fbpx

Type to search

5 Reasons Democrats Should Be Proud Of This Presidential Primary

Featured Post Memo Pad Politics

5 Reasons Democrats Should Be Proud Of This Presidential Primary

Share

If you’re a Democrat, chances are you appreciate both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

The more time you spend online, the harder this may be to believe. But it’s a poll-tested fact, even in Iowa and New Hampshire, where the Vermont senator’s appeal presents the biggest challenge to the former Secretary of State.

Both candidates have fervent, occasionally raving supporters who oppose the other, although the fanatics are a minority. Both candidates are historic in their own right. And even though Sanders is new to the Democratic Party, both candidates have found record support and represent the kind of energy necessary to grow the Obama Coalition and restore the New Deal consensus.

That doesn’t mean this campaign hasn’t been contentious and won’t get worse. It will, especially if the contest gets even closer. But there are several reasons to be proud, which is something you can rarely say in politics.

  1. Sanders is speaking to the great crises of our time. Our economy is eating itself: “In 1980, the top 1 percent had about 8 percent of national income. Today it’s closing in 24 percent. The bottom 50 percent of Americans in 1980 shared about 18 percent of national income. Today it’s down to 11 percent, down a third…” billionaire-turned-wealth-inequality-activist Nick Hanauer explained last year. “All you have to do is put that data in an Excel spreadsheet and just run the extrapolation out 30 years. The numbers are scary, right? Because the top 1 percent will control in the mid 30s — 35, 36, 37 percent of national income — and the bottom 50 percent of Americans will share 5 or 6 percent of national income. At that point you don’t have a capitalist democracy anymore. You have some kind of feudal system.”  Few Americans speak to this crisis — and its twin environmental crisis of climate change — as well as Bernie Sanders. He recognizes that we need a “political revolution” to change the dynamic. Some say that’s unrealistic, but it makes perfect sense in two ways. For Sanders to win even the nomination would require a remarkable upheaval, greater even that what Barack Obama pulled off when he barely beat Clinton in 2008. To implement his agenda, he would need Democratic majorities even larger than those swept in with Obama in 2008. If this doesn’t happen now, it needs to happen someday soon. Stopping the tide of conservative economics isn’t enough — it must be reversed. Our Republic depends on it.
  2. Clinton is speaking to the most immediate disasters we face. For Hillary Clinton to champion repealing the Hyde Amendment — which denies access to reproductive rights to poor people who get government health care — is in many ways as idealistic (and difficult to imagine becoming real) as Sanders’ Medicare for All plan. By campaigning on promises for which Democrats don’t have the votes in Congress, the left risks aping the right’s empty promises to the base. But just as Sanders is making a larger case for a new role for government, Clinton is staking a claim for defending reproductive rights, which are definitely on the ballot in 2016. The next president could be the first since Nixon to appoint four justices to the Supreme Court, possibly in one term. Both Clinton and Sanders would appoint justices who would defend reproductive rights, voting rights, civil rights, and labor rights. But who can put the immediacy of this issue before voters most effectively? While Sanders wants a political revolution, Clinton wants to build on the 90 percent of Americans who now have health insurance instead of letting Republicans immediately chip away at that number. More than any other single American, Clinton helped push forward the notion of universal healthcare in America — and we are closer than ever to that reality. But more than anyone, she knows the costs of that effort and the fury of right wing attacks on the people who fight for progress. Her argument is not as radical as Sanders’, but it is as essential: Help me keep and build on Barack Obama’s progress, or watch much of it waste away as quickly as the progress of the 90s faded under George W. Bush.
  3. Both candidates rise when challenged to present fresh policy ideas. The Democratic Party has moved left in the last decade, but only to keep up with the American public. On issues like mass incarceration, the drug war, LGBTQ rights, and background checks on gun purchases, the vast majority of Americans have embraced more progressive positions. When Sanders and Clinton were challenged by activists like #BlackLivesMatter, they produced policies to reflect this changing reality. These visions don’t please everyone, but they reflect a party that’s not trafficking in failed perspectives of the past. On Wall Street regulation, Clinton constantly had her credibility challenged due to her husband’s second-term embrace of deregulation, her own votes, and her affinity with donors from the financial sector, many of whom were her constituents in New York. Still, her policies to regulate shadow banks have been praised by Paul Krugman and reflect the reality that Dodd-Frank has been more effective than many critics will admit. Still, we face a Securities and Exchange Commission captured by industry and a revolving door between government and the banks that barely even squeaks, as lobbyists try to undo reform. Pushing Clinton on this issue just makes sense. Sanders’ vote to give gunmakers broad legal immunity reveals a rare instance where he sought to empower corporations. Given that Congress has largely blocked even basic efforts to study gun violence, pushing Sanders on this issue also makes sense. And when the candidates have been pushed, they’ve generally stepped up.
  4. Both candidates have avoided the personal mudslinging endemic to tight races (so far). The 2016 Republican primary race is a cesspool, with the frontrunner wielding a giant firehose that spews sewage. Racism, sexism, and personal attacks are the primary currency of that contest, and the biggest spender of that currency is winning. Sanders has refused to indulge right wing attacks on Clinton’s email use as Secretary of State. He has sidestepped personal attacks on Bill Clinton’s personal life, while his criticisms of Clinton’s integrity have been hazy and glancing. His supporters have been vicious toward Clinton, but generally peddle in fact not innuendo. Clinton’s surrogates have often matched or outdone Sanders’ backers vitriol. Primary elections are about flooding an opponent’s hull to learn whether there are any leaks. Going too easy on a candidate leaves him or her exposed in a general election, while indulging unfair attacks can inflict lasting damage. Thus far, this primary has tested both candidates’ weaknesses without weighing them down for the general election.
  5. The Democratic candidates aren’t damaging their party the way Republicans are.
    In a recent NBC/ Wall Street Journal poll, a substantial plurality of respondents said the GOP primary has damaged the party’s image by featuring its worst hucksters and clowns, as these polarizing figures gain more and more prominence. “In the poll, 42 percent of registered voters said the primary race has made them feel less favorable about the GOP, compared to just 19 percent who said they feel more favorable,” NBC’s Carrie Dann reported. “Thirty-eight percent said the brawl for the Republican nomination hasn’t changed their view of the party as a whole.” In the same poll, a majority of 54 percent said the Democratic primary hasn’t changed their view of the party at all.
Tags:

166 Comments

  1. FireBaron January 25, 2016

    What is best about this cycle for the Democratic party is that Bernie has been forcing Hillary to articulate her positions. Now we are seeing a clearer picture of what she would do instead of the “inevitable candidate” status she had been attempting to maintain. That’s the “Republican” way of campaigning. Clinton lost to President Obama in 2008 because she either could not or would not articulate her vision. She has since learned her lessons in that, but still has this aura of “above-it-all”.
    Frankly, I look forward to seeing her eviscerate Trump, Cruz or Rubio in the Presidential debates.

    Reply
    1. TheSkalawag929 January 25, 2016

      Sometimes evisceration is not enough. We have to get democrats out to the polls and and they need to vote all the way down the ballot.

      Reply
    2. Theodora30 January 25, 2016

      Actually I think the most important thing Bernie has done is shift the Overton window to the left by refusing to change his words because the right attacks. Not sure why the media has not gone berserk about it – maybe because they love having someone oppose Hillary. If Bernie wins the nomination all bets will be off. I doubt that the MSM really wants to see a socialist win. I can remember in the nineties when they trashed Hillary for pushing Bill to the left.

      Reply
      1. Eleanore Whitaker January 25, 2016

        If Sanders wins, which is precisely what the GOP wants, Paul Ryan assumes the role of President in situ from his Speaker of the House position. How can some Americans be so easily fooled? I was a Republican for over 3 decades and if there is one thing these boys are skilled at, it is how to control from a back room.

        Reply
        1. @HawaiianTater January 25, 2016

          “How can some Americans be so easily fooled? I was a Republican for over 3 decades.”

          It would seem you are uniquely qualified to answer this question, considering your 3 decades worth of being played for a fool.

          Reply
          1. Eleanore Whitaker January 25, 2016

            I was a Republican when men like Eisenhower, Stevenson and others were HONORABLE and didn’t suck up to billionaires and Wall Street cock roaches. Those Republicans knew they swore an oath to do their duty to the people…they didn’t con the SC into calling a corporation “people.” That was the work of middle aged slugs of the Republican party since 2001. So..who really is the fool? Middle Aged men and women today are enablers of bad behavior..from the disrespectful rude kids they have zero time for to the idiots they vote for without bothering to know their backgrounds or history. Nice try at your judging others though…too bad it failed.

