[US Election 2016] Democratic Primary Megathread III

[The Romulan Republic]

And if her words are anything to believe (Heh), she did say that she would sign $15 into law if it came to her desk. Not that it appears that it would...But still.

Of course she would.

Because for such a law to pass it would have to have either strong bi-partisan support (heh), or overwhelming support from the Democrats in a majority Democratic Congress.

She's not going to give her own party a blatant fuck you on a popular issue.

Its like some people think that Clinton is evil incarnate and will do stupid, self-destructive things constantly just to spite the poor, as opposed to what she actually is- a self-interested, corrupt, but basically competent and rational politician who will make incremental moves to the Left or Right based on her sense of what will benefit her political ambitions and whatever issues she actually gives a shit about.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And if her words are anything to believe (Heh), she did say that she would sign $15 into law if it came to her desk. Not that it appears that it would...But still.

Of course she would.

Because for such a law to pass it would have to have either strong bi-partisan support (heh), or overwhelming support from the Democrats in a majority Democratic Congress.

She's not going to give her own party a blatant fuck you on a popular issue.

Its like some people think that Clinton is evil incarnate and will do stupid, self-destructive things constantly just to spite the poor, as opposed to what she actually is- a self-interested, corrupt, but basically competent and rational politician who will make incremental moves to the Left or Right based on her sense of what will benefit her political ambitions and whatever issues she actually gives a shit about.

I'd even go so far as to say that her sympathies more or less lie with the progressive side, but that (as you stated) her political ambitions tend to override other concerns. However, all else being equal, she'll go with the left so long as it's not going to screw her over in terms of re-election or fundraising.

[The Romulan Republic]

Of course she would.

Because for such a law to pass it would have to have either strong bi-partisan support (heh), or overwhelming support from the Democrats in a majority Democratic Congress.

She's not going to give her own party a blatant fuck you on a popular issue.

Its like some people think that Clinton is evil incarnate and will do stupid, self-destructive things constantly just to spite the poor, as opposed to what she actually is- a self-interested, corrupt, but basically competent and rational politician who will make incremental moves to the Left or Right based on her sense of what will benefit her political ambitions and whatever issues she actually gives a shit about.

I'd even go so far as to say that her sympathies more or less lie with the progressive side, but that (as you stated) her political ambitions tend to override other concerns. However, all else being equal, she'll go with the left so long as it's not going to screw her over in terms of re-election or fundraising.

I think there are some progressive/Left wing positions she doesn't give a damn about.

I do get the feeling she's genuinely concerned about womens' issues/rights, though, albeit willing to compromise them (like anything else) short term for political reasons. And no wonder, since its an issue that ties into her personal experiences.

I also have a suspicion that she'd privately like universal health care, but concluded after her failure in the '90s that it was politically impossible, and hasn't realized that times have changed.

Unfortunately, I also think she's a sincere hawk, which is arguably the single biggest strike against her for me.

But of course, I could be wrong. I can hardly claim to know what's in Clinton's head.

Edit: I think some of Clinton's problems come down to the fact that she's to some extent still a '90's Democrat who hasn't caught up with the times.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I'd even go so far as to say that her sympathies more or less lie with the progressive side, but that (as you stated) her political ambitions tend to override other concerns. However, all else being equal, she'll go with the left so long as it's not going to screw her over in terms of re-election or fundraising.

I think there are some progressive/Left wing positions she doesn't give a damn about.

I do get the feeling she's genuinely concerned about womens' issues/rights, though, albeit willing to compromise them (like anything else) short term for political reasons. And no wonder, since its an issue that ties into her personal experiences.

I also have a suspicion that she'd privately like universal health care, but concluded after her failure in the '90s that it was politically impossible, and hasn't realized that times have changed.

Unfortunately, I also think she's a sincere hawk, which is arguably the single biggest strike against her for me.

But of course, I could be wrong. I can hardly claim to know what's in Clinton's head.

Edit: I think some of Clinton's problems come down to the fact that she's to some extent still a '90's Democrat who hasn't caught up with the times.

