Who are you voting for?

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, cazetofamo said:

I was hoping for Bernie... Well, looks like it will be McAfee 2016!

Don't listen to the bullshit.  A real chance is a real chance, and Bernie is not as bad off as the media make it seem... wait on the numbers for tonight.

 

I think he has won 3 states outright so far, and it should get interesting as we move away from the bible belt.  44 more primaries to go after tonight.

[smeek14]

Looks like trump and Hillary are dominating...

[Volbet]

Chris Christi looks like he just realized, that he forgot turn off the gas

Maybe that`s why he needs to home on that plane.

[Qyoon]

On 28/2/2016 at 11:51 AM, Misanthrope said:

You really think he'd be any worst than Hillary? Why would you want to hand over the country to European bankers which is basically what she'll do?

why european ? USA banks are basicly way more powerfull than EU banks.

[Trik'Stari]

Anyone but Hillary. It makes me laugh that people think Trump is the worse option.

 

Trump is a moron. I'll take a moron any day of the week, over an entitled, corrupt, murderess.

[Real_PhillBert]

9 hours ago, stconquest said:

Don't listen to the bullshit.  A real chance is a real chance, and Bernie is not as bad off as the media make it seem... wait on the numbers for tonight.

 

I think he has won 3 states outright so far, and it should get interesting as we move away from the bible belt.  44 more primaries to go after tonight.

I'll be the first to admit that he did A LOT better than I thought he would. 

[ImBleu]

On 2/28/2016 at 8:04 PM, Misanthrope said:

No, it actually is not a problem. In a perfect world, taxes would be equal across the board since the total amount of resources would be taxed. In reality however, the wealthy actually have the most resources to evade taxes legally and otherwise. I'm sorry wealthy people will have to go from 5 lambos to just 2 or 3 but is either that or brutal tax enforcement when like 90% of them end up in fucking jail for evasion. Also, none of that "I'll establish enterprises and put my money overseas" crap you live in the country you get fucking taxed, no more money extraction operations.

 

 

If I earn $10 and you earn $50, is it fair to tax us both $5?

 

Sure, it's only 10% of your salary, but that's also half mine.

 

When it comes to the top 1%, sure they 'earned' it, or inherited more than likely, but in a fair society everyone gets equal access to basic amenities, such as education and a living wage.

[ACatWithThumbs]

16 hours ago, Real_PhillBert said:

Come on... We all know those superdelegates  already bought and paid for. The Sanders party is already over, though no one has told most Sanders supporters yet. Even google is counting them already. 

That's not how Super Delegates work they vote with the popular vote always.(Bill Clinton voted for Obama in 2008 and Hillary tried to play the SD game there as well.)
If they would no vote with the popular vote it would literally split the Democratic party, which they simply can't afford with the current congress and senate situation as the white house is all control the Democrats currently have left.
If Hillary wins via Super Delegates they will loose congress, senate, and the white house to the GOP.

And now after Super Tuesday it's looking pretty good for Sanders as the Clinton's firewall has been passed now.
The majority of upcoming states besides Florida have favorable demographics to Sanders and the longer he is in the race the more known he becomes which is his number 1 problem.
I'm fully expecting the race to go until California.

On topic:
I'm voting for Sanders because I lived in both Europe and the US and have directly experienced which policies work and which do not.
And the most important issues above everything else is getting money out of politics, because as long as lobbyists and big money control our representatives we do not have a voice on any issue on both sides.

 

[Real_PhillBert]

1 minute ago, JasonRoGo said:

That's not how Super Delegates work they vote with the popular vote always.(Bill Clinton voted for Obama in 2008 and Hillary tried to play the SD game there as well.)
If they would no vote with the popular vote it would literally split the Democratic party, which they simply can't afford with the current congress and senate situation as the white house is all control the Democrats currently have left.
If Hillary wins via Super Delegates they will loose congress, senate, and the white house to the GOP.

And now after Super Tuesday it's looking pretty good for Sanders as the Clinton's firewall has been passed now.
The majority of upcoming states besides Florida have favorable demographics to Sanders and the longer he is in the race the more known he becomes which is his number 1 problem.
I'm fully expecting the race to go until California.

 

Keep telling yourself that there is no corruption in the caucus system and the delegates are an accurate reflection of public opinion. Sure, if you say so. Look at the average age of a caucus goer and the average age of a voter, and tell me again how caucuses are an accurate reflection of public opinion. 

 

BTW, If Hillary wins the nomination regardless of how, the DNC will lose congress and the white house. The democratic voter base is far more divided right now than the Republican voter base. Just my $0.02.

[Derpologist]

While I am under eighteen, I feel very strongly about Politics (I do live in the US)

Pardon my language

 

Trump is a racist and sexist bastard who will do anything to get his way, I fucking hate him. 

Hillary is alright, but definitely not 'good'

Bernie is the way to go in my opinion. 