            Reply
          2. @HawaiianTater January 25, 2016

            There hasn’t been a decent Republican president since Eisenhower, so you either spent 3 decades being played for a fool or you’re a hundred years old. Or you’re just really bad at math.

            Reply
          3. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

            Kenedy was an amazing president. Jimmy Carter was a good president and is an amazing humanitarian. Clinton wasn’t great with keeping it in his pants, but a damn sight better than G. Dubya Shrub when it came to running the country. And Obama has done a lot to undo the mess Dubya created, helped millions get healthcare, kept us out of a few wars the GOP wanted us in, and lowered gas and oil prices while getting American prisoners freed by a diplomatic treaty with Iran that the GOP violated the Logan Act and committed treason with the letter they sent trying to sabotage the deal that has ALREADY benefited the US. So yes, technically your math is better than Eleanore’s, there hasn’t been *A* decent Dem pres since Eisenhower, there have been 4.

            You lose, jackass.

            Reply
          4. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

            Boom.

            Reply
          5. @HawaiianTater January 26, 2016

            Wow. That is a mighty epic fail rant you just went on there. Read my comment again. I said there hasn’t been a decent REPUBLICAN president since Eisenhower. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/27dd35567b2ef0e6681e8067cf701618f14042a98a15f17c290a1da97589a0ca.jpg

            Reply
      2. 788eddie January 25, 2016

        Socialist, shmocialist. Will everyone just stop trembling at that word.

        Voters under the age of 40 have NO memory of the Soviet Union, and to them socialism may have no negative meaning. That represents a very large portion of the electorate. And a lot of Bernie supporters seem to be younger voters.

        If Bernie does take the nomination, it will be because there are a lot more people who support his ideas that many credit to him.

        If Bernie is elected, I think his coattails would be long indeed. I think the “revolution” some of his supporters talk about is not outside the realm of possibility.

        Reply
        1. S.J. Jolly January 25, 2016

          Human family economics is a form of socialism. One can even say of the members, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

          Reply
  2. charleo1 January 25, 2016

    “Some kind of feudal system.” Is that really the kind of life the future holds for our kids, and our kid’s kids? Those precious little grandchildren we so love to spoil, and dote on, and naturally have such high hopes and aspirations for? Yes, I believe that the numbers neither lie, nor are they themselves lies. As they have been verified by source after reliable source, looking at all kinds of data, both public and private for more than 30 years now. And yet, for so many people who have the highest stakes in the World on the line, there seems to have set in this sense of inevitability mirroring the five stages of grief. Running the proverbial gambit from denial. It is all Liberal hogwash pushed by the big government Democrats, and that Socialist Liberal, George Soros, and so forget about it! For others their stage is anger. Anger at incumbent politicians. Anger at the President. A mindless anger at the government particularly on the Right. That is manifesting itself in a let’s throw the bums out mentality that’s fueling Donald Trump, and to some extent the Burnie Sanders campaign. As if there weren’t enough money in the system to buy the next batch. Or that, in the case of Trump, by electing the puppet master himself, we somehow avoid the disastrous results of jumping into the fire as a reaction to our present situation of being in the frying pan. Then there’s a bargaining that begins. Yes, bargaining seems reasonable to those who advise us to all please just calm down, and stop all this bickering! And quit letting, “them,” divide us. They’re all the same you know? Why worry, and argue? Which can quickly turn to the final stage of grief which is acceptance, and acquiescence, the final grand bargain between the .001% Plutocrats, and everyone else. The negotiations start out with the premise, we can’t do anything about all this anyway. Author P.J. O’Rourke, and others in this vein advise us to, “ Quit voting, as it only encourages them.” “Expose the sham!” goes out the siren call of the cynics, and the zero sum nihilists. Them,” referred to as being this separate political class talked about as if they were a completely different species originating on a different planet. Coming to Earth, to serve man..as in the old sic-fi classic, to serve him up as the main course for dinner. Trump, the clever puppet master, demagoguing, and fanning the flames, says he doesn’t understand, doesn’t know why when they get to Washington, “something happens to them.” In 2008 over 6 billion dollars were spent on the elections that year. A record in a year where only 682 people donated the maximum amount allowable, ($2500) to at least one candidate. Some donated much more of course. 100s of millions more thru pacs, political action committees, and largely unaccountable S-pacs. Do we suppose the fact that America is being slowly driven into becoming a Capitalistic Oligarchy ranks high on the list of their concerns? Would we guess the vast majority of these high dollar donors, these heavy hitters, supported, or opposed Barack Obama? Supported The American Reinvestment Act? (The stimulus package.) Raising the minimum wage? Raising taxes on incomes of more than 1 million dollars a year? Was relieved to see the healthcare bill pass, or stricter regulations imposed in the financial sector in the wake of a financial crisis that saw 10 million people lose their livelihoods, homes, personal wealth and health insurance? And have came out on the other side with lower incomes, fewer benefits, and far less job security than before. The answer is, big money, now allowed to be poured into our political system in unlimited amounts, fought any reforms to a system they’ve spent billions over the years rigging to work in ways that in no way correlates with the best interests of millions of average, work a day Americans. That’s what the number show. And the numbers, the evidence if you will, of the theft by the systematic manipulation of the government by an extremely small minority of the ultra at the very top, is indisputable.

    Reply
    1. @HawaiianTater January 25, 2016

      Holy massive wall of text, Batman! Your commentary is always spot on but geez, learn how to use some freakin’ paragraphs.

      Reply
      1. CrankyToo January 25, 2016

        I gotta agree with the Tater (yet again). Don’t be afraid to throw in a carriage return now and again, Charleo1.

        Reply
        1. charleo1 January 25, 2016

          Got It! Thanks.

          Reply
      2. charleo1 January 25, 2016

        Sorry. A little too much coffee this morning I guess…. But it was in there, and I just had to get it out.

        Reply
        1. CrankyToo January 25, 2016

          Dig it.

          Reply
      3. Buck Ofama February 6, 2016

        Your commentary, on the other hand, is always moronic. Post some more of your trip photos now, fool.

        Reply
    2. Eleanore Whitaker January 25, 2016

      Charles and David Koch…Trump…the Bush Dynasty…got enough yet? Three Bush brothers? 4 bankruptcies dumped on taxpayers. Trump has over 22 lawsuits pending..one with the U.S. That your idea of Conservatism?

      Reply
      1. charleo1 January 25, 2016

        Pretty much, yes.

        Reply
    3. 788eddie January 25, 2016

      Charlio, you reflect on the Stages of grief well.

      Excellent post!

      Reply
      1. charleo1 January 25, 2016

        Thanks for the good words, eddie!

        Reply
  3. Eleanore Whitaker January 25, 2016

    There is a most important reason to make the choice between Sanders and Clinton clear. Which of the two intend to maintain the national economic stability that President Obama created?

    The problem with elections is the disruptive process from the path of the outgoing president to the new president who wants to start a “new” direction. It’s the syndrome most employees experience when one corporate regime is successful and a new regime takes control. Always the new regime has a “better” way that isn’t truly better…just personally gainful.

    The horrendous situation from 2004 to 2008 has been redirected to a level of stability. To undue the 8 years of President Obama with radical changes in a new direction is to undo all of the potential for national stability.

    Fools vote Republican. And they are today truly fools. Their conservatism is largely borne of a Plantation Nation mentality that seeks to use tax dollars for big businesses and their wealthy cronies like Charles and David Koch.

    Our children deserve to have affordable healthcare and education. The Republican conservatives idea is to pay out of pocket for these things while simultaneously paying hefty taxes to corporations and the wealthy in subsidies and tax cuts. When they do pay their fair share, we are the ones who must fill in the gaps they leave.

    Conservatives today would have you believe they are “conserving” ..how? By shutting down the government? By their slash and burn of government services the Constitution specifically states we are paying for? By handing out trillions in corporate tax subsidies and refusing to fund programs Americans already paid for over a lifetime? That’s not conservatism…It’s greed and we’ve had just about enough of that. The cost of their greed and corruption is breaking the backs of the middle class and destroying our children’s futures.

    But, think about this. Big Oil is about to disappear and with it the rest of the enormously costly burden of fossil fuels. A vote for a Republican is a vote for another $17 billion in Big Oil tax subsidies next year.

