Ummm, a single nuke detonated in North Korea is not going to fuck China up 'for a very long time'. The flood of refugees from North Korea is actually a crisis they are facing right now, and one that would be alleviated, if not entirely eliminated within a decade of reunification. China would be much more concerned about the prospect of American bases along their border, and the political fall out within their own country for abandoning what is still perceived as an ally.
Anybody else watch the debate tonight? It looks like Clinton has gone all in on imitating Sanders' stances. Much of this she didn't seem to believe in even a year ago. I don't know how anyone could look at her history and think she has even a shred of integrity, or sincerely believe she hasn't been bought by corporate donations ad nauseum. As Bernie has gotten more and more popular, suddenly she's Bernie Sanders lite, just not quite so far left, and wants a little less government spending. The way she slowly slides through her sentences to choose her words isn't the mark of someone with a consistent platform or who is speaking honestly. But really, don't even listen to her, just look at what she actually does when she holds an elected office. That was far more interesting than the WWF smack down that is the Republican debates. For the next round I fully expect Trump to light a match and just let Rubio/Cruz set themselves on fire. He's basically already done this, and now that they're in full panic mode and the attacks are so desperate I'm expecting a hilarious, if not utterly childish debate.
I watched a good bit of it. I wouldn't say I'm feeling the bern or anything yet. But I do feel he is genuine in his thoughts and feelings. While I'm no fan of Clinton, I do think she would be an ok president as far as not turning back the clock on important social issues. But I also think she is completely full of shit and an obvious panderer. Those are things I hate in politicians. I mean, the GOP debates devolve into name calling. And people cheer for it. Even if you're conservative leaning, you can't be proud of that shit.
On the social issues she'll do what the polls tell her to do. On the economic issues she'll go quid pro quo, and that's where she really concerns me.
I honestly don't get all the Hillary hate. Maybe it's because of my age, but I vividly remember her talking to Congress during hearings trying to get healthcare reform passed in the mid-90's. I also remember neoconservatives going after her. She was a supporter of gay rights (yes, people made fun of 'don't ask don't tell - but make no mistake, this was a very important step in the evolution of gay rights). She has always stood for civil rights. Yes, she is practical when it comes to business, and more hawkish, but again, she has been consistently so. While I agree that at times her rhetoric changes, her baseline positions have essentially remained the same. I do like Sanders and what he says about domestic policy, but if we're talking about President, then foreign policy is more important because that's where the President actually has far more influence. A lot of the criticisms I'm hearing are talking points generated by neoconservatives. Like many such points, they are rarely founded in fact. I say this as a conservative. My party abandoned me awhile ago. Now, I certainly wouldn't call myself a Democrat - but I will say this, as to the best qualified for the job out of both parties candidates, it's Clinton, hands down. As a political scientist, I'm not sure this one is even close. Frankly, I'm not particularly a fan of Hillary, and I do like what Sanders has to say quite a bit, but even as a conservative, I would vote Clinton before any of the other choices on either side.
I hate her because she says EVERYTHING with the intention of pandering to her current audience to get their approval. She's not being honest... noticeably so. She's playing a game and it's just so fucking obvious, it's insulting. Watching her carefully craft an answer that won't commit or incriminate her but still try to answer the question is annoyingly obvious. Watch tonight's debate for an example. And she's bought and paid for by big corporation, while trying to play that "gee, shucks" down-home angle that's she's just "one of the people". Big corporations do not have the best interest of the people at heart, they have their own interests, and more often than not, that is the exact opposite of what is good for the people. She's a fucking snake, and I can't stand her.
My mom called me tonight to tell me just how badly Hillary got her ass kicked at the debate tonight. Apparently she wasn't the only one who thought so: The more she tries to talk, the more she buries herself, and Bernie is just getting stronger and stronger. Personally, as a Canadian with no skin in this game, I really hope that Bernie pulls it off. The only weird thing I heard from the debate was the whole "sue the gun manufacturers" stance... that made no sense. Substitute "car manufacturer" for "gun manufacturer" and you can see how it makes no sense. Unless I'm missing something.
