All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[jeanvaljean]

What's she going to do for women that you honestly think Bernie wouldn't do? Seriously, anything at all. .

A little something called being the first female president of the US.

I mean, I'd love to see Bernie on the cover of Vanity Fair with his "Call me Bernice" coming out cover, but would he really go that far?

[Tami]

Does anyone actually LIKE Hilary and her policies?

I am not saying you like her "electability" or "like her more than republican"

But actually like what she stands for (does she stand for anyting really?)?

I do, and there are many others who do as well.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Does anyone actually LIKE Hilary and her policies?

I am not saying you like her "electability" or "like her more than republican"

But actually like what she stands for (does she stand for anyting really?)?

I like her. She's an impressive person and she'll be a good, practical leader. The narratives that she doesn't believe in anything, that she's no different than Republicans, that she's not progressive are just Republican manufactured lies. Look at her record. She's reliably promoted a progressive, and specifically feminist agenda. So much of the conventional wisdom about Hillary is actually smears that have been repeated so often people treat them like they're true.

[Shawn Hopkins]

A little something called being the first female president of the US.

I mean, I'd love to see Bernie on the cover of Vanity Fair with his "Call me Bernice" coming out cover, but would he really go that far?

Bernie's a good feminist, too. But he sees it just like he does racial issues, a subset of economic issues and economic inequality. He's the classic guy with a hammer that can only see nails. And just like on race there's a chance he'll miss some nuance if he doesn't consider it through the identity aspect, as Hillary will.

As an aside, I think this is why Bernie Bros. who hate feminism are drawn to Bernie. Couch feminism to them as just another aspect of economic equality and it's a lot easier to swallow.

[Mister Mets]

No one says that. Except maybe in a Youtube comment section. The thing I always hear is pro-choice supporters trying to convince anti-abortionists that even if they don't support abortion that they should support exceptions in cases of sexual assault. No one is ever convinces, but that's the treadmill we're running on.

As an aside, I greatly dislike the argument tactic of inventing absurd strawmen and assigning positions to them that no one actually holds. It's like me saying that I disagree with Clinton's views on Wall Street but it's better than how Trump punches Nuns. It's pretty pointless really.

The majority of pro-life people seem to believe in exceptions for rape, incest and significant health risks.

Old people are generally a more reliable voting block. Heck, looking ahead, if Bernie wins the Presidency Democrats will lose their shirts in the midterms, because his supporters are unlikely to vote without the Berniementum to fire it up, and aren't really Democrats in many cases. The Republicans will exaggerate and magnify every failure and Clinton supporters (who would usually be a reliable voting block) and on the fence people will stay home or switch to Republican, because the more extreme the change the more extreme the backlash. An even more extreme version of 2010.

Why would Clinton voters be more reliable in the midterms?

I also think Hillary will deliver us more legislators and governors. Bernie supporters tend more toward independent and Hillary's are more "good Democrats" who will vote a nearly straight ticket.

I know I've said this before, but I vote straight ticket. Democrats could run a dog and I would vote for the dog before I'd vote Republican. It wouldn't even have to be a particularly cute dog. I don't think most Bernie supporters are like me, heck in this thread we have at least two people who refuse to even vote for the eventual nominee if it's not Bernie.

The question of downticket effects is interesting. My guess is that Sanders would inspire more people to get into politics, which would help the party's bench.

Of course, Clinton might be a more popular President, which would help with the General Election prospects of candidates.

The best thing for Democrats running for local and state office would be a Republican President, although I kind of doubt many of the left are willing to make that trade.

Look, the author wants to know why he is wrong when he compares a potential Sanders' general run to '88. It's incredibly simple to do. Off the top of my head...

- The person running for the Republicans will not have been the V.P. of one of the most loved Republican Presidents of all time.
- Said V.P. certainly did not come out of the sort of primary that whoever will run this time out will have to survive.
- The "Soft-On-Crime" liberal aspect has no "apples to apples" aspect in this election.
- There was not a "Flint" equivalent for whoever comes out of the Democratic primary to point to.
- There was not the potential "Scalia" three-ring circus for the Democratic primary winner to point to.
- Don't even get me started on Cruz and if someone actually finds grounds to challenge his run. Before the general.
- Don't even get me started on a potential Trump third party run.

I don't think you could create a more "night and day" difference if you tried.

One problem with the '88 comparison is that George Bush won a historically unusual election. It was the only time since Eisenhower that a party held the White House for three consecutive terms.

With the Flint mess, has there ever been an instance of an unpopular Governor costing a party a presidential election?

[Vic Vega]

A good bit of Obamacare's "failures" have more to do with where the Federal Poverty Line is currently drawn than the policy itself.

And the fact that the Federal Poverty Line needs to be redrawn has not been in question by anybody on the
Right or Left for what 10 years now?

But nobody actually wants to do it because they know what will happen when they do: Its not going to look good for any sitting President or Congress (Dem or Repub) when a million more official poor folks show up on the stats that were previously on the "statistically screwed" sweet spot.

[Tami]

A good bit of Obamacare's "failures" have more to do with where the Federal Poverty Line is currently drawn than the policy itself.

And the fact that the Federal Poverty Line needs to be redrawn has not been in question by anybody on the
Right or Left for what 10 years now?

But nobody actually wants to do it because they know what will happen when they do: Its not going to look good for any sitting President or Congress (Dem or Repub) when a million more official poor folks show up on the stats that were previously on the "statistically screwed" sweet spot.