    The stakes are highest not for Dems…but for Republican states who have enjoyed the federal taxes the rest of the states pay for. Do we want another 8 years of working harder, longer and for less just so Republican states don’t have to?

    If the Republicans and CONs are great at anything, it’s social engineering. The idea that they can sell snake oil to the least savvy and get these people to make decisions that are never in their best interests is what today’s NEOcons do best.

    Reply
    1. @HawaiianTater January 25, 2016

      “There is a most important reason to make the choice between Sanders and Clinton clear.”

      Yes, Elly, we all know your clear choice is based on sexism. All men are evil and Hillary has a vagina, so that makes her qualified to be president.

      Reply
      1. Steve Batchelor January 25, 2016

        Tater…I respect you and love to read your comments but this is an attack right out of the “Right Wing” playbook and it is uncalled for.

        Reply
        1. CrankyToo January 25, 2016

          Some attacks are justifiable. Just as surely as I know (even before I start reading) that a post from Itsfun or Otto Greif is going to be absurdly stupid, I know one from Eleanor is going to be absurdly sexist. Her disdain for men is breathtaking, and it undermines her credibility, in my view.

          Reply
        2. @HawaiianTater January 26, 2016

          Steve, if you read my comments on a regular basis, then you know very well that I would not make this comment without just cause. Blame Elly for being sexist. Don’t blame me for calling her out on it.

          Reply
          1. Buck Ofama February 3, 2016

            Nah, you’re a disciple of Rushbo.

            Reply
          2. Buck Ofama February 4, 2016

            Sure thing, Rushbo.

            Reply
          3. Buck Ofama February 6, 2016

            Lose much, little girl?

            Reply
      2. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

        Wow, irony, accusing someone of sexism because your own sexist mindset demands you think she’s voting with her vagina…

        Reply
        1. @HawaiianTater January 26, 2016

          Calling out someone for being sexist =/= sexism. Try again.

          Reply
          1. Buck Ofama February 3, 2016

            I’m calling you out for being stupid.

            Reply
          2. Buck Ofama February 4, 2016

            Sure thing, stupid.

            Reply
          3. Buck Ofama February 6, 2016

            Surer thing, stupid.

            Reply
  4. @HawaiianTater January 25, 2016

    “Stopping the tide of conservative economics isn’t enough — it must be reversed. Our Republic depends on it.”

    Never a truer statement has been made. Current right wing policies are so extreme that they would destroy the USA if ever fully implemented.

    Reply
    1. Eleanore Whitaker January 25, 2016

      What conservative economics? Don’t you mean taking over government by refusing to fund it? Don’t you mean taking more in federal taxes and handing it to the Corn Pone and Mutton chops states? Right wingers are mindless lunatics whose only goal of their existence is anarchy…this they don’t dare admit. To them the word “anarchy” is a secret as the word “Kloran” to the KKK.

      If we already know that the 8 Bush years of “conservatism” resulted in a 2008 Financial Meltdown, paying 50% of the Exxon Valdez 25 year old spill fine, loss of 8 million American jobs and the wealthy in just 8 years becoming 11% wealthier with each tax cut they were granted…why would anyone believe a word out of any conservative’s mouth today. We lived those 8 Bush…forcing our kids to relive it is unfair.

      Reply
      1. Buck Ofama January 25, 2016

        Didn’t this guy call you a “feminazi” the other day? You’re just a glutton for punishment, aren’t you?

        Feel free to prove Bush cost 8 million jobs any time you like.

        Reply
        1. Eleanore Whitaker January 26, 2016

          Bucky Beaver has NO job, NOthiung better to do than sit all day, every day at his computer playing at being a Big Man. Here is the proof from two sources: Wikipedia…https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_in_the_United_States and the US Dept. of Labor..http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000.Note that in January 2009 when your Republican asshats refused to pass an extension for the unemployed, it rose. You want to lie about that too? Or do I need to prove that with another link you’ll only deny in your fantasy world of bitching?

          Reply
          1. Buck Ofama January 26, 2016

            Neither of those references shows anything like what you’re claiming, but thanks for playing.

            Reply
    2. Buck Ofama January 25, 2016

      FEEL THE BERN!!

      Reply
        1. Buck Ofama January 26, 2016

          Sanders for president!!

          Reply
          1. Buck Ofama January 28, 2016

            Fell the Bern, biotch.

            Reply
          2. Buck Ofama January 28, 2016

            Feel that burn in your crotch. It’s your clap.

            Reply
          3. Buck Ofama January 29, 2016

            You didn’t get that clap in your be-hind, to, did you?

            Reply
          4. Buck Ofama January 30, 2016

            FEEL THE BURN!!

            Reply
          5. Buck Ofama January 31, 2016

            Sanders for dogcatcher. Maybe he can win that election.

            Reply
          6. Buck Ofama February 1, 2016

            Nah, trash collector, I think. Then you’ll get to meet him.

            Reply
          7. Buck Ofama February 2, 2016

            Feel the bern, trash.

            Reply
          8. Buck Ofama February 3, 2016

            The Bern will come from your clap.

            Reply
          9. Buck Ofama February 4, 2016

            Feel the berning yet, loser?

            Reply
          10. Buck Ofama February 6, 2016

            Sure thing, loser girl.

            Reply
    3. John March 4, 2016

      We keep the democratic ways – then we go down the road to socialism which is on path with communism or maybe that is your end game.

      Reply
      1. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

        If you can’t understand the difference between democratic socialism and communism, there is little I can do to help you.

        Reply
        1. John March 5, 2016

          Weekend at Bernie’s Sanders is a well known socialist. That is where, in short, the government runs everything. There is not one of those clowns on either side of the isle that knows how to run a business and what they do run – does not have the best track record.

          1 – The goal of socialism is communism. Vladimir Lenin
          2 – in general, communism is often considered a higher and more advanced form of socialism. – The Relationship Between Socialism & Communism
          by Jeffrey Billman, Demand Media

          Trump is a businessman – he has seen business thrive and fail and is still a millionaire.

          Reply
          1. John March 5, 2016

            lol – i know that is the only way you can write but it will be better. bernie get in and you can have your allotment (that means what the government thinks is your share – not what you actually earned) or hillary gets in and we are just screwed.

            Reply
          2. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            Your stupid amuses me. Dance some more, little monkey.

            Reply
          3. John March 5, 2016

            Then show me the error of my ways -instead of just throwing out names. You don’t have to explain it because I don’t think there is a true explanation.

            Reply
          4. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            John, something tells me you’re not interested in having an intelligent conversation. If you were, I’d be happy to oblige you. Since you’re not, I feel this would be a waste of time. That’s why I’m not bothering.

            Reply
          5. John March 5, 2016

            I am always interested in a good debate – regardless of the outcome – you can usually learn something.

            Reply
          6. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            In my experience, people who compare Bernie’s democratic socialism to communism are not interested in any kind of intelligent discourse.

            Reply
          7. John March 5, 2016

            I was quoting Lenin and the Democratic Socialist of America. I figured they would be the authority on the movement.

            Reply
          8. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            Have you bothered to study up on what democratic socialism is like in Nordic countries? Because that’s similar to what Bernie is proposing.

            “Take it from the hands of those that created it and earned and pass it out to all?”

            No… it’s about setting up a system where people can succeed for themselves so they don’t need handouts. Look around you. We already live in a welfare state. That’s what has to be changed. The reason we live in a welfare state is because the billionaire class has rigged the system so all the gains go to the top. If people are allowed to earn their fair share of what is produced, we won’t be giving away so many handouts. Contrary to what you might think, most of the people on welfare are people who populate the working class. I don’t want lazy bums living off the taxpayer dime any more than you do. We’re talking about people who work full time, up to 40-60 hours a week, and they still qualify for welfare because they aren’t making enough money. If we fix the system so people earn enough money while working full time, they won’t need welfare anymore.

            Reply
          9. John March 5, 2016

            I can buy that argument and will look into it deeper but that is not what it sounded like reading through the DSoA website – they seem to lean more to that middle ground – not quite communism. i don’t think we can get there from here but what you propose is a good idea. I can not picture how it would be accomplished. Capitalism – you have a founder ( a top boss) , board of directors, private ownership, etc. How would you change that structure? I agree that we need to get away from the massive handouts – you should have to do something in order to get money, medicine, schooling or whatever.

