to nationalist nuts.

By Gabyskra Go To PostWhat should haunt you as a voter is the way WalMart treated their workers when Clinton was part of their board of directors, and how she supported the Iraq war, amongst many other issues.

If this takes a backseat to your concerns, then you have your priorities wrong.

When did I say I was talking about myself in this scenario?

I'm talking about Bernie's electability - not any actual opinions I have of Bernie Sanders compared to Hillary Clinton.

Bernie hasn't really been vetted by any sort of aggressive opposition group. Clinton has. Over. And over. And over again.

So by this point, we pretty much know all of the skeletons in the Clintons' closet. I doubt that's the case with Bernie.

By BertramCooper Go To PostWhen did I say I was talking about myself in this scenario?

Sure, I did not mean to single you out, "you" was meant as a rhetorical device.

By Gabyskra Go To PostSure, I did not mean to single you out, "you" was meant as a rhetorical device.

Okay, gotcha.

By Gabyskra Go To PostHow? America does not have a patent on bicameral legislative processes.

IMO, it's not even so much about the elections, it's about social movements. But I'd rather have someone talk about said social movements during the elections, than a dynasty imbedded in corporate interests hold power because you need to be more palatable to nationalist nuts.

That may be true, but the way our house is currently set up, rural America has way more representation than urban america relative to population. In any case my point still stands. If one wants liberal legislation it's not going to happen by voting for a liberal president only. Liberals need to vote during the midterms and at local elections. Bernie is doing a fine job of making Hillary discuss liberal policy and pushing her left.

Remember the great success George McGovern had turning out young people to vote in the general and the lasting impact of his nomination?

By IWMTB19 Go To PostRemember the great success George McGovern had turning out young people to vote in the general and the lasting impact of his nomination?

Terrible comparison. McGovern was screwed by Southern Democrats who are now dead (and the responsibility is also largely on them for the defeat), and the New Left was not susceptible to participate in politics like that.

But what comes out of your remark too, is that you really did not think much was to be done about the Vietnam War...

Bernie Sanders is also 75 years old. Hillary isn't young but that worries me as well.

By reilo Go To PostBernie Sanders is also 75 years old. Hillary isn't young but that worries me as well.

Hillary Clinton is so young and free she's on Ellen learning how to dab, and elsewhere she's saying how much she loves "beh-yonce" (sic).

You have the democracy you deserve, run by an absolute lack of authenticity and victors that are masters at raising funds from power-holding lobbies...

By Gabyskra Go To PostTerrible comparison. McGovern was screwed by Southern Democrats who are now dead (and the responsibility is also largely on them for the defeat), and the New Left was not susceptible to participate in politics like that.

But what comes out of your remark too, is that you really did not think much was to be done about the Vietnam War…

Nope, it's just that nominating a guy sometimes doesn't help much if they lose.

You think that there are no groups that will avoid voting for Bernie Sanders even though Socialists are more hated than even Muslims and Atheists? Really? The point isn't that the voters are exactly the same, the point that is when the extreme fringes of the party nominate an extreme candidate, that candidate can often get destroyed. Reagan and Obama were two of the more extreme candidates to be elected and they needed to be running against a party leading an economic collapse.

By IWMTB19 Go To PostYou think that there are no groups that will avoid voting for Bernie Sanders even though Socialists are more hated than even Muslims and Atheists? Really? The point isn't that the circumstances are the same, the point that is when the extreme fringes of the party nominate an extreme candidate, that candidate can often get destroyed. Reagan and Obama were two of the more extreme candidates to be elected and they needed to be running against a party leading an economic collapse.

There is no substance in your political argument, there is only a measure of opportunity that takes precedence over what--is--RIGHT. I'm not interested in discussing the way people think of socialists, I'm one, and I'm proud, and I know that what we need today is people saying that they are too, even if it means being in the minority for a while. Not out-of-touch politicians like Clinton who think 250k/y is middle-class income.

Centrists always talk about compromises and opportunities. They're not the driving force of the grand historical moments. There'll always be some centrists somewhere. I'd rather find my historical grounding in the abolitionist movement. In feminism. In the civil rights movement. In labor! All these were "infested" by socialists... Enough with neoliberal policies that further inequality.

I can definitely imagine better candidates than Hillary as president, and Sanders is arguably one of them. The problem is whether the rest of this country can envision Sanders as a good candidate and elect him to the White House. So if I had to choose between Hillary and any of the republican candidates, even if it means she's not a better liberal than Sanders, then I choose her 100% of the time.

Idealistically, I also think it's time to elect a woman for the president, because that's a type of progress for this country that Sanders just can't provide.

By reilo Go To PostIdealistically, I also think it's time to elect a woman for the president, because that's a type of progress for this country that Sanders just can't provide.

Most young women interested in the debate like Sanders over Clinton.

That has a lot to do with the fact that the neoliberal policies of Clinton hurt women.

I think Clinton's presidency is inevitable tbh.