The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Tannhauser42**

Biden should make an entrance like the WWE: just when Hillary and Bernie are in the middle of an argument, the lights go out, and then the Biden logo appears onscreen and his entrance music plays. THEN he can roll in on a Harley.

**whembly**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
Biden should make an entrance like the WWE: just when Hillary and Bernie are in the middle of an argument, the lights go out, and then the Biden logo appears onscreen and his entrance music plays. THEN he can roll in on a Harley.

I'm sold!

**Frazzled**

whembly wrote:
We'll see how "impartial" the questions will be.

Will the moderator simulate the same sort of "Fight Club" as it were done in the last two Republican debates?

I'm just hoping that Sanders goes after Clinton...

Then Sander's "Socialism" proclivities are attacked...

Will O'Malley or Jim Webb make some noise? The almost HAVE to come out there swinging...

Then... there's Biden... the "He.Who.Shall.Not.Be.Named" candidate.

I doubt it. I do like how all commenters on CNN were talking about how they were sure it would be a calmer debate-DUDE YOU CREATED THE RULES FOR YOUR FIGHT CLUB DEBATE!

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
whembly wrote:
We'll see how "impartial" the questions will be.

Will the moderator simulate the same sort of "Fight Club" as it were done in the last two Republican debates?

I'm just hoping that Sanders goes after Clinton...

Then Sander's "Socialism" proclivities are attacked...

Will O'Malley or Jim Webb make some noise? The almost HAVE to come out there swinging...

Then... there's Biden... the "He.Who.Shall.Not.Be.Named" candidate.

I doubt it. I do like how all commenters on CNN were talking about how they were sure it would be a calmer debate-DUDE YOU CREATED THE RULES FOR YOUR FIGHT CLUB DEBATE!

Hey... CNN should at the very least, encourage their debate participants to press the Life Alert buttons if they choke up on stage.

**Frazzled**

They are a pretty AARP heavy group aren't they...

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
They are a pretty AARP heavy group aren't they...

Bernie: 74
Biden: 72
Webb: 69
Hillary: 67
Golden Girls (1st Season)

Bea Arthur: 63
Betty White: 63
Chafee: 62
Estelle Getty: 62
Martin O'Malley: 52

:shrugs:

**Tannhauser42**

And, just like they did for the Republican debate, CNN has kindly provided us with a bingo card for tonight's Democratic debate:
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/10/politics/democratic-debate-bingo/

**Jihadin**

Starting to get the feel some of us will vote to whoever entertain us more.....

**jasper76**

Enough with the national anthems before debates already. Feels like a baseball game.

**whembly**

Cooper is being tough on all candidates.

So... who's more "socialist" quips is going to hurt them in the General...

**jasper76**

Cooper is Bush League at this, and so is CNN. The candidates are begging for substantive questions, and he is interjecting himself way too much. God forbid they tell us what their actual plans are.

**whembly**

Webb much stronger than I expected.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Did I hear this right?

Chaffee: “We need a president with ethics”
Anderson: “Sec Clinton, would you like to respond?”
Hillary: “No”.

wut?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Whoa... Sanders just crushed Hillary on Wall Street

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hillary: Nobody went to jail after the 2007 crash?

Who's been in charge ever since?
O.o

Automatically Appended Next Post:
LOL... my twittah feed is a riot now:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
ROTFLMAO:

**Ensis Ferrae**

Honestly though, I actually think the candidates, when they get to talk, are actually getting TO their policies, rather than the "Real Housewives" circus that was the last R debate.

And Webb is pretty damn weak... he spends probably half his time bitching and moaning about the time he gets to speak

**whembly**

Ooh.... HRC is anti-Snowden.

And... Ouchie on Sander's Single Payor plan:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heh...

Cooper: How'd you be different than Obama?

Hillary: thats obvious, I’m a woman!

**Ensis Ferrae**

whembly wrote:

And... Ouchie on Sander's Single Payor plan:

We've already been over, ITT, how that WSJ article was and still is garbage.

**whembly**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
whembly wrote:

And... Ouchie on Sander's Single Payor plan:

We've already been over, ITT, how that WSJ article was and still is garbage.

He has still failed to describe how he'd pay for all of it.

**Ensis Ferrae**

whembly wrote:

He has still failed to describe how he'd pay for all of it.

You must be watching a different debate than I am, because he's said repeatedly, through a "Wall Street Speculation" tax, as well as other taxes on the ultra-rich.