            Another topic – thoughts on illegal immigration?

            Reply
          10. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            Watch this video first. It will help clear some things up. It’s about a Russian chess master who similarly conflates communism with what Bernie is proposing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itu7GIPF-cU

            Reply
          11. John March 5, 2016

            I will say that I really don’t like that guy. It was all I could do to get past his attitude to listen to what he was saying. It sounds good – governments funds healthcare, education, etc. Then you look at obamacare where there was an attempt and it is failing with at least 12 out of 23 was the last number I saw of co-ops that have failed despite outrageous sums of money. There are public outcries in those countries about wait times and then to top it off Denmark’s tax rate is over 50 – nearly 60%. I know that my employer supplied health care went from $300-500 deductibles to $3000-10000 deductibles and where maybe I was paying $300 a month to now nearly $300 a week. He called out drugs should be regulated by the government – actually he said pop but it could very well grow from there. Who decides which industries to regulate – which industries wont benefit from competition? I will agree that we have a flawed system and I am personally in favor of the states having a larger piece of the pie. Would you do away with Private education – private colleges, etc Our public school system right now sucks and if that is the direction we are headed I can’t support. i have 4 kids and 3 of the 4 were homeschooled. Then there are other fun industries like energy, infrastructure, etc. I am not against what he says – it sounds good but there are a lot of questions (doesn’t help that I am learning in a matter of minutes) and I can’t at the moment stomach 60% tax rate.

            Reply
          12. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            Yeah, that guy can be a little grating but he offered some very good explanations in the video about the definitions of political terms. I went with it because it’s recent and is directly related the topic at hand. The point is, all that communism/socialist stuff some people incorrectly attribute to Bernie Sanders and his supporters is just as vehemently opposed by us as it is you.

            Let’s start with Obamacare, which is nothing more than a capitalist scheme designed to further enrich the private insurance companies. Don’t let the hype fool you. That is the furthest thing from democratic socialism that there could be. I’m all for capitalism in certain areas. Cars/cell phones/mattresses/etc. I am NOT for capitalism when it comes to healthcare. There are certain things that just should not be for-profit industries and healthcare is one of them. This is life and death we’re talking about and who lives and dies is getting decided by who has the most money. That is reprehensible.

            “Would you do away with Private education – private colleges, etc”

            Absolutely not. I am pretty big on the whole freedom and liberty thing. If people want to still do their private schooling thing, we should not stand in their way. That said, we do need to overhaul and fix our public education system. One of the questions I often hear asked about Bernie wanting to make college tuition free at public universities free is how would he pay for it? I believe it would cost somewhere between 1-2 billion a year to do that. We spend 600 billion a year on the military but people whine about 1-2 billion to educate our kids? Think about that.

            Tax rates… do you know how structured tax rates work? Unless you’re in the top 1% of the country, you’re not going to be paying that 60% tax rate. Even then, not all of their income is taxed at that rate. I’m just making up numbers here for example: pay no taxes on your first 15k. Pay 20% on 15-50k. Pay 40% on 50k-1m. Pay 60% on anything over 1m. Trust me, rich people are still gonna be super rich. Those scary tax raises will help people like you and me and we’ll end up paying less overall. Everyone is going to save money when we’re not getting ripped off by private healthcare insurance.

            You asked me about illegal immigration earlier… I say shut it down. I’m not opposed to immigrants but if you enter our country illegally, you’re on the first flight out. That’s just my opinion though.

            Reply
          13. John March 5, 2016

            See a good debate – discussion can be had by people on both sides of the fence. I have always found myself leaning more toward the conservative side but there are definitely valid arguments. I will have to do a little more research to better understand. I am not a big fan of the higher tax rates even as stated but I do believe that the rich are able to weasel around paying their fare share through loopholes. If you were filthy rich and paid taxes as prescribed by our current tax rates – I would not wish more on you. I know that the tax structure for corporations is not necessarily friendly with companies either incorporating in more friendly states or even overseas to avoid them. I am glad to hear he immigration thoughts. I have know people that went through the process legally and it is a pain and it is expensive but it is doable if you want to be here. I do not want to pay higher taxes to take care of them.

            One of the few other polarizing topics is gun control. I have a pistol, about 5 shotguns and 2 rifles – all but the pistol (and it too when looking for snakes) are used for hunting. My kids grew up with them and understood very early that you only shoot what you mean to kill and that if the trigger is pulled it is likely something or someone could die.

            Anyway – work is over – headed to the house. We can continue this but I did want to say thank you! It started off a little contentious but I appreciate the time and patience.

            Reply
          14. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            John, you gotta understand, most conservatives don’t come on here for rational discussion and I don’t like wasting my time on trolls. I apologize for my earlier smartassery but that’s why it happened.

            Here’s the funny thing about taxing the rich… we wouldn’t have to tax the rich more than everyone else if we had an economic system that more fairly distributed the wealth in the first place. Here’s the problem though: rich people aren’t going to let us peons share the wealth unless they are forced to, which is why we have to tax them more.

            The gun control debate is insane but I will put in my two cents. I live in Hawai’i and we have strong gun control laws. We also have the lowest rates of gun violence in the country. Only 16 people last year died due to gun violence and most of those were in the city. So when I hear people claim gun control laws don’t work, I call BS, because they work great here. Yes, we’re islands, which makes it more difficult for them to get here. That’s why gun control laws won’t work in the mainland unless they are adopted by all the states. Conservatives use Chicago as an example of gun control laws not working. Well, duh. Stopping people from buying guns in the city is not going to curb gun violence if people can just drive right out of town to buy them.

            For me, the big issue with gun control is less about people having guns and more about what guns they are allowed to have. I don’t have any issue whatsoever with people owning revolvers or shotguns or hunting rifles. Where I have issue is with semi to fully automated weapons with large clips of ammo. I don’t think people should be able to own pistols like say a glock that shoots 15 rounds per clip and is easily reloaded. You want to own a 6 shot revolver? That is fine by me. At least if you want to shoot up a place, you’ll have to stop and reload after 6 shots. It gives people more time to run away. Same idea goes for rifles and shotguns. Nothing automatic should be legal for civilians. If you can’t hunt without an AK-47, then you’re doing it wrong.

            Another argument of conservatives is that if we take the guns away from the good guys, only bad guys will have guns. And I say, not if we control the manufacturers of the guns they won’t. Bad guys aren’t making their own guns. Control the source, control what’s out in the streets. I don’t like the idea of living in a society where everyone is roaming the streets with guns. Leave the guns where they should be: in the house for protection or in the woods for hunting. You don’t need a f’n gun to go to Walmart.

            Oh and I know how to solve the illegal immigration problem with one easy step. You go after the employers. If you get caught employing illegal immigrants, 10k fine per worker. You get caught a 2nd time, 20k fine per worker. You get caught a 3rd time, mandatory jail time. If there were no jobs for illegal immigrants, there would be no illegal immigrants. You know I’m right.

            Reply
          15. John March 5, 2016

            I will admit that I do get on these sometimes just to start stuff. There is so much anger and vile from both parties. I can piss em all off. LOL But I always try to get it to a discussion and very rarely will they or can they. I appreciate it when they can. What does fairly distributed the wealth mean? I agree that if everyone would pay their fair share and cut out some of the crap spending we would be much better off.

            I will leave the gun control argument quiet for now except most guns are semi-automatic. There are very few truly automatic weapons. I have a 45 handgun with 3 15 round clips and in a perfect or better world I would not worry about it but it stays in my car. I travel a lot and am in unique places at times and it is a security for me. Funny thing is some of the lowest per capita murder rates are in Tx (not counting the big cities – dallas and Houston) and very liberal laws. The cities are their own worst enemies there and I think a lot of that has to do with the poor family values. My kids have a good family and a good extended (if not strange) family. They are taught to respect authority and to overall be good people.

            As for illegal immigrants – AMEN to what you said. The SE has a lot of food processing facilities that have thousand of these people. ICE comes in from time to time and raids but never penalizes the employer – and like the family thing it needs to start with the employer not the employee.

            Again – thank you!

            Reply
          16. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            I understand your need for having a gun for protection. Why do you need a gun that has clips of 15 though? Seems like to me that if you have not protected yourself after 6 shots, you’re dead anyways.

