US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Human Snorenado]

Also seems like Megyn, Bret and Chris Wallace have been ripping into the GOPers way more than all the other debate moderators. And often actually about issues (that the candidates have bombed on), not campaign garbage or trying to make them all fight.

I wish Megyn would rip into me on the issues.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

And Bret?

[close]

That's because they're not scared of being called "liberal" media

[benjipwns]

President Trump already doin' work: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/271683-miley-cyrus-pledges-to-leave-us-if-trump-wins

Miley Cyrus is pledging to leave the country if GOP White House hopeful Donald Trump becomes president.

“Honestly f--- this s--- I am moving if this is my president!” the 23-year-old “We Can’t Stop” singer wrote to her more than 38 million Instagram followers on Wednesday.

In a lengthy post that included photos of a smiling Trump next to Texas hunter Kendall Jones, alongside a separate snapshot of a teary-eyed Cyrus, the controversial entertainer wrote, “I don’t say things I don’t mean!”

[Mods Help]

It took a snapshot of trump next to a hunter with a dead animal to make her react that way? Not the way trump treats non-whites and women?

[benjipwns]

It's Miley Cyrus.

[Mods Help]

Ugh. Moron is me for giving her a modicum of credit.

[Dennis]

No. Don't. Go, Miley.

[I'm a Puppy!]

Well at least there will be one net positive.

[CatsCatsCats]

MILEY CYRUS IS A UNIQUE TALENT

[Syph]

Jesus this is going to fuel Canadian smugness for years.  How embarrassed you guys must feel about the state of your politics.

breh we have trudeau
nothing to be smug about right now lol

[brob]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/04/the-debilitating-economic-disaster-louisianas-governor-left-behind/

smh at you people not rallying for jindal

[ToxicAdam]

LA has been a mess for 60+ years. Jindal was just the last guy holding the chair.

[Phoenix Dark]

@walrus

I always visit Drudge whenever a BLS report comes out just to see the spin. Today takes the cake. I've been around these people for years  yet it never ceases to amaze me how dumb a lot of very successful, older financial types are with respect to basic economic principles once politics get involved.

Rogers Holdings Chairman Jim Rogers is certain that the U.S. economy will be in recession in the next 12 months.

During an interview on Bloomberg TV with Guy Johnson, the famous investor said that there was a 100 percent probability that the U.S. economy would be in a downturn within one year.

100% chance of a recession. Why?

"It's been seven years, eight years since we had the last recession in the U.S., and normally, historically we have them every four to seven years for whatever reason—at least we always have," he said. "It doesn't have to happen in four to seven years, but look at the debt, the debt is staggering."

The debt is always "staggering." And surely not an indicator of immediate recession for a large economy like the US.

The former partner of George Soros suggested that if investors focus on the right data, there are signs that the U.S. economy is already faltering.

"If you look at the … payroll tax figures [in the U.S.], you see they're already flat," he concluded. "Don't pay attention to the government numbers, pay attention to the real numbers."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-04/payrolls-in-u-s-surge-while-wages-drop-in-mixed-jobs-report

Another financial guy trotted out on the day a decent BLS report to tell us doom is coming. There's a host of economic data to look at every month, and none of it points to a surefire recession. As the article states, economics place the chances of a 2016 recession at less than 30%.

Could a lagging global economy/China cause a recession? Maybe, sure. But the US economy is doing well right now in spite of global issues.

[Dennis]

I like what I see. I wish Bernie had a chance to be president. Alas America isn't ready for a middle of the road social democrat.



http://www.vox.com/2016/3/4/11161616/bernie-sanders-tax-policy-center

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1193903

[mormapope]

Gaffers expose themselves as liberal conservatives. Helping men and women dealing with social issues? "Of course." Helping the impoverished and fucked in the country by giving up some of what you have so we can all reach some sort of similar level? "Fuck you Bernie, you scum fuck, my money."

But you paying up can help other people. By helping them they can contribute more themselves.

"Tell those people to apply for social services."

The ones being gutted and aren't getting enough money because of government misspending and taxes being too low?

"Taxes will never ever be raised in this country, lol you can try though, it'll never happen"

United States deserves a dreary fate for how bitter and cynical our citizens are.

[I'm a Puppy!]

Oh I don't think we need more taxes. We just need to not spend 80 bazillion dollars on the military.

[archie4208]

Which candidate will make anime real?

That's who I'm voting for.

