American Politics

[xi0]

I don't think you can blame immigrants because they're doing what they have to in order to survive and support their family. And when they apply to jobs, the companies can tell them no instead of hiring them. Plus, I don't think the government can keep track of everyone, especially illegal immigrants.

I said it was more of a human issue than simple right or wrong. But they're still breaking the law.

 

[Josef]

If Rubio loses Florida it's over for him, if he still does not drop out...sorest loser ever. It's easy to predict that at the point both Rubio and Kasich drop out - Rubio after an eventual Florida race and Kasich after an Ohio race, the Republican primary would get crazy, as Cruz is as unpredictable on certain things as Trump is, I can see Carson backing Trump at some point, as for Kasich, if he wins Ohio and a few northern states, and Rubio is gone at that point...there might be something going for hi, at least to disrupt Trump enough in the more liberal states, so Cruz is competative. But then again why would Kasich work that for Cruz, I still think Kasich is holding Trump back for Rubio.

Sanders just needs to be more aggressive and he can start turning it around, he also needs to win the more and MOST liberal states like the New England ones and take this all the way to California. He should not cave into the media ejaculating all over Hillary and gatekeeping her every move.

 

[SharkBait]

He should not cave into the media ejaculating all over Hillary and gatekeeping her every move.

What? Unlike Sanders, Hillary actually generates positive results, so its understandable that the media would love her.

 

[kkck]

If Rubio loses Florida it's over for him, if he still does not drop out...sorest loser ever. It's easy to predict that at the point both Rubio and Kasich drop out - Rubio after an eventual Florida race and Kasich after an Ohio race, the Republican primary would get crazy, as Cruz is as unpredictable on certain things as Trump is, I can see Carson backing Trump at some point, as for Kasich, if he wins Ohio and a few northern states, and Rubio is gone at that point...there might be something going for hi, at least to disrupt Trump enough in the more liberal states, so Cruz is competative. But then again why would Kasich work that for Cruz, I still think Kasich is holding Trump back for Rubio.

Sanders just needs to be more aggressive and he can start turning it around, he also needs to win the more and MOST liberal states like the New England ones and take this all the way to California. He should not cave into the media ejaculating all over Hillary and gatekeeping her every move.

But rubio has been loosing so well! He has had amazing third places, and he has surprised with second places here and there! he won one state but who can blame him? His consistent defeats are such good results for him! Sarcasm aside, the guy is the actual last shred of common sense the party has (which in any other context would be an offensively low standard but beggars can't be choosers). Him leaving equates to the GOP effectively giving up and letting the party nomination to either delusional or the religious nutjob. For the sake of sanity the establishment should have it's candidate stay till the bitter end, otherwise they are just literally giving up on their party (though the irony of "sanity" in this context does not elude me).

 

[xi0]

What? Unlike Sanders, Hillary actually generates positive results, so its understandable that the media would love her.

So Sanders doesn't generate positive results despite winning multiple states.... So you would say Rubio hasn't generated positive results despite only winning one state so far? Somehow this doesn't add up...

 

[Momoni]

What? Unlike Sanders, Hillary actually generates positive results, so its understandable that the media would love her.

CNN was calling her a poll winner despite their own polls reflecting that Sanders was more supported because they've endorsed her. It's also more complicated than "winning over the people" if the Democratic super delegates are the ones who decide which candidate gets what state, basically.

 

[SharkBait]

So Sanders doesn't generate positive results despite winning multiple states.... So you would say Rubio hasn't generated positive results despite only winning one state so far? Somehow this doesn't add up...

Ive already accepted Hillary Rodham Obama as the next president so come November Ill vote for her. IMO its just not realistic for me to spend the next few weeks thinking that Ruboo will somehow secure many more delegates than Trump. At some point candidates just have to give up. One third of delegates are out there already. If by some chance Rubio gets the nomination, well TeamMarco forever. But a part of my still has hope.

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2016, Original Post Date: Mar 3, 2016 ---

CNN was calling her a poll winner despite their own polls reflecting that Sanders was more supported because they've endorsed her. It's also more complicated than "winning over the people" if the Democratic super delegates are the ones who decide which candidate gets what state, basically.

Superdelegates in states she won wouldnt just happen to jump ship to Sanders though especially when she beat him 64% or even 75% to 20/30%. Shes legit winning states on popular vote.

 

[Momoni]

Superdelegates in states she won wouldnt just happen to jump ship to Sanders though especially when she beat him 64% or even 75% to 20/30%. Shes legit winning states on popular vote.