            It’s my opinion that fairly distributed wealth means that anyone working 40 hours a week makes enough money to support themselves and not need any welfare. 50 years ago, the minimum wage was a living wage. Wage increases didn’t keep up with the times. If they did, the minimum wage would be around 18 bucks an hour now if you compare dollar value now to what dollar value was back then. Think of it this way… without the workers who produce the wealth and buy the products, we wouldn’t have rich people either. No amount of cheap foreign labor making cheap foreign products is going to matter when people don’t have any disposable income.

            It’s not as simple as an hourly wage issue either. There should also be CEO to lowest paid worker ratio caps and profit sharing within companies. Let’s say a company does a billion in profit while the workers make 30k a year. The next year, the company makes 2 billion in profit but the workers still make only 30k a year. That’s BS. If the company does well, everyone in the company should do well. All the gains shouldn’t only go to the CEO and the shareholders. That wealth has to be shared with the people who produce it.

            Giving tax breaks to the rich because they are “job creators” is the stupidest thing I have heard in my life and how anyone can fall for that scheme is completely beyond me. Rich people don’t create jobs. The middle class creates jobs. When the people have money, they spend money, then businesses hire more employees to keep up with demand. Companies getting tax breaks have no incentive to hire more people when nobody has any money to buy anything.

            I’ve got errands to run but I’ll respond when I’m back.

            Reply
          17. John March 5, 2016

            Honestly – it has 15 because it was a better deal and I prefer the clip to the revolver – easier to carry and easier to load. I was not looking for that many but it just worked out that way.

            Fairly distributed wealth – just sounds like a socialist idea but is really nothing different that getting paid what you are worth, unless someone outside the company is deciding what is fair.

            I have worked in food, chemical and oil / gas and giventhe option I would work in oil / gas as the wages are higher than any other industry..

            Scary thing about minimum wage these days is that if it is pushed too high it will encourage the use of automation to be more of an option instead of paying the wages. That does worry me. It is a possibility this day and age. Automation is slipping into out world in all aspects – including sex now – lol.

            I know the companies that I have worked for has profit sharing plans (which is not quite what you are talking about) but is better than a lot of people – esp the lower paid group.

            I can buy what you are saying and agree with most of it but I don’t think Bernie can win the Democratic nomination if he managed to win in votes I dont think he can win the nomination and Hillary scares me – what I have seen from her – she does not need to be in charge of the country.

            Reply
          18. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            I despise Hillary with every fiber of my being but I’ll get back to that topic later. Let’s talk automation.

            The robot revolution is coming, my friend! And there is nothing that can be done to stop it. You say raising wages too high encourages more automation but automation is coming regardless of where the wages are at. We’re going to get to a point where there just aren’t going to be enough jobs anymore. Virtually all forms of manual labor will be replaced by robots and many skilled positions will be as well. Our current system of finding a job, working for money and paying your way through life will become unsustainable.

            When that happens, we will be left with two options…

            A: We let 90%+ of the population starve and die.

            B: We devise a way to distribute the wealth.

            Reply
          19. John March 5, 2016

            Good answer. I agree with the automation thoughts. The wages just encourage it to move a little faster and yea – that is a little scary. I Robot by Asimov was an interesting read especially since it was written so many years ago.`

            My mother and my sister just left Hawaii – sis moved to Arizona and mom moved to FL

            Reply
          20. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            That’s funny because I have lived in both AZ and FL. I’m from Alabama but I’ve been calling Hawai’i home for over a decade.

            I don’t even consider the oncoming robot revolution to be a bad thing. If we don’t need human labor to provide the necessities in life, that frees up people to pursue their interests more. People would still work but a lot of it would be part time. Some people would be more involved in things like arts and music while others might be more involved in outdoors stuff. There would probably be a lot more yoga studios. Work will turn into something people choose to do because it’s things they enjoy doing rather than having to work just to survive. Technology is supposed to make our lives easier. Automated technology is the next natural step.

            The real difficult thing will be deciding how we distribute the wealth. We obviously cannot let the 0.1% own all the robots while everyone else lives like peasants. It’s going to take some kind of government ownership and control and that’s where the real fight is going to be. It’s going to be a nasty fight too. The key will be making sure it’s the people who run the government in the interests of the people instead of the elite owning the government, which is basically the main problem we face now. None of our problems will ever be solved as long as money owns our government.

            Reply
          21. John March 5, 2016

            I have lived in none of the above and with a family of 6 – never quite made it to Hawaii. Right now – living in GA and working in TX.

            I agree about the robots. The idea is fascinating but I would be willing to bet that they are rolled out before we are ready and it will leave people in the streets. We will see how it all plays out.
            I think we place more power on the president during an election that he truly has. There are deeper issues with congress and the senate. I think we get rid of all of them and start over. It is a shame that many of these people have never done anything but politic.

            Reply
          22. @HawaiianTater March 5, 2016

            It most certainly will happen before we are ready. Hell, it’s already happening now. Look at all the thousands upon thousands of manufacturing jobs that are gone. Bank tellers are being replaced by ATMs. We’re not very far away from fully automated fast food restaurants either. I bet we see them by the end of the decade. And as usual, Republicans are still pushing their bootstraps theory. People just need to try harder. Well, no amount of bootstraps in the world is going to help when there are simply no jobs out there because everything is automated.

            Not being able to see problems and avoid them is one of the things I hate the most about the USA and how it is run. Everyone is reactionary to things that have already happened and nobody has any foresight to avoid problems before they happen. It annoys me to no end.

            Take the banks, for example. We know they are even bigger than the last time they crashed the economy. We know they are still playing dangerous games with our money. We know regulations on them are still weak. We know they are not held accountable for their criminal behavior. Unless we do something about it, they WILL crash the economy again and this time will be even worse than 8 years ago. The Republicans’ answer is to further deregulate and Hillary is going to tell them to “cut it out”. Bernie is the only one running who sees the banks for the danger that they really are.

            Reply
          23. John March 5, 2016

            It is a shame that he wont be able to push hillary for the nomination. We need her like i need a hole through my head.

            The banks are a serious issue. I keep being told that I need to find investments not tied to US currency (gold, crypto currency, etc) and I keep seeing warnings of the upcoming recession.

            The whole robot / automation thing is exciting but will be a major growing pain for everyone. As for the knee jerk reaction I see it in the government – I see it day to day in the businesses I work with.

            Talk to you later – it is bed time. Working in Tx its 11pm

            Reply
          24. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            You watching the Dem debate? It makes me cringe every time Hillary speaks. I really can’t stand that woman.

            Reply
          25. John March 6, 2016

            Honesty I forgot about it. Gotta love the way they go for Sunday night. I looked a few min ago and could not find it.

            Reply
          26. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            It’s on CNN. Hillary is up there lying like she does best.

            Reply
          27. John March 6, 2016

            Found it. Totally irrelevant but Bernie Sanders reminds me of Billy packer (just listening to him) and if you don’t follow college basketball that will not mean anything – lol

            Reply
          28. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            I’ve got this nice Orca Coolers cup that my mother bought me. It’s one of those metal cups with an air sealed layer in it that keeps drinks hot or cold longer. It’s really nice but it explains everything that is wrong with America. On the bottom it says: designed in Tennessee, made in China.

            Bernie is absolutely right about how badly the free trade agreements have screwed the American worker. Don’t believe Hillary for a second when she says she now opposes the TPP.

            Reply
          29. John March 6, 2016

            Yea – it is cheaper to manufacture overseas and Free Trade while it sounds good, allows for this sort of trade. Labor is cheaper – regulations are less – its easier and cheaper to make so lets move the manufacturing sites over seas. A major problem.

            Reply
          30. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Short term gains do not equal long term viability. Corporations are so blinded by greed that they do not care. They won’t make any changes until the government forces them to do so.

            Reply
          31. John March 6, 2016

            Agreed – those up high are in it for the money – the boards live on the profits. There should be some sort of incentive to keeps the jobs and the manufacturing sites in the US or at least take away the $$ incentive.

            Reply
          32. John March 6, 2016

            Why should the gun maker be responsible for how it was used? Can we sue chevrolet for a hit and run?

            Reply
          33. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            I’m with you on that one. Should the manufacturer of baseball bats be held responsible if someone uses one to kill a man? What about screwdrivers or hammers or any other tool?

            This is one of those areas where Bernie should appeal to conservatives.

            Reply
          34. John March 6, 2016

            I feel for the families but lets be real. This question bothers me too. The race thing

            Reply
          35. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Hillary is full of $#@!. If she was serious about ending for-profit prisons, she wouldn’t be taking donations from them. Follow the money.