[ACatWithThumbs]

--

[Real_PhillBert]

2 minutes ago, JasonRoGo said:

I'm not saying there is no corruption in the process we have already seen it several times this election.
What I'm saying is that the Democratic Party simply can't afford to pull any major upsets or they will literally loose their jobs and the money/power that comes with it.
They would also be at risk loosing the Supreme Court as well.

If the GOP wins in the general this will likely be the scenario:

Congress: GOP controlled (It already is.)
Senate: GOP controlled (It already is.)
White House: GOP controlled 
Supreme Court: GOP controlled (It's now 50/50 who every wins the nominee gets the Supreme Court)

If Sanders wins it will likely be like this:
Congress: GOP controlled (There is a slight chance of flip but it's unlikely)
Senate:  Democrat controlled (Likely chance of flip if he runs against Trump)
White House: Democrat controlled
Supreme Court : Democrat controlled

 

Ahh, sorry for misinterpreting your post.

 

I actually agree now that you have clarified. The only point I might not see is a Senate flip to democratic control if Sanders wins. But that is basically speculation on both parts at this point.

[Deoros]

Donald Trump is illogical.

[Unhelpful]

On 3/1/2016 at 8:48 AM, AlwaysFSX said:

Depends, not all Republicans like Trump. They may not even vote at all.

Can confirm. If he's the nominee I'm not voting, at least not republican or democrat. 

[Real_PhillBert]

1 minute ago, Deoros said:

Donald Trump is illogical.

I know where you're coming from, but I still feel the need to point out that perhaps politics is not the best place to hunt for logic.

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I'll be the first to admit that he did A LOT better than I thought he would. 

I have been paying attention.  I knew this type of outcome was probable, at least three states, but he took one more than I expected.

 

Anything can happen in these early stages and I was worried a bit for Sanders.  The Democratic party is standing behind Clinton for now.  This can change as time goes on and Hilary is not gaining new supporters.  Her message is boring and vague.  When you listen to her speech yesterday, you could place her back twenty years and the speech would work:  Like astrology.  

 

Bernie has a clear message that most don't understand.  Every argument against his healthcare plan is contrived from false logic and touted as statistically factual when it could not be farther from the truth.  

 

Education is an investment in the people of the country.  The better the opportunity the general population has to gain career-related skills, the richer the country will become.  

 

I know even republicans want corruption out of the political system.  Is there really any other viable choice to help make this happen?   

 

Sanders will crush Trump in a general election.  Hilary is shady and corrupt herself.  Trump will have plenty of ammo to use against her.

 

Side Note:  A 1927 article has Fred Trump being arrested for brawling (out on $500 bail).  Apparently a fascist Italian group and KKK members got into it.  Guess which side Trump was fighting on? 

 

 

[Real_PhillBert]

2 minutes ago, stconquest said:

I have been paying attention.  I knew this type of outcome was probable, at least three states, but he took one more than I expected.

 

Anything can happen in these early stages and I was worried a bit for Sanders.  The Democratic party is standing behind Clinton for now.  This can change as time goes on and Hilary is not gaining new supporters.  Her message is boring and vague.  When you listen to her speech yesterday, you could place her back twenty years and the speech would work:  Like astrology.  

 

Bernie has a clear message that most don't understand.  Every argument against his healthcare plan is contrived from false logic and touted as statistically factual when it could not be farther from the truth.  

 

Education is an investment in the people of the country.  The better the opportunity the general population has to gain career-related skills, the richer the country will become.  

 

I know even republicans want corruption out of the political system.  Is there really any other viable choice to make this happen?   

I have also been paying attention

 

One of the big problems that Bernie has is Bernie supporters. Far too often his supporters come off as rabid fanatics, which push moderates away from his message. I honestly think that if his supporters would calm down a bit, he would have a better chance. 

 

Hillary is always pandering, that's why her message is always vague and unspecific. She doesn't want to piss anyone off. 

 

As for education and healthcare, I don't believe anyone is arguing that those are bad things. Plans just differ on how much we can pay for and how exactly to pay for it.

[stconquest]

11 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I have also been paying attention

 

One of the big problems that Bernie has is Bernie supporters. Far too often his supporters come off as rabid fanatics, which push moderates away from his message. I honestly think that if his supporters would calm down a bit, he would have a better chance. 

 

Hillary is always pandering, that's why her message is always vague and unspecific. She doesn't want to piss anyone off. 

 

As for education and healthcare, I don't believe anyone is arguing that those are bad things. Plans just differ on how much we can pay for and how exactly to pay for it.

Regarding education and healthcare, I look at it this way:  Your doctors and educators (profs) are being paid no matter what.  The more money you throw at them through insurance companies and banks, the more they will gladly take.

 

Having a sort of regulation on what their work is really worth can benefit the consumer.  Banks and insurance companies squeeze till it hurts, while making obscene profits.  These are privately owned companies that focus on their bottom line.  

 

Here in Ontario, I believe our highest paid doctor (COO of Sick Kids) was making $1M a few years back.  Most make a very livable wage of a few hundred grand a year.  

 

Imagine cutting out the middle man (insurance and loans).  No premiums, no interest.  Does that not at least sound like it might be smarter?