[mormapope]

Oh I don't think we need more taxes. We just need to not spend 80 bazillion dollars on the military.

This is definitely true.

Doing both though would guarantee positive changes pretty quickly.

[mormapope]

Which candidate will make anime real?

That's who I'm voting for.

If Hilary gets elected, her supporters will defend her every decision like she's a platinum coated waifu.

If Trump gets elected, there's a chance that The Apprentice's newest season will take place at the Whitehouse.

Depends on what anime you want.

[Mods Help]

Gaffers expose themselves as liberal conservatives. Helping men and women dealing with social issues? "Of course." Helping the impoverished and fucked in the country by giving up some of what you have so we can all reach some sort of similar level? "Fuck you Bernie, you scum fuck, my money."

But you paying up can help other people. By helping them they can contribute more themselves.

"Tell those people to apply for social services."

The ones being gutted and aren't getting enough money because of government misspending and taxes being too low?

"Taxes will never ever be raised in this country, lol you can try though, it'll never happen"

United States deserves a dreary fate for how bitter and cynical our citizens are.

Liberals are still capitalists. 

Not really surprising. We still live in a society that's all about obtaining wealth that's completely based around the premise of "got mine."

Liberals aren't the people you think they are and liberalism isn't as progressive or equal as you think it is.

It's another symptom of conservatives labeling all people that are democrats or are on the left liberals. Now everyone that's not conservative or moderate is a liberal, as if it's some synonym for progressivism or something. It isn't. Many of those people aren't even liberals. They're socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. Most are actually moderate. But because of the Republican party and their insanity, they identify as liberals - even if they're not.

[Phoenix Dark]

 

[Mods Help]

 

[Phoenix Dark]

There's no logical policy reason to raise taxes on people who make 35k. This is not a small European country. It doesn't make political sense nor is it required for his plan. Does he want to be revenue neutral, or does that not matter in fantasy land? If so surely he could cut a variety of government spending (ie the military) to make up the difference. But I assume he doesn't care about deficits...but then again why raise taxes on the working poor?

He's not going to win that argument with "bububu you won't be paying insurance premiums anymore"

[Madrun Badrun]

I make 20,00$ a year and I would be happy to (and probably do) pay 2000$ to have universal healthcare.  Knowing that if I get hurt I can just walk into a hospital without worries or if my mom has a heartattack she won't have to worry is invaluable.  The difference in feeling between our eye/teeth plans where we have to deal with insurance and universal healthcare is crazy.  I remember when my mom got layed off and I couldn't go to the dentist for 2 years. 

[Mandark]

I make 20,00$ a year and I would be happy to (and probably do) pay 2000$ to have universal healthcare.  Knowing that if I get hurt I can just walk into a hospital without worries or if my mom has a heartattack she won't have to worry is invaluable.  The difference in feeling between our eye/teeth plans where we have to deal with insurance and universal healthcare is crazy.  I remember when my mom got layed off and I couldn't go to the dentist for 2 years.

Yeah, it's an economics factoid that people will pay for health insurance even if it's an actuarial "loser" for them.  Paying a bit more across all the averages and possibilities is better when you don't have to worry about going bankrupt or missing out on important medical treatment.

The political hurdle (well, one among many) is that most people are extremely wary of a plan that takes away their current insurance with the promise of replacing it with a new system.  This is why Obama stressed the not-entirely-true "you'll be able to keep your insurance if you like it" talking point when promoting the ACA.  With a single-payer system you're asking people to give up something tangible for a promise, and that's a hard, hard sell.

[brawndolicious]

Insurers know that most people are too scared to switch. With car insurance, the loyal customers get the highest premiums for that reason while those who are willing to shop around usually end up with the lowest rates. There'd have to be a massive amount of transparency in costs as well as education of consumers to be able to convince people to bet on a switch to universal healthcare.

[Human Snorenado]

Insurers know that most people are too scared to switch. With car insurance, the loyal customers get the highest premiums for that reason while those who are willing to shop around usually end up with the lowest rates. There'd have to be a massive amount of transparency in costs as well as education of consumers to be able to convince people to bet on a switch to universal healthcare.

This is true- I signed up for a new car policy with Progressive last June, and then in 6 months when it came due again they jacked it up $9/month. I was too lazy to do anything about it

[benjipwns]

$15?!? Fuck that Marxist Hillary, that's like two trips to Taco Bell or more.