            Reply
          36. John March 6, 2016

            The whole idea of a “for profit prison” is ludicrous. Profiting from people being locked up is counter intuitive – more people = more money so lets arrest more poeople

            Reply
          37. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Did you notice that huge round of applause Bernie got for fighting against segregation in Chicago back in the 60s? That was awesome.

            Reply
          38. John March 6, 2016

            Yea but that was 50+ years ago. What are his beliefs now and Hillary’s now? What is she doing now? Besides answering the wrong question. What about the white people killed by the blacks? Racism still stalks our country….

            Reply
          39. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            If you look at their actual records, Bernie has always supported policies that helped minorities and Hillary has often been on the side of hurting them.

            I’m one of the people who is opposed to idea of black lives matter. That’s an unpopular opinion amongst my fellow liberals. The problem is cops killing people, right? Are blacks the only ones ever unfairly killed by cops? Does it never happen to white people or Latino people or Asian people? I’ll stand beside anyone who wants to fight against cops killing people but I don’t like the idea of dividing up by race.

            Reply
          40. John March 6, 2016

            That does not surprise me. I have always held the belief that Hillary was not for the “black” community.

            I think the biggest problem with the inner cities (black, white, etc) it is the family. There are a lot of kids that have no support at home, or drugs and abuse and that turns out bad people. I am not in favor of BLM, especially the way they have gone about their cause – giving demands should not work. You have got to look at who wants to be a cop I have known guys that worked in prison and wanted to be police and they enjoyed beating guys that acted out – there is a mental thing there. Then think about it from their shoes – a new cop in St Louis and a large black kid is coming at you – you shoot once and he doesnt go down – you freak and unload. I feel bad for both sides but the kids should not have approached after being told to stop.

            Reply
          41. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            The broken family structure is a complicated issue with blame on both sides. Yes, some people are just terrible people but if we fixed our communities with criminal justice reform and better jobs, maybe we wouldn’t be producing so many terrible people. Some people are simply a product of their environments.

            Reply
          42. John March 6, 2016

            I am sure not blaming either side for that one because I have seen it with all presidents. People need to work, need to be able to work to provide for their families to show the kids that, that is what they need to do. Not sure about the criminal justice reform but there are issues.

            Unions – i think they some serious issues! I have worked in Union shops and non and the union shops are much harder to deal with. They either need to be revamped – or eliminated. Btw – teachers in PA are VERY well paid. Pittsburg has teachers making $70-80K . The SE is no where nearly that good.

            Reply
          43. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            There’s a saying I’m sure you’ve heard before. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. If we have problems with unions, we fix the problems with unions. What we don’t do is get rid of them. Look at what life was life for workers a hundred years ago before unions. That’s what Republicans are trying to take us back to.

            Reply
          44. John March 6, 2016

            This one hurts my stomach. Climate change – thoughts? Fracking can be done – done safely. All that carbon credits – carbon taxes etc just makes my stomach turn

            Reply
          45. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Even IF fracking can be done safely, there is nothing safe about continuing to burn fossil fuels. We have to take the quickest route to energy efficiency and that means all of our efforts should be on clean energy, not on arguing about how safe or not fracking is.

            Reply
          46. John March 6, 2016

            Realistically we are not getting rid of fossil fuels any time soon – esp not in our lifetime or our kids. I can’t speak to solar but wind is not nearly as clean as it looks. It takes a lot of oil to keep them running. The US infrastructure cannot sustain the “green energies.” The best thing I heard was that right now there is no storage for the energy – which means that every KW of green energy used has to have a swift backup should the wind quit / or it rain for days – and the only “quick ” energy we have is oil/gas or nuclear. There is a lot of work to do before getting rid of fossil fuels. Electric cars are horrible on the environment even though they don’t use gas. There are millions of jobs related to oil / gas and coal that I really believe do not do nearly the damage that is said. When thrid world countries are burning forests and not replanting – that is worse that what we are doing.

            Reply
          47. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Well, if we don’t at least make significant reductions in our use of fossil fuels within our lifetimes, our kids might not have a habitable planet left for our kids to fix.

            Clean energy tech is jumping by leaps and bounds. It may not be there yet but it’s getting there fast. It’ll get there a lot quicker if we start investing in it instead of giving billions in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.

            Reply
          48. John March 6, 2016

            I’m not sure I agree with the first paragraph but I do believe that wind, solar, nuclear and fossil fuels should be all worked. Every decade it seems to be a new crisis – I have watched and research global cooling (the next ice age was coming), global warming and lately global climate change. I do think that we need to work on efficiencies, and work on the new technologies but I think it needs to be done smartly. Huge tax penalties based on carbon usage is not good for our economies. My belief is that we are not affecting mother nature to nearly the extent that al gore preached. There are things that can be done because deforestation scares me – it is the greenery that creates the breathing air that we all need.

            I so do not want hilary in office – – I hope bernie can kick it in and win a few more so that maybe some of the super delegates will chance allegiance.

            Reply
          49. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Look, I’m no science expert but I do trust guys like Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson. When they tell me this is a major crisis, I tend to listen to the scientists.

            Ugh, you have no idea how much it annoys me that CNN allowed that woman on stage to ask stupid religion questions. Religion has nothing to do with how good their policies are or are not. They wasted 5 minutes on that crap but never touched on foreign policy tonight. Our own Constitution says no religious tests, yet our media allows this kind of crap. Ugh.

            Reply
          50. John March 6, 2016

            Bill Nye is no science guy either and not sure that Neil’s credentials are but I like listening to him. That was a pet peeve of mine from college days and everytime I hear all scientists agree or 95% agree or a new term come out I can’t help but research it.

            Anyway – agreed at this point foreign policy def trumps religion. I would like a country with more balls that we have now. lol a slight pun against hillary. I get the impression that the world looks on us as really nothing any more. Russia has thumbed their noses at us twice and Obama backed down, the apology to Iran followed by the release of 1.7B, the stated pullout of troops in the middle east followed by the reluctance to support the regimes we put in place, the support of the UN. We are not a strong country any more. We have the muscle – but are afraid to flex?

            Reply
          51. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Maybe Nye and Tyson aren’t the best examples of “scientists” but they do talk to the real scientists and act like mouthpieces for them.

            Putin is the kind of guy who would not back down from war. If Hillary tries to confront him over Syria, it could lead to WWIII. Everyone should be terrified of that.

            Reply
          52. John March 6, 2016

            I don’t see her pushing his buttons. I could see her pushing the buttons of those in the middle east just because she is a woman and they have nuclear capability too. Obama tried to sanction Putin years ago and putin told him to f… off and then nothing else was ever hear about it. He will try who ever wins.

            Reply
          53. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Hillary wants a no-fly zone over Syria. Putin flies his jets through that space in support of Assad, who Hillary wants to overthrow. How is that not pushing Putin’s buttons?

            Reply
          54. John March 6, 2016

            That would def push but I don’t think she has what it takes to stand toe to toe with him and say that she will enforce the no fly zone. On foreign policy she reminds me of a little dog that comes out aggressively but if the other comes at her she would hie or cower in the corner. Bernie have any thoughts? I think there would be war or at least an escalation if Trump wins because he would not be able to keep his mouth shut or flinch when putin faints

            Reply
          55. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Bernie thinks we should stop interfering all the damned time and if we do, it should never be unilaterally and should always be a part of a coalition. He also thinks the other ME countries need to be using their armies to deal with ISIS instead of relying on us. There are 5 million Muslim troops from surrounding countries and ISIS has like 20-30 thousands. Muslim countries need to deal with Muslim problems.

            Reply
          56. John March 6, 2016

            Can’t really argue with those ideas – no reason that we should be the only country with troops over there. ISIS does need to be stopped – terrorism needs to be addressed or it will visit us again. It is a muslim problem but muslims are a large part of europe and becoming bigger in the US

            Reply
          57. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Maybe Muslim terrorists wouldn’t hate us so much if we stopped war mongering in their homelands. Just sayin’…

            Reply
          58. John March 6, 2016

            Maybe so – just because they don’t agree with us does not mean we need to conquer them or change them

            Reply
          59. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            You’re alright, John. You should hit me up on Twitter so we can keep in touch.

            Reply
          60. John March 6, 2016

            Maybe I will sign up. I have enjoyed the discussion and have learned a lot about Bernie that i did not know. Thank you! It is bed time in texas. Take care. Not everyone on here is an ass.