I've gone back and forth on Hillary over the years, but of all the current candidates she's the most qualified. Hell, between being First Lady, a Senator, and Secretary of State, she's one of the most qualified candidates of all time. While Bernie's economic platform appeals to me more than hers, I have my concerns about his ability to actually be president. For starters, how's he going to handle an openly hostile congress if the democrats don't regain control? He also hasn't really been put under the scrutiny, criticism, and second-guessing the GOP would give him if he were president, and from what I've seen and read about him he's not exactly good at keeping cool when he needs to be. On the other hand Hillary's been in the crosshairs for almost 25 years now, and I was pretty damn impressed on how she handed the bullshit Bengazi Senate hearing witchhunt. It's nice to idealistically want a pure straight shooter in the White House, but the president's gotta have some guile as well. Another thing I've been wondering is how Bernie's not considered "establishment". He's been a member of congress for 25 years; how much longer to you have to serve before you're considered "establishment"?
Forget about the vote for her because she's a woman angle of this video for a moment and watch 1:00-3:30. Yeah, she doesn't even try to answer it. This is the election cycle she's the #1 recipient of donations from the drug industry, and unsurprising she's attacking the single payer system. I don't understand how anyone could say her baseline positions have been consistent. She can't stay consistent in a single year, forget about a career. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/democratic-debate-hillary-clinton-flip-flop-213247 As for Bernie not coming under fire yet, it's pretty much all there. He's been saying the same shit he said 20 years ago. The republicans will probably run some big 'say no to communism' and 'healthcare to control your life' campaign. I would take him on foreign policy over Hilary any day of the week. He had the sense not to go forward into Iraq. She didn't. Bernie's concern were pretty much spot on. What did Hilary's experience add then? For now Bernie wants to pull out of Afghanistan and let an Arab coalition deal with ISIS. Clinton does not, in fact she seems to want more of the failed military policies we've had over the last 12 years. Also on foreign policy he's been on the right side of trade deals for decades, Hilary, Ms. consistent platform just flipped on that within the last few months. Sanders plans to break up the too big to fail banks and reinstate Glass-Stegall along with additional measures. Hilary makes some vague allusion to not supporting Wall Street while offering no coherent reforms. She's going to be hands off. Sanders exaggerates some of the problems he wants to address, but he is not exagerrating on this one, and it's the main reason I can't vote for Hillary: https://berniesanders.com/issues/money-in-politics/ Yeah, she was against Citizens United. So she takes every advantage of it's stipulations. Give me a fucking break. Meh, I don't want to go on. Hilary Clinton is not a person. She's a shape shifting reptilian from an alternate dimension, and it's hard to know what you're voting for when she's taking money under the table all election and her positions change like the wind.
Isn't that what Trump is doing? I mean, does he really love the idea of a wall on the Mexican border or is he just saying that because people are eating it up with a spoon? And she may be bought by big corporation but he literally IS big corporation. The only real difference between their strategies is that she is playing the middle and he's playing the fringe. If the two noms end up being Trump and Hilary, it will be like Coke vs. Pepsi.
Think encounters like this will diminish her minority vote? My same friends who were sharing the #BernieSoWhite hashtag awhile ago are now all on board with Killer Mike preaching for Sanders. It may not make a difference but I find the turnaround interesting.