[benjipwns]

Why does her plan even bother raising taxes on all the lower brackets at those amounts?     (EDIT: Or is that from some other tax change...the GOP one they did was just Income Taxes so I assumed making an ass out of u and med.)

Also:

Absolutely disgusted by the selfish responses here. I thought Gaf was a progressive forum... Apparently I didn't get the fucking memo you fucking Ted Cruz wannabes. I guess you really don't give a fuck about people dying in the streets.

I'll take it one step further, the fuck you got mine attitude on display from Hillary and "former" Bernie supporters shows exactly why racism will never cease in your country.

For true equality to happen you need to understand that you are going to have to give something up if you are privileged period. This thread could easily be mistaken for a pro GOP with the amount of whining that you have to help your fellow man.

Fucking disgusting, thank god I live in Canada, where the basic human right to healthcare is not a fucking "pipe dream". Your country is not special, comparing it to the majority of other 1st world countries is not "apples to oranges" it's reality.

Buy a smaller house or no house so millenials can have free parties at college for a year and never go to class.

I knew so many freshmen who never went to class and was just there to have a good time and that was with their parents paying for them or using TOPS. The thought of them getting to do that for free hurts.

[Mandark]

Why does her plan even bother raising taxes on all the lower brackets at those amounts?

It doesn't.

[benjipwns]

Oh, looking at the report instead of Vox, they just estimate economic growth. Bottom rises to $6 by 2025.

Also this was in there that Vox left out:

Another proposal would limit contributions to tax-favored retirement accounts, including traditional and Roth IRAs, defined benefit plans, and to defined contribution plans such as 401(k), 403(b), and 457(b) accounts. Currently, limitations apply to annual contributions and benefits for each plan an individual holds. However, an individual with multiple retirement accounts may accumulate very large balances within those accounts.7 The proposal would prohibit account holders from making additional contributions to any account once the sum of all account balances reaches a level adequate to finance the maximum annuity currently permitted for defined benefit plans. The account balance limit for an individual age 62 in 2015 would have been approximately $3.4 million under this rule

[benjipwns]

https://twitter.com/ericming5/status/705417645936545794/photo/1

[benjipwns]

[benjipwns]

Has Hillary really shifted to "the left" due to Bernie in any tangible way though?

The cultural issues she's moved on since 2008 have become more mainstream since then, gay marriage/rights, criminal justice reform, etc. Certainly not due to Bernie. And she remains steadfast on others. And you could argue some of it is opportunistic.

She's not really budged too much on health care, BIG BANKS, trade, climate change, gun control, etc. She's spent more time blasting Bernie for being unrealistic on those issues than really outlining anything specific on those.

She remains seemingly in the "hawk" wing of the Democratic Party, and Bernie hasn't exactly delivered foreign policy blows to her.

This isn't really to criticize her on these policies, Darko knows I'm not one to throw stones in the glass house of policy, but I'm not seeing the shift that everyone keeps saying has happened.

Just to illustrate rather than claim this is some kind of definitive thing. OnTheIssues had Hillary placed in 2007 (day she announced for President) vs inauguration 2009 vs 2014 vs today:


So by their standards, it was Obama who moved her left, not Bernie. (Likely, considering Iraq, health care, etc.)

For fun, Donald Trump, 2006 vs 2011 vs today:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Jim Gilmore, 2006 vs 2008 vs today:

[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Jeb, 2004 vs 2008 vs 2012 vs 2016:

[close]

[benjipwns]

Oh fuck how did I not think to do these (all close to election day as possible), Johm McCain:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

2003 vs 2004 vs 2007 vs 2013 vs 2016:

[close]

Mitt Romney:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

2004 vs 2006 vs 2007 vs 2008

2009 vs 2011 vs 2012 vs 2016

[close]

[octopushover]

That GAF thread is pretty telling, not about whether or not people are "true progressives" but about human behaviour in general. Bernie's revolution isn't realistic because it's a revolution built on asking people of all stripes to pay more, and people have extreme sticker shock when something happens that fast. To get to that level of taxation by 2016, regardless of whether or not it's good for the country, you would have had to start raising taxes progressively twenty years ago.

[brawndolicious]

I don't think people are going to be so worried about what a "true progressive" does in a few months. Hillary will win the nomination and Sanders will endorse her and the focus of the rest of the election season will be on how horrible Trump or Hillary is for America. The difference is that Trump is actually a crazy, disgusting, scary person who will absolutely draw everyone opposed to him to the polls while Hillary isn't remotely a "controversial" figure for most American conservatives.