            Reply
          61. @HawaiianTater March 6, 2016

            Later.

            Reply
          62. @HawaiianTater March 8, 2016

            You should check out http://www.truthdig.com/ and be sure to read through some of the comment sections too. I’m not saying I agree with everything there but you will find some very different perspectives compared to what you see in the MSM.

            Reply
          63. John March 5, 2016

            From the Democratic Socialists of America website –
            “Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. ”
            “Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few”. Take it from the hands of those that created it and earned and pass it out to all?

            Reply
  5. S.J. Jolly January 25, 2016

    A Clinton / Sanders ticket? Or, Sanders / Clinton ?

    Reply
    1. JPHALL January 25, 2016

      It might be better than Obama / Biden. Great for the American people.

      Reply
    2. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

      Sanders/Warren would be the best option, right now. Though I’d rather vote Warren/Sanders.

      Reply
    3. John March 4, 2016

      There is no way she would go for that – he might pose a threat

      Reply
  6. Dowhat January 25, 2016

    America is becoming an oligarchy for the billionaires. (It has actually been happening in America for 30years.)
    An American government of the RICH, by the RICH, and FOR THE RICH—not for the majority of Americans (or the middle and lower classes).

    Many Americans didn’t stand up against the money class for a long time. Many Americans didn’t get angry even when billionaires and politicians were in cahoots for their greed and power. Politicians (puppets of the billionaires) worked in Congress gaining favors for billionaires and helped to destroy the middle class, labor unions for workers, and cutting our safety nets. In the process the politicians muffled the people’s voices concerning universal health care, unfair tax-codes, and human-rights. Helping big corporations (especially Healthcare and weapon industries) and Wall-Street criminals.

    It is ridiculous that many Americans in the working-class supported “billionaire candidates” (some still do!) who run for billionaires, not for the majority of Americans. It is one of the reasons the media and the billionaire supporters brainwashed people.

    How long do we keep this oligarchy controlled by the greedy billionaires? When is it time to change this corrupt situation? I think this election is the key for America.
    Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who will fix corruption in America.

    Reply
  7. oldfed January 25, 2016

    7 years of a Dem fiefdom, $10T in new debt. The Dems have proven they never have had the gravitas to lead

    Reply
    1. charleo1 January 25, 2016

      Republicans have proven time and again they’ll lead us right off a cliff, if we’re stupid enough to swallow their garbage.

      Reply
      1. John March 4, 2016

        lol – manufactured unemployment numbers. With the current world situation there is no way they are correct not to mention the highest food stamp requests, the ballooning welfare class. So feel good about the numbers if you like.
        I don’t want to see the US go to full socialism? The government controls the industry? That is VERY American. Maybe its because I am tired of paying for illegals and that I think they should be sent home and then kept out unless they go through the LEGAL channels? Or maybe its the Obamacare comment – where my insurance sucks compared to before and then you see business failing that were built for it. Lastly maybe it was the laughing stock comment – Russia flipped Obama off related to sanctions several years ago, they recently said there were flying over the US and there was nothing we could do about it and laughed the whole time I would bet. Iran made him kiss their collective butts to get our soldiers back.

        Reply
        1. charleo1 March 5, 2016

          You lost me with your crackpot theory about the employment numbers being doctored. Which tells me, if something doesn’t fit the narrative, you deny it’s credibility, or existence. It’s all too common today to see Right Wingers come fully equipped with their own set of facts, complete with horrible predictions of gloom and doom, if Right Wingers aren’t put back in charge of the whole shebang. Yet, you can’t refute a single thing I said as being anything other than absolutely true. Or the common sense in not allowing these ignorant psychopaths another crack at things.

          Reply
          1. John March 5, 2016

            I like the crack reference. The dems like that – lol. Look at Food stamp numbers – steep increase since 2009. Welfare application have also risen. So what are these jobs that are so abundant? maybe that’s why the scream for $15 an hour McDonalds workers because all the good paying jobs are going elsewhere? That is my problem with the numbers. If unemployment is so low than why do soooooooo many people need government assistance. Last year BP laid of 30,000 people, shale companies are folding, refineries are scaling back, construction is down – so again where are all these jobs?

            Reply
          2. charleo1 March 5, 2016

            Well, how about 90% of all wealth created since the recession has gone to the top 1%? There are abundant jobs being created, if one compares today’s economy, the healthiest in the World, BTW, with losing some 800,000 jobs per month. So where’s the credit for saving the economy from collapse? Or the blame for the irresponsibility, and greed that caused the calamity in the first place? Or finally where’s the common sense realization that in times of severe economic contractions there is more need across the board for public assistance? That included Wall Street too. For these amnesiacs that worry about “Socialism” only when it’s the working class that needs the help.

            Reply
          3. John March 5, 2016

            Good excuse for years 1-4 but even 7-8 with assistance numbers still climbing? Socialism is not good for the economy ever. I am square in that working class – was caught up in the last round of layoffs and was out of work for 8 months and never once asked for a handout. I work for what I spend. Looking at articles – the middle class is fading away. Soon it will be the elite and the welfare roles. And that is speeding up too.

            And for all the great work – what about these headlines? “A recession worse than 2008 is coming”

            Reply
          4. charleo1 March 5, 2016

            You’ve got to get yourself informed, or else you will never know what hit you. Now, there’s a truth, that you may accept or reject. I personally do not have the time, nor the inclination to unpack, and debunk your ideologically bent impressions of what works, and what doesn’t to insure the economy improves for all, and doesn’t just work for the few thousand at the top. Who have for the last 40 years been engaged in writing the rules to their benefit themselves far into a future. And all that only gets worse, as long as those like yourself, who are working for a living, keep mindlessly blaming gov. and getting themselves worked up about food stamps, of all things! Exactly like the wealthy elite’s mouthpieces are telling you to. Think about it.

            Reply
          5. John March 5, 2016

            So, what is your solution? Bernie so the government can run it all and then we will know exactly who to blame? You don’t have the time huh? I get a kick out of this sometimes. You assume those that do not agree with you are less informed huh? I agree that govt on all sides has worked very hard for their own benefit. I think they should make politics like it started out to be – it was not your full time job – you did it because you fell compelled to not entitled to and once done you had to go get a real job – not paid for like like our presidents. That said – I am in favor of business and the working class. I get worked up about food stamps because people like to say how wonderful this admin is doing. The welfare state is booming – that is what this admin has done a great job of building

            Reply
          6. charleo1 March 6, 2016

            Any solution I would suggest involves getting more of the wealth currently being piled up, and setting fallow at the top, ushered down the economic scale, to the real economy where the vast majority of us live, work, and determines the overall prosperity of the Nation. Any notion of solving the fundamental source of the weak demand, soaring public debt, and deficient public investments that continue to stagnate wages, and stunt full time employment, without accounting for this historic imbalance, is like the U.S. economy itself, doomed to eventual epic fail. And since you obviously want to work regressively down the bottom of the scale, to in effect funnel even more capital to a top that’s literally starving the bottom. That, my confused fellow American, is an uninformed position, and shows the individual in need of some personal homework, before engaging in conversations that involve suggested solutions. Then too your last line is very telling, You don’t see yourself as on the same side as the Democrats. So naturally, you want the news to be all bad to help your team. Or to accentuate the problems, not their fundamental causations.

            Reply
          7. John March 6, 2016

            You say a lot without saying much of anything other than trying to suggest that you are smarter and that I am totally uninformed. I do believe that there is a group of the rich that will stay rich or get richer at the expense of the middle and lower class. The question is how do you change that? Go to the democratic socialist type government where the tax rates are up as high as 60%? Get rid of loopholes they use to keep their money? One problem is – those that make these decisions have a vested interest in making sure they retain their money. If the politicians had to actually work for a living and not do politicking only for quite a lot of money then maybe things could change a little quicker and there would be more thought to the working class. My last line addresses the current policies that are not helping the middle class but rather growing the lower class. There is also a lot of money spent on fluff by our government that could and should be spent – healthcare, etc and not fluff and personal projects.