1) She is incredibly condescending. Call her on her bullshit and she will not only not answer, but act like you are a fool for even questioning her. There are dozens, at least, of examples of this on video. She clearly thinks she is the smartest person in any room and acts like it. I work with someone who acts just like her. I hate him. 2) The e-mail issue is a glaring example of the above. Her security breach was incompetent, just short of treasonously so. But how dare we question her. She knows what she's doing dammit! Her password has letters AND numbers! 3) Everything she has ever done and said, from her shady financial deals, to her vote on Iraq, to magically becoming a New Yorker when a Senate seat from that state opened up, has been geared towards one thing - becoming President. She has no consistent viewpoints or values. She wants one thing - to be elected. She panders to the minority vote only because she needs it. Question her on minority issues and she falls apart and whips out the condescending card. Even if you are a minority. 4) This is related to the above, and it is kind of personal, but she is devoid of dignity and self awareness. She allowed Bill Clinton to make a fool, a laughingstock, of her for decades, all to use his connections to eventually become president. I'm not blaming the victim here - Bill is to blame for his behavior, not Hillary. But she made excuses for him over and over again. As soon as they left the White House she should have divorced him, and I would have had an enormous amount of respect for her. But she didn't, because her self-respect and dignity took a back seat to becoming president.
Does this surprise anyone? 'Too low, too slow': Even state that just raised minimum wage is facing pressure to raise it again "It took less than a day after Oregon’s governor signed one of the nation’s largest minimum wage hikes into law for activists to complain that it’s not enough " http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...pressure-to-raise-it-again.html?intcmp=hplnws
Michigan is one of the most important states for the dems primary, and that will be decided tomorrow. On March 15th we'll really know if Bernie has enough steam to finish the race. Anybody else picture Clinton standing on a mountain top shouting "Kuwabara! Kuwabara!"? Sanders has handily won the debates. The real question is if he can steal away enough of the minority vote to sway the field.
He actually angered a lot of minority voters last night with the "White people don't know what it's like to be poor and live in the ghetto" statement. He attempted to pander to minorities and it backfired...they took it as him suggesting that all minorities are poor and live in section 8 housing. Many now see him as totally disconnected from reality.
I don't expect him to win too much of the idiot vote, or from the people who try to spin everything as a thinly veiled attack on minorities and women. The Clinton campaign will wisely try to exploit them. This is just more bullshit heaved on top.
Clinton will get the idiot vote, because the biggest idiots that there are (a.k.a undecided voters) seem to gravitate towards her as a "safe vote". It would be a much better world if the Western politics didn't coddle undecided voters and instead treated them like the dipshits that they are. But no, instead they stick their tongues up their ass and treat them like they're Nikola Tesla in a think-tank. If you can't tell between X and Y in an American election than you're hopeless. I still think that the right to vote should have an IQ test to go with it first. Morons with low information shouldn't determine a nation's fate.
Being undecided in an effort to choose carefully rather than latching onto a candidate and ignoring all others makes you an idiot? Voting blindly makes you an idiot, not just being undecided. I understand the point of this, but to answer the latter part of your statement I believe that is why we have the electoral college system in place. It ain't the morons and the popular vote that decides el presidente, it's the college. Of course they are basically supposed to go hand-in-hand too but Bush vs. Gore taught us otherwise.
Undecided voter here. I'm socially liberal, fiscally conservative. I can tell the difference between the candidates, but even with each one it's a balancing act between which parts of them I like vs. their positions I cannot stand. I'll give a brief breakdown of my personal views on each candidate so you can see how an independent/undecided like me might have some issues. Or at least the mental calculus we go through. Trump -- insane, bad business guy, only person I would not vote for under any circumstances Cruz- can't stand his mixing church and state, but love his fiscal policies and think he'd make a good military leader; generally hate, but could see myself voting for if he softens some of his stances in the general election Rubio- love his stance on student loans and immigration and think he'd make a good military leader, will deal with his religious views because they aren't as extreme; like and would happily vote for because he represents a good compromise for me Kasich - favorite candidate I think I've ever seen, has a snowball's chance of getting the nomination; would love to vote for, not getting hopes up Clinton- don't know where she stands because she'll say whatever it takes to get votes, like social views; would vote for over trump or cruz Sanders- economically the dude is an idiot, his inheritance tax plan, actually his tax plan in general for me, would be an automatic disqualifier for me to even consider voting for him, but I think he has a snowball's chance of getting that through legislature if he got the dem nom; he is my favorite candidate socially; I would vote for him over trump only