I've never thought of it as a failure, but it is a work in progress. Assuming that the Republicans don't obstruct or mess things up. It's a good start with room for improvement.

[Shawn Hopkins]

The majority of pro-life people seem to believe in exceptions for rape, incest and significant health risks.

Why would Clinton voters be more reliable in the midterms?

The question of downticket effects is interesting. My guess is that Sanders would inspire more people to get into politics, which would help the party's bench.

Of course, Clinton might be a more popular President, which would help with the General Election prospects of candidates.

The best thing for Democrats running for local and state office would be a Republican President, although I kind of doubt many of the left are willing to make that trade.

One problem with the '88 comparison is that George Bush won a historically unusual election. It was the only time since Eisenhower that a party held the White House for three consecutive terms.

With the Flint mess, has there ever been an instance of an unpopular Governor costing a party a presidential election?

Because they are older and more likely to vote straight Democrat.

I don't think Bernie encourages people to get into politics at all. He couches himself as an outsider, his supporters tend to think politicians are inherently bad and see Bernie as a Messianic exception. And if they did get into politics, it might not be as Democrats.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Hillary campaigns with Sandra Bland's mother, Geneva Reed-Veal today in Chicago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...aign-stop.html

Clinton then took mic and said: "I have deepest respect, admiration for Geneva. Her spirit, her commitment to take the terrible loss of her daughter, Sandra Bland, and turn that grief into action."
"We owe it to them to reform police practices to make sure that no other young woman like Sandra Bland is ever pulled out of a car for no good reason and thrown into a jail where she is found dead.
"We owe it to the families of young men like Laquan McDonald and the other names that we know all to well. Walter Scott, Freddy Gray, Tamir Rice and so many others."

[Kevinroc]

http://www.theonion.com/article/fema...ed-state-52367

"Female Presidential Candidate Who Was United States Senator, Secretary Of State Told To Be More Inspiring."

Sometimes The Onion is so on point it is scary.

But it's the last line that really sells it. " Margolis added that Clinton was too much a part of the establishment she spent decades breaking down barriers to enter."

[JediMindTrick]

For instance, Bernie's Medicare for all plan would come with a 2.2. percent income tax increase and a 6.7 percent payroll tax increase.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/

Now, Bernie argues that the middle class would save in the long run on healthcare costs, but the Republicans aren't going to mention that. They're just going to say tax increase. Also, the potential savings for Medicare for all might not sound too appealing to people who like their current health insurance. Republicans will point to Obamacare failures, real and exaggerated, to further scare these people.

I can tell you from personal experience that I, a typical middle class person, got royally screwed by Obamacare. I used to have great health insurance through my employer but due to the Cadillac tax provisions in Obamacare my employer had to seriously whittle away what they cover, sextuplee my deductible (used to 500 back in 2009 but now is 3000), and raise my monthly payment for it nearly 300%. We didn't get a raise during this time to cover these added expenses either so its been a major financial burden on me and the 800 others who work for my employer. And consequently my employer, who once was one of the most desirable to work for in the state, is now an albatross with huge recruiting and retention problems since their health insurance, once their #1 draw, is now so mediocre. I like many of my former co--workers would be gone except I'm too old to start over now that I'm less than 8 years from early retirement at my company. All because of Obamacare.

I'm absolutely in favor of figuring out a way to help poor people have insurance but screwing the middle class like Obamacare did is not the way to win us over.

If you don't know what the Cadillac tax thing is, there are provisions in Obamacare that basically say if you offer your employees too good insurance the employer will be seriously penalized in taxes.

[JediMindTrick]

But actually like what she stands for (does she stand for anyting really?)?

Hilary, like her husband, is a quintessential coward politician whose only values and stands are what are popular in the polls. If you agree with the direction the polls are heading then Hilary will bandwagon with you but she like her husband won't take a stand on anything unless the polls show the majority already in favor. To be fair, you can lobby this same criticism at most politicians. It in large part why Trump has such popularity, many people who disagree with him on issues at least respect that he will take a stand on issues, polls be damned.

[Michael P]

Does anyone actually LIKE Hillary and her policies?

I don't know her well enough to like her, but I respect her. I think she genuinely does want to improve things. She doesn't give a crap what assholes think of her. She's willing to compromise, but not to be pushed around. She's pragmatic. She can lead. I like all those things.

I don't necessarily like everything she's done, but her overall policies line up with mine. She's entrenched in the system, but so's Obama, and he's done well enough. I'd have no problem voting for her in the general.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I don't know her well enough to like her, but I respect her. I think she genuinely does want to improve things. She doesn't give a crap what assholes think of her. She's willing to compromise, but not to be pushed around. She's pragmatic. She can lead. I like all those things.

I don't necessarily like everything she's done, but her overall policies line up with mine. She's entrenched in the system, but so's Obama, and he's done well enough. I'd have no problem voting for her in the general.

But Hillary is such a meany type bitch ! She will ultimately destroy Mom , America and Apple Pie if she's elected !

[Gray Lensman]

http://www.theonion.com/article/fema...ed-state-52367

"Female Presidential Candidate Who Was United States Senator, Secretary Of State Told To Be More Inspiring."

Sometimes The Onion is so on point it is scary.

But it's the last line that really sells it. " Margolis added that Clinton was too much a part of the establishment she spent decades breaking down barriers to enter."

That last line is pretty on point, despite it being parody. She manages to get in, only to find out that the group she has entered is being blamed for everything.