**whembly**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
whembly wrote:

He has still failed to describe how he'd pay for all of it.

You must be watching a different debate than I am, because he's said repeatedly, through a "Wall Street Speculation" tax, as well as other taxes on the ultra-rich.

That "speculation" tax will never pass.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yay... Bernie is pushing for carbon taxes.

**dogma**

whembly wrote:

That "speculation" tax will never pass.

No, it probably won't, but pretending that Sanders did not lay out the funding mechanics behind his proposals simply makes you seem foolish.

**whembly**

dogma wrote:
whembly wrote:

That "speculation" tax will never pass.

No, it probably won't, but pretending that Sanders did not lay out the funding mechanics behind his proposals simply makes you seem foolish.

It's vaporware... it wouldn't even come close to paying for it.

Why? Because that assumes the behaviors will remain static. It's the same old problem when trying to raise any taxes. Because, people will always seek to minimize their tax liabilities... something that big spenders (both Democrats and Republicans) ignores.

**grumpy_newenglander**

Jim Webb... good lord. I think the Donald has found his dream running mate.

**whembly**

For a loopy loon... I still like O'Malley.

>.>

<.<

Weird...

**Co'tor Shas**

whembly wrote:

Spoiler:

I laughed way to hard at this. Dammit, whembly, there are people trying to sleep in my house.

**whembly**

heh...

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Even better...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

And Webb is pretty damn weak... he spends probably half his time bitching and moaning about the time he gets to speak

Well.... he wasn't wrong:

Speaking times:
Clinton: 23 min 42 sec
Sanders: 22 min 27 sec
O'Malley: 13 min 18 sec
Webb: 12 min 55 sec
Chafee: 7 min 32 sec

**Co'tor Shas**

I must say, from knowing nothing about him going into this, I'm liking O'mally. If Biden doesn't step up, I could certainly see him getting the nomination.

**dogma**

whembly wrote:

It's vaporware... it wouldn't even come close to paying for it.

You're moving the goalposts.

Sanders clearly stated how he would fund his proposals. You might not like what he said, but pretending that he didn't say anything regarding the matter is simply dishonest.

whembly wrote:

Why? Because that assumes the behaviors will remain static.

Have you become more likely to vote for liberals? Democrats?

whembly wrote:

It's the same old problem when trying to raise any taxes. Because, people will always seek to minimize their tax liabilities... something that big spenders (both Democrats and Republicans) ignores.

No, people will generally seek to maximize their day-to-day profit.

**whembly**

I'm still laughing at:

Chaffee: “We need a president with ethics”
Anderson: “Sec Clinton, would you like to respond?”
Hillary: “No”.

After this... Biden has to be really be thinking now... right?

**Ensis Ferrae**

whembly wrote:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

And Webb is pretty damn weak... he spends probably half his time bitching and moaning about the time he gets to speak

Well.... he wasn't wrong:

Speaking times:
Clinton: 23 min 42 sec
Sanders: 22 min 27 sec
O'Malley: 13 min 18 sec
Webb: 12 min 55 sec
Chafee: 7 min 32 sec

That being said, IMHO, when Webb wasn't complaining about his time allotment, he did give some pretty good answers.

In regards to the softball "Who is the greatest threat to america", Webb pointed out that it's actually a multi-faceted issue, and highlighted some pretty big "keys" in each issue.

**whembly**

dogma wrote:
whembly wrote:

It's vaporware... it wouldn't even come close to paying for it.

You're moving the goalposts.

Sanders clearly stated how he would fund his proposals. You might not like what he said, but pretending that he didn't say anything regarding the matter is simply dishonest.

Now it's you being dishonest.

I'm stating his "plan" isn't as clear. You can sum it up by saying "he's going to tax the rich more". Well... yeah... but, how.

whembly wrote:

Why? Because that assumes the behaviors will remain static.

Have you become more likely to vote for liberals? Democrats?

Wut. You're not making any sense.

whembly wrote:

It's the same old problem when trying to raise any taxes. Because, people will always seek to minimize their tax liabilities... something that big spenders (both Democrats and Republicans) ignores.

No, people will generally seek to maximize their day-to-day profit.

They are NOT mutually exclusive.

**Scrabb**

whembly wrote:

dogma wrote:
whembly wrote:

Why? Because that assumes the behaviors will remain static.

Have you become more likely to vote for liberals? Democrats?

Wut. You're not making any sense.

He's providing an example of behavior remaining static (your voting preferences) to present the argument that things remaining static is often correctly assumed.