Re: US Presidential Race

by gb Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:41 pm

I wish Obama would just FDR this presidential race. I can't stand to see any of these buffoons(Rep. and Dem.) in office.

by RealGunner Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:44 pm

As an outsider, the only candidate I have liked reading about is Bernie Sanders. But i've been told he has no chance.

Think Hillary will win it in the end

by gb Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:05 pm

Yeah, he visited my University a few weeks back and honestly liked what I heard but has no chance.

by M99 Thu Aug 06, 2015 10:49 pm

Same here. Bernie Sanders is my pick.

by VivaStPauli Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:01 pm

Biden might be a not-too-shitty choice as well. Doubt he'd win, but I think he'd be aaaa very reasonable president.

by RedOranje Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:36 pm

gb wrote:I wish Obama would just FDR this presidential race. I can't stand to see any of these buffoons(Rep. and Dem.) in office.

Literally impossible given the constitutional amendment passed (as a direct result of FDR, actually).

by RealGunner Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:48 pm

Read that Carly Fiorina did well in the GOP debate on fox.

googled her speech and could only watch it for 2 minutes before closing the tab

"I will fully back my good friend Netanyahu" followed by "I will do my best to cripple Iran's economy" followed by shitting on Obama and Hillary

I suddenly don't dislike David Cameron so much.

by BarrileteCosmico Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:42 am

She looks like Ms. Underwood, has my vote.

All kidding aside I heard her CEO track record is terrible, doubt she would beat Clinton.

by RealGunner Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:41 am

Watching the GOPDebate featuring Trump.

As a European, I am shocked at how extreme the views are of all these candidates.

And the amount of support there is for them.

How can anyone take these candidates seriously. They are all a parody of each other

by FennecFox7 Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:43 am

Because people are prejudiced and in america as long as you are a WASP, it doesn't matter what you do, just make sure to hate on islam, support military aggression, and shit on obama no matter what.

You're in disbelief RG but come down to Dallas or Amarillo and you'll see what I mean.

People here actually believe to their hearts that the likes of Cruz and Trump preach the truth.

by McLewis Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:23 pm

BarrileteCosmico wrote:She looks like Ms. Underwood, has my vote.

All kidding aside I heard her CEO track record is terrible, doubt she would beat Clinton.

I was working for HP during her tenure there and the environment there was ridiculous. My business unit wasn't effected by the firings, but had a lot of friends in those areas that were. Lots of flip-flopping. People who thought they were safe were the ones that went first and the ones who should've gone stayed much longer than they should've. It was chaos. Meg Whitman was no better though.

Regarding the debates, it's clear that Fox News was the real winner here, as the Huff Post points out.

I must say, I don't agree with Megyn Kelly on a lot of stuff, but I enjoyed watching her hammer Trump on his comments about women. Fantastic segment.

Also really enjoyed Chris Christie's jabs with Rand Paul. Jeb Bush utterly failed with his "voice of reason" schtick. This wasn't the night for that and he made himself look rather weak with his calls for civility.

I personally won't support any of these candidates as my ideology is very different from theirs, but this was great entertainment.

by M99 Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:58 pm

Bernie Sanders wrote:The Republican debate is over. Not one word about income and wealth inequality, climate change, Citizens United or student debt. That's why the Republicans are so out of touch with the American people. What I heard was more tax breaks for the rich, more people losing health insurance and more talk about war. This is not what we need.

by McLewis Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:26 pm

Bernie Sanders can't even get through his own rallies without Black Lives Matter activists hounding him. He was never going to get the Democratic nomination and with the Black vote being a bloc that's quite crucial to winning the whole thing, as boisterous and bullish as BLM are being, he has to come and address their concerns directly and genuinely. He hasn't done that and it makes him extremely opaque, which is something you don't want to be when in his position.

by BarrileteCosmico Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:36 pm

McLewis wrote:Also really enjoyed Chris Christie's jabs with Rand Paul. Jeb Bush utterly failed with his "voice of reason" schtick. This wasn't the night for that and he made himself look rather weak with his calls for civility.

I thought that was interesting because tons of people thought Rand 'won' and tons of people thought Christie 'won' that exchange.

by RealGunner Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:02 pm

https://twitter.com/UrbanEngIish/status/630394578051317760

by CBarca Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:24 pm

McLewis wrote:Bernie Sanders can't even get through his own rallies without Black Lives Matter activists hounding him. He was never going to get the Democratic nomination and with the Black vote being a bloc that's quite crucial to winning the whole thing, as boisterous and bullish as BLM are being, he has to come and address their concerns directly and genuinely. He hasn't done that and it makes him extremely opaque, which is something you don't want to be when in his position.

Interesting article here about this, that came out a while ago. Seems relevant right now.

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/07/the_truth_about_bernie_sanders_race_why_his_biggest_weakness_could_become_his_greatest_strength/

I don't understand his reluctance to talk about race. I understand and even agree that a large amount of racial inequality can be attributed to economic inequality and the socioeconomic circumstances that black, latino and other minority groups grow up in--but if he wants a wider appeal, he needs to address race directly. As this article points out, despite him being an old white guy from the whitest state in America, he has the history and the credentials to back up his being a firm supporter of racial equality.