Hmph. If you're not going to give me anything to disagree with even slightly, then I'm not sure how to continue to debate you.

[The Romulan Republic]

Ultimately, while I think little of Clinton's personal integrity, I do think she is mostly competent, generally rational, and highly experienced. I think she will for the most part, policy-wise, be an effective President as long as the Left wing of the party maintains constant pressure, so that she sees that it is in her interests not to swing too far Right and that she has support from her party for Left wing policies.

The only policy of hers' I'm aware of that has major potential for immediate disaster is the Syria policy, as I see no way to enforce a no-fly zone at present that doesn't amount to starting a shooting war with Russia. However, because I don't think Clinton is generally stupid, insane, or suicidal, I suspect that some of her stance is just posturing.

[Geilinor]

Ultimately, while I think little of Clinton's personal integrity, I do think she is mostly competent, generally rational, and highly experienced. I think she will for the most part, policy-wise, be an effective President as long as the Left wing of the party maintains constant pressure, so that she sees that it is in her interests not to swing too far Right and that she has support from her party for Left wing policies.

The only policy of hers' I'm aware of that has major potential for immediate disaster is the Syria policy, as I see no way to enforce a no-fly zone at present that doesn't amount to starting a shooting war with Russia. However, because I don't think Clinton is generally stupid, insane, or suicidal, I suspect that some of her stance is just posturing.

There's not going to be a no-fly zone unless it can be done without causing a conflict with Russia.

[The Romulan Republic]

Ultimately, while I think little of Clinton's personal integrity, I do think she is mostly competent, generally rational, and highly experienced. I think she will for the most part, policy-wise, be an effective President as long as the Left wing of the party maintains constant pressure, so that she sees that it is in her interests not to swing too far Right and that she has support from her party for Left wing policies.

The only policy of hers' I'm aware of that has major potential for immediate disaster is the Syria policy, as I see no way to enforce a no-fly zone at present that doesn't amount to starting a shooting war with Russia. However, because I don't think Clinton is generally stupid, insane, or suicidal, I suspect that some of her stance is just posturing.

There's not going to be a no-fly zone unless it can be done without causing a conflict with Russia.

Then its probably just empty talk, which doesn't make me think well of her, but doesn't terribly scare me either.

[Geilinor]

There's not going to be a no-fly zone unless it can be done without causing a conflict with Russia.

Then its probably just empty talk, which doesn't make me think well of her, but doesn't terribly scare me either.

Only if you consider unlikely proposals "empty talk".

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Then its probably just empty talk, which doesn't make me think well of her, but doesn't terribly scare me either.

Only if you consider unlikely proposals "empty talk".

If she knows that they're unlikely, then it's empty talk.

[Ashmoria]

It's about the speeches isn't it?

Or perhaps past policies. I do have to say, it's funny to see people harp her for changing views when we do it so frequently.

I, for one, haven't changed my opinion on that. I think that it would be right for her to release the transcripts of her speeches so that we know exactly what she told them in exchange for these huge sums of money. Even on a strategic level, it's a boneheaded move to not release them, because it allows people to fill in that information for themselves with words that are likely far worse than anything that was actually stated by her. That was my belief when I was backing Bernie, and it's my belief now. I won't defend her on this. I will, however, say that no matter what she's likely to have told them, it's not worth running the risk of having Trump in office.

it be a gigantic mistake. its too easy to take things out of context. consider the "what difference does it make" thing that the conservatives love to pretend meant that she didn't care about americans dying in Benghazi.

[Theodolia]

Only if you consider unlikely proposals "empty talk".

If she knows that they're unlikely, then it's empty talk.

I certainly hope Bernie Sanders is self aware enough to realize how unlikely most of his proposals are, are his words empty talk too?

[Ashmoria]

Talk is cheap, and based on Hillary's past, I don't expect her to live up to those promises.

She's been pretty consistent on 12.

I'd prefer 15, but I think there's a fair chance that we'll see 12 if the Democrats hold a majority in the House and Senate. Otherwise no, but that would be no fault of Clinton's.

Especially since a lot of places are going to 15 on their own initiative. 12 is if anything the compromise position now.