            Reply
          8. charleo1 March 6, 2016

            My opinion of you is irrelevant. However, I don’t see you so much as uninformed, as misinformed. And unfortunately using the same straw man arguments, and debunked tropes dragged up ad nauseam by wealthy elites specifically designed to keep any reforms to reconfigure, and fix the current lopsided, and predatory structure of wealth distribution out of the public conversation. Holding that doing anything would be unwise. At worst, dangerous, or at best, undoable, when history clearly disproves both.
            Is big money buying politicians the vehicle that brought us over the past 40 to this point? The answer is a complicated yes, but not entirely. The fact is, that dynamic has allowed our economy, (us,) to be exposed to the worst of the side effects of globalization, and automation. Which allows U.S. industry to shop a much poorer World for the lowest possible labor costs, and demand the least regulations to be found. While the Right has led the way in aggravating this situation, by using it to grind some very old political axes against union shops, who support Democrats, and public school unions who largely do the same, And have used the deteriorating wages caused by a World economy, to push for bought and paid for calls for ever more deregulation. That may increase profit margins for a few, but seldom help the people that are most always harmed by the consequences. Progressive tax rates have been another victim of the sea change brought to us by the enormous sums of corporate money in our gov. Now, most times a servant of the wealthy elite. So rates as high as 90% at the top, in effect for 35 years after the end of WWII. Are now a paltry, and mostly unpaid 15% for the most profitable companies in the World.

            So the question now becomes, how to financed a huge military, underwrite security in Europe, protect oil shipments from the Mid-East, and a thousand other projects, and trip wires we maintain around the World? Then, if we do all that, where does the money come from for public investments in education, science, and infrastructure, like the kind that laid the foundation for new industries in the latter 20 century, enabling a strong diversified economy, that financed this minimum bottom line for American labor coming out of the Great Depression as it did. What now of those very popular, and expensive programs, SS, Medicare, and Medicaid insurance for the growing numbers of uninsured poor?

            This is why it is wholly inadequate to say, let’s balance the budget by shrinking the size of government. Without gaining
            the agreement of the largest benefactors of all this debt to forgo those very things they receive from gov. and feel, given their circumstances, they absolutely need. Or conversely, to keep the current system in place, and secure them from the only entity
            capable of provision, the private sector. Or, that not being in the cards, be willing to sit satisfied at the end of the day, and feel pride, that although this great majority that has worked all their careers for meager sub par wages, will never be able to retire, and enjoy life. And any short stint in the hospital will take what little they have. At least democracy, as the story goes, will have been protected from Socialism. So hurrah! Right? Yes, that’s what they expect to say when their agenda is complete. Hurrah!

            Reply
          9. John March 6, 2016

            I do agree that the problem does not lie entirely with the Political leaders. Corporation, companies and their lobbyists do serious damage to the economy as well. There is a lot of effort to make sure the rich stay rich. There is a lot of effort for companies to go where ever they can make the most profit from either lower wages, cheaper tax structures or whatever the reason. There is a large push at the top for them to stay there. That is a tough one to break – when politician are being aided by the lobbyists and gaining power from there position what incentive is there to change the status-quo. I do have issues with Unions as they are formed today. They are VERY top heavy as well so that their rich stay rich. I have worked in several industries that have Unions and they have always had issues – they do not encourage hard work – they encourage doing just what it takes to get by. They promote by whomever has been there the longest – not by who is the best. They were a very important part of history but that is where they should stay. Education needs a major change – every school that I have had kids in teach a test – there is no separation any more for those that are smarter (because it might hurt someones feelings). My last 2 have been homeschooled for all but 2 years and I am proud of them for it. I am open for change I just don’t see it coming. Bernie and the Democratic socialism is an interesting concept that I need to research further – Hillary scares me and I just don’t like her. As for the republicans – I like the fact that Trump is not a career politician (maybe a businessman might have a different perspective) but other than that he scares me too as you have no idea where he stands from one day to the next. The other 2 other than gun control – I don’t like them. So – it will be hillary vs probably Cruz (because the GOP will not let Trump win).

            Reply
    2. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

      Only if by “Dem fiefdom” you mean a GOP-controlled congress blocking every jobs and veterans’ aid program as well as obstructing everything else proposed that would actually help people, and shutting down the government when something that has been helping millions of Americans actually got through their racist refusal to work with Obama since even BEFORE day 1 of his 1st term – which they have NEVER done with ANY other Dem president… Oh, and SCOTUS giving corporations more rights than the people, just to serve partisan politics. Not to mention the massive debts and shitty economy that we have had since the Dubya admin plunged us into 2 unpaid-for wars and created ISIS by destabilizing Iraq, because Dubya wanted to “Git the guy who insulted his daddy!” All of which we only started digging our way out of thanks to our president, Barrack Obama’s leadership…

      Yeah, sure, Dem fiefdom..

      Except fiefdoms existed because wealthy lords kept the people they ruled poor and pretty much slaves. It’s only the GOP trying to hand the country to the wealthy robber-barons at the expense of the people, but hey, at least you managed to use a few big words most of the GOP base wouldn’t even know!

      Be careful, too many big words and your party will declare you as one of the “intellectual elite” and a RINO…

      Reply
    3. Daniel Max Ketter January 28, 2016

      Me and the Ketter family are life long democrats, and I would NEVER break that family tradition. Me & Linda Rae look forward to stepping into that voting booth and giving Hillary Clinton our votes! God bless the democratic party, and the United Automobile Workers for their service to our country.

      Reply
      1. John March 4, 2016

        Nothing like having an open mind. What good has come from the last 7 nearly 8 years? Obamacare – with so many of the companies folding and going bankrupt and those of us that work for a living paying more and getting less. World view – the us is the laughing stock of the world. Taking it deep from Russia, Iran and N. Korea….

        Reply
        1. Daniel Max Ketter March 4, 2016

          You sure dont sound like an american patriot to me. Go wave your nazi flag to your aryan minions

          Reply
          1. John March 4, 2016

            How does realism – relate to the Nazis? Because I don’t want to see the US go to full socialism? The government controls the industry? That is VERY American. Maybe its because I am tired of paying for illegals and that I think they should be sent home and then kept out unless they go through the LEGAL channels? Or maybe its the Obamacare comment – where my insurance sucks compared to before and then you see business failing that were built for it. Lastly maybe it was the laughing stock comment – Russia flipped Obama off related to sanctions several years ago, they recently said there were flying over the US and there was nothing we could do about it and laughed the whole time I would bet. Iran made him kiss their collective butts to get our soldiers back. So – what part of that makes me a nazi?

            Reply
          2. John March 4, 2016

            Btw – Unions are outdated and antiquated and so against the improving of the US – they promote based on seniority not knowledge or ability, the auto industry has always set quotas and ensured incentives to not exceed. Do exactly as I tell you and nothing more. but pay me fees.

            Reply
  8. Rebecca Anne Inkster January 26, 2016

    It’s simple: The Republicans/Tea Party/Conservatives act like vicious, screaming, hateful, bratty children throwing a tantrum and calling each other names. The Dems are adults having a vigorous debate, occasionally criticizing each other, but generally being civil and citing facts instead of using coded language to insinuate things they can’t openly say because they’d be sued for slander.

    So who do YOU want to run the country? A screaming, vicious, hateful, impulsive, ignorant child, or an adult?

    Reply
    1. John March 4, 2016

      At least the repubs dont want to send us further down that socialist path – where the whims of one woman can over rule the law of the land. Where she is free to allow the deaths of whoever she sees fit.

      Reply
  9. Tony Milton February 4, 2016

    After last night town hall meeting, there is no doubt that Clinton has my vote.

    Reply
    1. Laszlo Folgerts February 7, 2016

      you like your presidents in the pockets of big money, do you?

      Reply
  10. Gene Harris February 9, 2016

    Yep 5 Reason why more people should actually require that the Government live up to the Constitution. That Politicians be Held accountable for their Actions. Clinton lies when her lips are moving. She Supports Big money, Has no desire to support the working person. She would rather control the individual Rather than the corporations. Sanders on the other hand wants a utopia where all you have to do is be born and do whatever you want without producing anything. Give all your money to the government so the government can give you what you need to survive.

    Reply
  11. John March 4, 2016

    And the people are blind that they want total control by the government. The government will decide what jobs are viable. The government will decide how much you are worth. Why else is the welfare group growing by leaps and bounds – to be tied to the government to the democratic party that is so not in favor of a democratic process. watch – if we vote her in (or bernie for that matter) there will be arrests based on your ideology not real crimes. Dissent – criminal

    Reply
  12. John March 5, 2016

    Here is another interesting graph – printed in the Bloomberg view – makes you think twice about current unemployment numbers.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.