If he can manage to start garnering large amounts of support from those voting blocs, as he well should considering he will do ten fold the amount of good for them as any other candidate available--I really wonder where his campaign will go and how it will start to look, as far as being an actual threat besides moving Hillary left and showing there is one politician we can trust in this country.

Don't know how others felt about the GOP debate, it was entertaining. Of course, I would never support a single candidate, but from the pool of candidates out there, it seems to me that Christie is the one I could stomach the most, if a GOP candidate had to be president. Of course, the bridge scandal is something I also really can't overlook. As long as Walker doesn't have a chance at the presidency and a dem wins it's a win for me tbh

by rwo power Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:05 pm

One thing that always puzzles me a lot - why are there only two parties in the US that have part in governing?

Being from Germany, I am used to a much more colourful mix of parties that take part in government, and that diversity makes it easier that issues of all kind can be at least addressed, and the rise of smaller parties does force the big parties to evaluate their programs an add issues that were formally only addressed by some of the small parties.

In the US it looks as if there are two big camps that mostly seem to walk on diametrally different paths and a lot of things just get ignored for a long time, until they can't be ignored anymore, although it seems to take far longer than in a more varied party environment.

by McLewis Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:02 am

Well the US has many different political parties that span the political and ideological spectrum...it's just that the Democratic and Republican parties are the most dominant and traditionally accepted when it comes to running for political positions.

by BarrileteCosmico Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:54 am

rwo power wrote:One thing that always puzzles me a lot - why are there only two parties in the US that have part in governing?

Being from Germany, I am used to a much more colourful mix of parties that take part in government, and that diversity makes it easier that issues of all kind can be at least addressed, and the rise of smaller parties does force the big parties to evaluate their programs an add issues that were formally only addressed by some of the small parties.

In the US it looks as if there are two big camps that mostly seem to walk on diametrally different paths and a lot of things just get ignored for a long time, until they can't be ignored anymore, although it seems to take far longer than in a more varied party environment.

The presidential system invariably tends towards bipartydism. When you have a "winner takes all" system eventually 2 broad options will develop that have the likeliest chance to win. In Europe most democracies are parliamentary so smaller parties can be part of the governing power through coalitions. If the US had a parliamentary system the Republican party would probably be a coalition of the libertarians, the religious right, & the conservatives instead, for instance.

by gb Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:57 pm

RedOranje wrote:
gb wrote:I wish Obama would just FDR this presidential race. I can't stand to see any of these buffoons(Rep. and Dem.) in office.
Literally impossible given the constitutional amendment passed (as a direct result of FDR, actually).

Bro chill. No need to take everything so literal. It was just a jab at the current slate of candidates.

by gb Wed Aug 12, 2015 4:04 pm

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
rwo power wrote:One thing that always puzzles me a lot - why are there only two parties in the US that have part in governing?

Being from Germany, I am used to a much more colourful mix of parties that take part in government, and that diversity makes it easier that issues of all kind can be at least addressed, and the rise of smaller parties does force the big parties to evaluate their programs an add issues that were formally only addressed by some of the small parties.

In the US it looks as if there are two big camps that mostly seem to walk on diametrally different paths and a lot of things just get ignored for a long time, until they can't be ignored anymore, although it seems to take far longer than in a more varied party environment.

The presidential system invariably tends towards bipartydism. When you have a "winner takes all" system eventually 2 broad options will develop that have the likeliest chance to win. In Europe most democracies are parliamentary so smaller parties can be part of the governing power through coalitions. If the US had a parliamentary system the Republican party would probably be a coalition of the libertarians, the religious right, & the conservatives instead, for instance.

Exactly BC. It's the type of government that decides the party system. A democracy or republic style of government will always form a two-party system (sometimes a third party develops).

by VivaStPauli Wed Aug 12, 2015 4:23 pm

For the US the big "problem" is the electoral system, meaning that taking a state by 51% is enough. It's idiotic and means you can be president with a minority of the vote.

But little anachronisms like that exist in most democracies, and it made a lot of sense, when the federal government was a lot weaker and it was more a coalition of the member states than a coherent nation.

by CBarca Wed Aug 12, 2015 9:19 pm

@Rwo, it's really been answered but just to be thorough and clear here, this is explained perfectly by the principle (though it is called a law as it is so widely accepted) Duverger's Law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Plurality rule elections structured within single-member districts tend to favor a two-party system.

@gb--The electoral system determines the party system. Again, Duverger's Law. Which is just a technical term for what has already been explained.

by rwo power Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:55 am

Thanks for all the elaborate replies! :bow:

by Guest Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:08 pm

Looking more and more like Biden is going to make a run of it.

US Presidential Race - Page 5 6fe

Good guy I'd vote for him over Hillary.

by FennecFox7 Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:43 am

Bernie sanders was injected by the republicans to split the Hilliary vote. I mean no one in their right mind would vote for jeb bush or donald trump. The same thing happened to beckermann - al gore

by Sponsored content