Clinton is sleazy, but she's not stupid. She knows there's only so far she can go from what her base wants.

Besides, a majority Democratic Congress might very well take the issue out of her hands and pass 12 weather she wants it or not.

it doesn't really matter, it would have to get through congress. if it gets through congress there is no way in hell she would veto a $12 minimum or even a $15 minimum.

[Ashmoria]

She's been pretty consistent on 12.

I'd prefer 15, but I think there's a fair chance that we'll see 12 if the Democrats hold a majority in the House and Senate. Otherwise no, but that would be no fault of Clinton's.

Especially since a lot of places are going to 15 on their own initiative. 12 is if anything the compromise position now.

Clinton is sleazy, but she's not stupid. She knows there's only so far she can go from what her base wants.

Besides, a majority Democratic Congress might very well take the issue out of her hands and pass 12 weather she wants it or not.

I don't really find her or the Democratic Party itself trustworthy anymore.

We shall see if they live up to their promises.

what have they failed you on except for things they couldn't possibly get done?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I, for one, haven't changed my opinion on that. I think that it would be right for her to release the transcripts of her speeches so that we know exactly what she told them in exchange for these huge sums of money. Even on a strategic level, it's a boneheaded move to not release them, because it allows people to fill in that information for themselves with words that are likely far worse than anything that was actually stated by her. That was my belief when I was backing Bernie, and it's my belief now. I won't defend her on this. I will, however, say that no matter what she's likely to have told them, it's not worth running the risk of having Trump in office.

it be a gigantic mistake. its too easy to take things out of context. consider the "what difference does it make" thing that the conservatives love to pretend meant that she didn't care about americans dying in Benghazi.

And now they can instead come up with their own ideas about what she said in order to divide the left against the moderates in the party (not that some of us on the left haven't been doing that already).

[Yumyumsuppertime]

If she knows that they're unlikely, then it's empty talk.

I certainly hope Bernie Sanders is self aware enough to realize how unlikely most of his proposals are, are his words empty talk too?

I think that he sees them as possible if enough of a mass movement can come together to demand them. That was the entire point of his campaign.

[Distantiality]

A platform should be a statement of values, not necessarily what you'll offer on the bargaining table.

[Theodolia]

A platform should be a statement of values, not necessarily what you'll offer on the bargaining table.

platforms aren't worth the paper they're written on

[Distantiality]

A platform should be a statement of values, not necessarily what you'll offer on the bargaining table.

platforms aren't worth the paper they're written on

Hence my statement.

[Geilinor]

Only if you consider unlikely proposals "empty talk".

If she knows that they're unlikely, then it's empty talk.

By that same logic, many of Bernie Sanders' proposals were empty talk if he knew they were unlikely to happen.

[New Jerzylvania]

“Attack” ~ (apologies to Danger Mouse)

Untouched by walls where borders meet, and
Didn't explain, but
Madly showed them our craze
Just wanting to die

Cast down
It was Satan sent, and
To the mosque no intent to repent
On my knees, just to cry

Until you travel to that place you can't come back
When the last bombings done and all that's left is wrecked

Pray nights Allah's coming for me, and
Some day
They'll punish my deeds, and they'll find
All the crimes
But then asked when you're gonna free them
Then they're going to
Ask to deal the boasts, the walls, the schemes
Oh, I plot mine

At last those coming came and they never looked back
With deadly planes in their skies then New York's attacked

Fooled them hoping to seem
Like a slave of evil but the product of greed and
It's such a mess so be honest with me
We can't afford to ignore that we're the disease

Tactical since we had to be, and
Then they were all taking flak for me
Worlds collide
Bombs inside
And when you follow through
with huge winds at your back
Looking on up, where's heaven, the sky
mushroom clouds have turned it black

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3yAx2uCoHs

[Guy]

I'd even go so far as to say that her sympathies more or less lie with the progressive side, but that (as you stated) her political ambitions tend to override other concerns. However, all else being equal, she'll go with the left so long as it's not going to screw her over in terms of re-election or fundraising.

