What's interesting is how march 1st (super Tuesday) may not be the deciding day on the Dem side! It's exciting to have such a close race between a more popular candidate and a candidate with high turnout. If march 1st is a tie/close, then the next big day will be march 15th (Florida, Illinois, Ohio, and Missouri all have Dem primaries that day) if that's still a tie/close, then it will probably come down to CA which is months form now! It will be interesting to see where the tipping point is.
·
Edited 8 years ago
deleted
· 8 years ago
Presidential elections have turned into a side show. Candidates are doing more outlandish things to gain popularity, it's no longer a serious thing.
Okay stop. Firstly, this whole notion of "it's all a joke!" Is near ALWAYS said by people who don't understand the basic platforms near all the people run on. You can disagree with all of them politically if your part of the VERY small percentage of people that have a basic or better grasp of the candidates ideas and platforms, but if you can't give even the major points of the candidates ideas (which isn't, things like "trumps a racist" (which is true but completely neglects the progressive part of platform such as infrastructure rebuilding and his opinion on money and politics) and "Bernie's a socialist!" (which is such a misleading but technically true statement. He's a democratic socialist, which is a mix of socialism and capitalism, similar to what the Nordic countries have. Another term that has a negative connotation, I'll be it a much more, but still not entirely proper by the common (and often incorrect) US perception of the word, is what's called a "welfare statuses")
*I don't like Donald trump and honestly with my understanding of the dictionary, he is a fascist. But credit where credit is due
.
Feel free to believe politically as you wish, ill be happy to debate anyone, but at least know what the candidates want before making an assessment of the entire political atmosphere.
▼
deleted
· 8 years ago
I know everything I need to know to decide if it's a show. The image given by media, the internet, and speeches tells me it's a sideshow.
Do not listen to the media such as CNN, Fox, MSNBC, NYT, etc. They are almost universally either
1: A company part of the establishment themselves or
2: Owned by a company that has a vested political interest (CNN, for example, is owned by time Warner, one of the biggest companies in the US and a very large political donator, particularly Hilary Clinton.)
So most of the mainstream news outlets are (to put it nicely) intentionally putting massive handicaps on Bernie sanders in particular, but they also do a sh*t job at actually doing what you would expect them to do on the Republican side.
I'm personally a fan of Bernie sanders, and have fought for him vigorously on this site, so I would like to know what POLICIES in particular you have a disagreement with, and why. But let me get a few things out of the way right of the bat: (counting to write)
1) WITH TAXES LETS GET A FEW THINGS STRAIGHT:
If you are an average income household
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR COLLEGES
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR SOCIAL SECURITY
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR NEAR ANYTHING BESIDES:
Healthcare.
Now, lets settle a few scores,
even before Obama care, so no arguments about Obama care raising the price which is about 2% true, the US paid more per capita than any other devolved countries and with all of that spending we got:
Worse health outcomes and a worse self reported health care system then all the other countries with a single payer health care system. So while yes households would see a 2.2% increase on their taxes, that also would come at the elimination of private health insurance, which takes up about 1/5-1/4 of the average Americans income, If you wish to see how everything will be paid for please read from THEIR website:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/
▼
·
Edited 8 years ago
deleted
· 8 years ago
As fun as it is to discuss politics with a stranger while holding a plate of cookies, I'm stoned as shit
Okay, while I realize you have gotten a lot of information from Bernie's site, I still don't like the idea of free college overall. And yes, I am a college student, working my ass off to pay for it but I don't think it should be free, and I have my reasons for it. My main reasoning for this is students already don't take a free high school education seriously. They'll blow off a school day the first chance they get. Education is handed to them and they don't appreciate it. There's already college students now that basically go for free because they're eligible for grants. A lot of them do much more poorly in classes because they skip and blow it off and don't work nearly as hard as someone who is paying for it themselves. They can fail all they want and just keep retaking it with no consequences at all. Whereas someone who has to work for scholarships and take out loans, if they fail a class, their GPA drops and they lose that scholarship and financial aid. We’re all lazy enough as it
is, and if we make it free we’re basically handing it to them and they won’t work for it and take it for granted. Like I said before, just look at high school students. If we just keep handing everything out to everyone, no one bothers to work for anything because they figure “what’s the point?” Now I’m not saying we shouldn’t help anyone at all. If students can prove their going to work hard but can’t afford college, then yes we should be able to help them. But we shouldn’t be letting just anyone, especially students barely passing with C’s and D’s into college because that’s just a waste of time and money.
My college roommate is a perfect example of this. She gets a ton of money in refunds because she's eligible for federal grants. However, she parties like crazy, binge drinks and smokes pot on a weekly basis. She skips half of her classes and just recently bombed an exam because of that. She doesn't even have a job, she spends her money on alcohol and tattoos. She hasn't bothered to get a license because she doesn't have a car. She doesn't bother even saving for a car with all the refund money she has. She can live in better housing on campus and doesn’t have to apply for any scholarships. While I’m going to every single class, keeping up with homework and exams, looking for a part-time job, applying to scholarships and taking out loans, I am not even sure I can come back next year because I don’t know if I can pay for it. My parents make too much money for me to get grants, but they don’t make enough to pay for my college.
No one ever said anything about not having an entrance test, or not having college rejection/acceptance, etc. Just that public universities, if people are accepted into them, won't be charged in with needing to take out money. Also I think what you're referring to is a result of anecdotes and focusing on extemes, something that is unfortunately very common and uncontrollable to a certain extent. While yes someone people would just abuse it, that also says something more about our culture because if you compare us to Finland, where they pay students a small amount to go to college, education is much more highly thought of and respected. I understand your concern, nor can I give an concrete defense, but neither of us can, because we both lack scientific studies or things like that.
I'm all for making it a little more affordable and even making college a little harder to get into. Because really, a lot of public state colleges aren't hard to get into at all. I could've gone to any university in my state because I had a high GPA and a decent ACT score. You can get into most public state colleges with a 2.5, sometimes even a 2.0 GPA and an ACT score of 17 or 18. They're pretty low standards.
.
Feel free to believe politically as you wish, ill be happy to debate anyone, but at least know what the candidates want before making an assessment of the entire political atmosphere.
1: A company part of the establishment themselves or
2: Owned by a company that has a vested political interest (CNN, for example, is owned by time Warner, one of the biggest companies in the US and a very large political donator, particularly Hilary Clinton.)
So most of the mainstream news outlets are (to put it nicely) intentionally putting massive handicaps on Bernie sanders in particular, but they also do a sh*t job at actually doing what you would expect them to do on the Republican side.
I'm personally a fan of Bernie sanders, and have fought for him vigorously on this site, so I would like to know what POLICIES in particular you have a disagreement with, and why. But let me get a few things out of the way right of the bat: (counting to write)
If you are an average income household
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR COLLEGES
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR SOCIAL SECURITY
-YOU WILL NOT BE PAYING FOR NEAR ANYTHING BESIDES:
Healthcare.
Now, lets settle a few scores,
even before Obama care, so no arguments about Obama care raising the price which is about 2% true, the US paid more per capita than any other devolved countries and with all of that spending we got:
Worse health outcomes and a worse self reported health care system then all the other countries with a single payer health care system. So while yes households would see a 2.2% increase on their taxes, that also would come at the elimination of private health insurance, which takes up about 1/5-1/4 of the average Americans income, If you wish to see how everything will be paid for please read from THEIR website:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/