It's pretty obvious if you watched a single GOP debate where like 10% of the time someone is trying to hype up how evil Hillary is. The Republican candidates are afraid that independents and moderates won't care that much about Hillary's negatives at all and they all know that Hillary can handle pressure/criticism in a debate better than any of their guys (especially better than Trump).

It's really annoying that people start imagining doom & gloom scenarios based on polls months away but the one good thing about the long campaign process is that we get to see this implosion happen in slow-motion. I'm far more concerned with reelection in 2020 at this point since that's more important as far as policy change/economic status.

[benjipwns]

http://rodsilva2016.com/

[tiesto]

I don't think people are going to be so worried about what a "true progressive" does in a few months. Hillary will win the nomination and Sanders will endorse her and the focus of the rest of the election season will be on how horrible Trump or Hillary is for America. The difference is that Trump is actually a crazy, disgusting, scary person who will absolutely draw everyone opposed to him to the polls while Hillary isn't remotely a "controversial" figure for most American conservatives.

Sounds like someone who doesn't know a lot of conservatives

[Joe Molotov]

http://rodsilva2016.com/

If Taco Bell isn't a plank in his platform, then no thanks.

[benjipwns]

I just signed up and sent him this question: "What is your position on Taco Bell?"

[benjipwns]

http://andy2016.com/

For more than 10 years, he has shared with the American people the true facts of our great nation’s accomplishments in time travel and Mars visitation.

He has done so as one who served bravely in the two secret U.S. defense projects in which time travel on Earth and voyages to Mars were first undertaken.

As a result of his courageous advocacy as a crusading lawyer, Andy is credited with ending the time travel and Mars cover-ups by the US government on behalf of the American people.

This arduous work in the vineyards of the Truth Movement represented historic breakthroughs in America’s understanding of our past and our prospects for the future.

Though this is arguably just as good:

Taking My Official Campaign Portrait
The campaign website is all about branding me as a candidate. Our early focus groups revealed that American voters want their President to “look Presidential.” To this end, we decided to take an Official Campaign Portrait to show voters just how Presidential I look. The President is, after all, America’s drum major at home and its chief diplomat abroad. We decided to search for a photographer who has taken the official portraits of executives of major American corporations. We found Ken Beebe, whose many subjects have included leaders of Bank of America. We hope that you are as pleased with the photographic result as we are. Ken rocks!

[benjipwns]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432380/donald-trump-culture-rot

A few years back, I began reliving, in reverse, the most treasured part of my upbringing. On sunny summer Sundays, my son, age seven and falling in love with baseball, would curl up next to me on the couch to watch the game. The great American ritual of a man passing on to his boy not just the national pastime but a cultural heritage; the odd bits of hard-knocks wisdom sprinkled around the infield-fly rule. There was even symmetry across the decades: The Mets providing just enough drama to break your heart in the end.

There was, however, a vexing intrusion on the ritual: the remote control. And not because we didn’t have a remote control for our black-and-white RCA TV set in the Bronx circa 1966; it was because we didn’t need a remote-control back then. And not because there were only six other channels, as opposed to today’s 600; it was because, as his wide-eyed seven-year-old was taking it all in, my dad wasn’t worried about having to switch off Viagra commercials between innings.

So what is the natural progression from turning the campus and pop culture over to Amerika-hating radicals, to the vigorous years-long media defense of Bill Clinton’s right to turn the White House into a cathouse, to the inability of a father to watch baseball with his young son at one o’clock on a Sunday afternoon without being ready to address erectile dysfunction?

It is the cretinous Donald J. Trump campaign.

[El Babua]

NRO melting down might be in the top 3 or 4th thing about this election cycle.

[octopushover]

#boobsforBernie is hilarious mostly due to the fact that the woman in the picture has an Insane Clown Posse tattoo

[Syph]

Nancy Reagan just died
almost poetic

[brob]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/02/david-duke-steve-scalise_n_6406844.html

 

[Human Snorenado]

Nancy Reagan just died
almost poetic

Of all the responses to Trump from within the party, hers has been the best so far

[Madrun Badrun]

[Syph]

Puerto Rico baby
Winds of change
Rubio 2016 basically a lock at this point

[Dickie Dee]

Nancy Reagan just died
almost poetic

Of all the responses to Trump from within the party, hers has been the best so far

Really went the extra mile and didn't just say no.