I think there are some progressive/Left wing positions she doesn't give a damn about.

I do get the feeling she's genuinely concerned about womens' issues/rights, though, albeit willing to compromise them (like anything else) short term for political reasons. And no wonder, since its an issue that ties into her personal experiences.

I also have a suspicion that she'd privately like universal health care, but concluded after her failure in the '90s that it was politically impossible, and hasn't realized that times have changed.

Unfortunately, I also think she's a sincere hawk, which is arguably the single biggest strike against her for me.

But of course, I could be wrong. I can hardly claim to know what's in Clinton's head.

Edit: I think some of Clinton's problems come down to the fact that she's to some extent still a '90's Democrat who hasn't caught up with the times.

She's had close links with organised labour for decades.

Granted, you could say that's politically-motivated, but I'm not sure it's as clear as that. She was going after the New Deal Coalition / Beer Track in 2008. Unions having a stronger role to play in our economy has been an issue she has been quite consistent on.

She's also been pushing for minimum wage increases for a very long time. In 1999, she said:

We should be working to keep a basic bargain with all Americans: If you work hard and are responsible, you will not live in poverty. If you study this issue, you can clearly see it will not hurt the economy, it will not increase unemployment. There are those who have opposed an increase in the minimum wage, arguing that it will cost jobs, and there are some people who say we need more studies... They are wrong.

In 2007, she voted to increase the minimum wage to $7.25, and earlier (as part of a separate bill) an amendment to ensure the increase is to $7.25 rather than $6.25. She then immediately joined Democrats' calls to increase the minimum wage further to $9.50 (keep in mind that this was 9 years ago, so inflation etc means that it's much more now). She also introduced a bill that will ensure Congress does not get its annual COLA increase until the minimum wage is raised.

She's not Bernie Sanders on these issues, but I think it's one of these issues where she's at least as good as Obama.

[AiliailiA]

Talk is cheap, and based on Hillary's past, I don't expect her to live up to those promises.

She's been pretty consistent on 12.

I'd prefer 15, but I think there's a fair chance that we'll see 12 if the Democrats hold a majority in the House and Senate. Otherwise no, but that would be no fault of Clinton's.

Especially since a lot of places are going to 15 on their own initiative. 12 is if anything the compromise position now.

Washington's $15 MW doesn't come in until 2020. By which time it will be worth about $13.60 in current money.

I'm not contradicting you, just raising the point that any large increase in minimum wage will be phased in. And that a raise to $12 in the next two years, might actually relieve the poverty of minimum wage workers more effectively than a raise gradually to $15 over the next eight years.

[Corrian]

Washington's $15 minimum wage is only Seattle, just as an FYI

[AiliailiA]

Washington's $15 minimum wage is only Seattle, just as an FYI

Ah. That explains why I couldn't find a source.

My memory was at fault. It was actually California with the $15 MW, and it gets to that level by 2022 not 2020.

[New Jerzylvania]

Trump Age Daydream ~ (apologies to David Bowie)

Trump's an alligator, Newt's a moldy grampa coming for you
Donny draft evader, he's a moonbase buildin' bitch for you
Keep your mouth shut, it's the theater of the absurd
And I'm busting up my brains for the words

Weep for Captain Bligh, it's me babe
Put Mister Christian in my head
Press faithlessness, it's mine, love
Freak out for this Dump Trump daydream oh yeah

Don't fake it Donny, lay those purse strings on me
The church of con men, is such a phony place to be
Break me baby, make the RNC really care
For Donald Trump's comb-over hair

Weep for Captain Bligh, it's me babe
Put Mister Christian in my head
Press faithlessness, it's mine, love
Freak out for this Dump Trump daydream oh yeah

Weep for Captain Bligh, it's me babe
Put Mister Christian in my head
Press faithlessness, it's mine, love
Freak out for this Dump Trump daydream oh yeah

Weep for Captain Bligh, it's me babe
Put Mister Christian in my head
Press faithlessness it's mine, love
Freak out for this Dump Trump daydream oh yeah

Sell out , Cash out, Get out.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFDj3shXvco