[Real_PhillBert]

4 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Regarding education and healthcare, I look at it this way:  Your doctors and educators (profs) are being paid no matter what.  The more money you throw at them through insurance companies and banks, the more they will gladly take.

 

Having a sort of regulation on what their work is really worth can benefit the consumer.  Banks and insurance companies squeeze till it hurts, while making obscene profits.  These are privately owned companies that focus on their bottom line.  

 

Here in Ontario, I believe our highest paid doctor (COO of Sick Kids) was making $1M a few years back.  Most make a very livable wage of a few hundred grand a year.  

I am more than a little familiar with US healthcare. 

 

I think you have misunderstood my statement a bit. When I was talking about how much we can pay for and how to pay for it, I am referring to government subsidies; not end user care. It's important to understand that those two are not necessarily the same thing in the US. 

[stconquest]

1 minute ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I am more than a little familiar with US healthcare. 

 

I think you have misunderstood my statement a bit. When I was talking about how much we can pay for and how to pay for it, I am referring to government subsidies; not end user care. It's important to understand that those two are not necessarily the same thing in the US. 

What I am saying is that you are overpaying for those things and there is no stop gap.  The private companies just squeeze until they feel they should let up.

[Real_PhillBert]

3 minutes ago, stconquest said:

What I am saying is that you are overpaying for those things and there is no stop gap.  The private companies just squeeze until they feel they should let up.

But the real question becomes; Why is healthcare so expensive? And it is much more complicated of an issue than just private companies trying to make a profit LOL. That is a hugely oversimplified answer to a very complex question. 

[stconquest]

3 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

But the real question becomes why is that? And it is much more complicated of an issue than just private companies trying to make a profit LOL. That is a hugely oversimplified answer to a very complex question. 

But it is not more complicated.  It is is really simple.  You need a doctor, you go to a doctor and there are no insurance companies to deal with.  You tax dollars (that have been already taken) pay for it.  You walk in, you walk out.

 

Of course there are other factors, but get the core principal right:  Kick the middleman out of the picture.  What the fuck do insurance companies do for your health?

 

All the government has to do is make sure the doctors are paid.

[Real_PhillBert]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

But it is not more complicated.  It is is really simple.  You need a doctor, you go to a doctor and there are no insurance companies to deal with.  You tax dollars (that have been already taken) pay for it.  You walk in, you walk out.

 

Of course there are other factors, but get the core principal right:  Kick the middleman out of the picture.  What the fuck do insurance companies do for your health?

You are starting this discussion based on the pretense that a socialized system is best. In order to have a real discussion you MUST be able to recognize the advantages of a verity of systems. I'm not going to say that a socialized healthcare system is the worst thing ever, but it is equally untrue to claim that a privatized healthcare system is the worst thing ever. 

 

You don't understand, you are not kicking the middle man out, you are exchanging which middle man you're dealing with. 

 

What do Insurance Companies do for your health? The exact same thing that my home owners insurance does for my house. Or what my car insurance company does for my car. 

[stconquest]

Just now, Real_PhillBert said:

You are starting this discussion based on the pretense that a socialized system is best. In order to have a real discussion you MUST be able to recognize the advantages of a verity of systems. I'm not going to say that a socialized healthcare system is the worst thing ever, but it is equally untrue to claim that a privatized healthcare system is the worst thing ever. 

 

You don't understand, you are not kicking the middle man out, you are exchanging which middle man you're dealing with. 

 

What do Insurance Companies do for your health? The exact same thing that my home owners insurance does for my house. Or what my car insurance company does for my car. 

I never said socialized medicine is best, or better.  I said smarter.  It is less expensive to the population.

 

You would be dealing with a middle man that, in principle, works for you... not it's small group if select shareholders.

 

I guess you would have to value healthcare as a right, more than a privilege.  One battle at a time. 

 

Home insurance assures that once you have a house, you can hold on to it's value in the case of a catastrophe. 

 

Car insurance financially protects you and the people around you.

 

Health care is not the same as home or car insurance.

[Real_PhillBert]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

I never said socialized medicine is best, or better.  I said smarter.  It is less expensive to the population.

 

You would be dealing with a middle man that, in principle, works for you... not it's small group if select shareholders.

 

I guess you would have to value healthcare as a right, more than a privilege.  One battle at a time. 

 

Home insurance assures that once you have a house, you can hold on to it's value in the case of a catastrophe. 

 

Car insurance financially protects you and the people around you.

 

Health care is not the same as home or car insurance.

I would argue that a paid insurance company has much more stake in you than a government entity does. After all, a dead or canceled policy makes no money, which of coarse is the goal. 

 

I have argued and will continue to argue that no on has the right to another persons services. Health care is in fact a service. An essential service, but a service. 

 

I was not intending to say that health insurance is equal to car insurance, however I will point out that neither directly effects the end service. Both are paying a third party, doctor or mechanic. 

 

It's also important to note how cheap homeowners and car insurance is. Could this possibly be because of the incredibly limited government involvement in that space?

 

However we are straying pretty far off of the topic at hand.