[benjipwns]

A feller on GAF reformatted some of Jamelle Bouie's tweets into chronological order/paragraphs:

There is more to a political party than voters. There are officials, activists, donors, party leaders of various stripes, organizers, etc. These are the folks who recruit candidates, organize campaigns, develop field operations, maintain the party in off-years, etc. The POTUS is also a party leader, and exists in a relationship with these folks. What he/she says and does affects the field for them. This even goes for the people running for president. But not all candidates understand their roles as such.

HRC is explicitly running as the leader of the Democratic *coalition*, which includes liberals as much as red state Democrats. Sanders is running as an ideological liberal, who is less concerned with party building than in changing the terms of the party coalition. And so, when you're hear HRC's answers on something like fracking, you should be asking yourself "who in Dem coalition wants to hear this?" The answer is: "Democrats in conservative places who don't want to make this salient in their campaigns."

It's a balancing act, between not alienating those coalition members, but also not alienating enviros, another important member. Sanders doesn't have the same kind of balancing act. He wants to make ideological liberals the fulcrum of the Democratic Party coalition. Which frees him to be more expansive as a candidate. But because the Democratic Party isn't purely transactional or purely ideological, it makes them both uncomfortable fits. Hillary is too transactional and too beholden to corporate-wing of the Democratic Party. Sanders' is probably a bit too ideological. It's noteworthy that HRC is strongest among most stalwart Democratic voters, Sanders among most ideological Democratic voters.

Anyway, in a real sense HRC and Sanders are running for two completely different jobs.

HRC is running as leader of a loose coalition of interests, Sanders is running as a champion of liberal interests. Obama was that rare figure who could present himself as both.

[Phoenix Dark]

Benji what are your plans for tomorrow 

I just remembered my driver's license expired late last month so I'll get it renewed today and be ready to vote. I was going to vote for Sanders but I'm insulted no one from his campaign called or came to my door last week. Perhaps they assume I'm too old and black to feel the Bern; I'm not even 30 yet! BUT if I vote for Hillary I will confirm that I am indeed too old and black. So I'm conflicted.

I might write-in the hippest, most progressive candidate available: Lyndon LaRouche.

post this on poligaf for old times sake

[benjipwns]

I offered up my vote to PoliGAF, either Sanders, Trump or Cruz.

But then I noticed that George Pataki is still on the ballot. (And Rand! But not Jim Gilmore. )

So is...and this is the way it'll be written apparently:

Roque Rocky De La Fuente
  Formerly: Roque De La Fuente

We also have Uncommitted to vote for in both parties. I've heard good things about their position on Rock Music Videos.

[benjipwns]

"WE NOW HAVE INTERNET"

[octopushover]

[brob]

oji~senpai

[curly]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/04/death-predicts-whether-people-vote-for-donald-trump/

Even after controlling for these other factors, the middle-aged white death rate in a county was still a significant predictor of the share of votes that went to Trump.

Here's how to think about it: Say that County A and County B are roughly identical, except for the death rate of their white, middle-aged residents. County A's death rate is in the 75th percentile — meaning that the middle-aged whites there are dying faster than in three quarters of other counties — while County B's is in the 25th percentile. Between these two economically similar places, County A would give an extra percentage point to Donald Trump in the primary.

Three other characteristics stood out as highly statistically significant:

    The fraction of people with bachelor's degrees. All else held equal — including the death rates — places where people were more educated were less likely to vote for Trump. This effect was large. About a seven percentage-point increase in the fraction of people with BAs (the difference between the 75th and 25th percentiles) predicts about a four to five percentage point decrease in Trump's vote share. In other words, more educated counties don't vote Trump. (They tend to vote Rubio, polls show.)
    The fraction of people in the county who are working. After controlling for other factors, the percentage of people with jobs was a significant predictor of the Trump vote share. If an additional 12 percent of adults had jobs (which is roughly the gap between the 75th and 25th percentiles), Trump would have lost about two percentage points of the vote in the primaries.
    The decline in manufacturing. In the early 2000s, increased trade with China delivered another whammy to American manufacturers. The data show that the places that lost a lot of manufacturing jobs since 1999 were also more likely to vote for Trump on Super Tuesday.

[Great Rumbler]

lolololololol

[Brehvolution]

Pretty convincing.  Fuck you pre-civil rights act "democrats"!

[Human Snorenado]

David Brooks has been drinking again. Sad!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/opinion/its-not-too-late.html?ref=opinion&_r=0