They've jumped ship to her before when he's won in the polls. She's legit being paraded as "the only logical vote," which in turn makes nobody want to vote for Sanders, because he's "just going to lose." The whole reason my generation is full of people who "don't vote, because it won't matter anyways," is because of this type of thing.

 

[Taorero]

Since I am actually from Venezuela, I can tell you this guys with 100% security of what I am saying...

Bernie Sanders and his so-call "socialism" and "free" policy is just a pretty way of convincing people to vote for something that cannot be done just as simple as he says. (It happened in my home country and now that country is the worst place to live in, our resources where wasted by the government and everything is so freaking expensive that nothing actually comes for free...)

Donald Trump, even though the guy is an outstanding businessman and sometimes he is right about a few things, to run you need humility not despotism or a hate speech... We live in dangerous times so a country needs a cool head with experience.

 

[kkck]

Since I am actually from Venezuela, I can tell you this guys with 100% security of what I am saying...

Bernie Sanders and his so-call "socialism" and "free" policy is just a pretty way of convincing people to vote for something that cannot be done just as simple as he says. (It happened in my home country and now that country is the worst place to live in, our resources where wasted by the government and everything is so freaking expensive that nothing actually comes for free...)

Donald Trump, even though the guy is an outstanding businessman and sometimes he is right about a few things, to run you need humility not despotism or a hate speech... We live in dangerous times so a country needs a cool head with experience.

Venezuela? That's rough. Though to be fair what bernie sanders is proposing is in no form or context related to the insanity started by chavez or 21th century socialism in general (as far as I can tell anyways). Sanders is a socialist but not within the context of what is going on in venezuela or other south american countries. Each and every developed nation in the world is socialist to varying degrees (or falls within what nowadays is called socialism). Other countries have nice stuff like universal health care and access to education (and it's not really free either). The US is in fact the most powerful nation in the world, it lagging behind other countries in such things shouldn't be a thing.

The notion that donald trump is an outstanding businessman and is right about things is just contrary to facts and common sense. The guy is a demagogue who would say anything that he thinks gets him votes and media attention. In that regard he is plenty similar to your average 21th century socialist (except without the socialist agenda although he would probably have one if it got him votes).

 

[Taorero]

Venezuela? That's rough. Though to be fair what bernie sanders is proposing is in no form or context related to the insanity started by chavez or 21th century socialism in general (as far as I can tell anyways). Sanders is a socialist but not within the context of what is going on in venezuela or other south american countries. Each and every developed nation in the world is socialist to varying degrees (or falls within what nowadays is called socialism). Other countries have nice stuff like universal health care and access to education (and it's not really free either). The US is in fact the most powerful nation in the world, it lagging behind other countries in such things shouldn't be a thing.

The notion that donald trump is an outstanding businessman and is right about things is just contrary to facts and common sense. The guy is a demagogue who would say anything that he thinks gets him votes and media attention. In that regard he is plenty similar to your average 21th century socialist (except without the socialist agenda although he would probably have one if it got him votes).

To be fair is not like I have actually sit to listen to Sanders for long. But it is a little scary how the speech is very similar (thank god not the same) as Chavez back in 98 if you mixed up Bernie + Donald then you will have Bernald and then the speech will be exactly the same. What I find hard to believe is that US politics and "mentality" can change without actually having a downside to it. Take for example. My college (in LA) has a lot of schoolarships for people from random countries, states and random situations. Who pays for that free stuff? Full time students without scholarship :/ All the time, no matter how when something is free, it usually means that someone else is paying. It would be awesome if examples like Canada, Germany, Sweden and such could be follow. The problem is to follow those examples for the right reasons. I think Sanders can do what he propose but from a different seat. I will take my time to actually pay attention to a debate and get back to the discussion

 

[xi0]

Ive already accepted Hillary Rodham Obama as the next president so come November Ill vote for her. IMO its just not realistic for me to spend the next few weeks thinking that Ruboo will somehow secure many more delegates than Trump. At some point candidates just have to give up. One third of delegates are out there already. If by some chance Rubio gets the nomination, well TeamMarco forever. But a part of my still has hope.

I mean, that's pretty flippant of you. While it's conveniently difficult to really pin down where Clinton really stands on most issues (this is by design btw), none of them have lined up with what you've voiced in this thread thus far.

And if Rubio and other establishment Republicans revolt against Trump, and the rest of the the primaries go according to plan, a brokered convention may end up happening. Even when the Tea Party was still new and "threatening" there wasn't this kind of dissonance within the GOP.

Superdelegates in states she won wouldnt just happen to jump ship to Sanders though especially when she beat him 64% or even 75% to 20/30%. Shes legit winning states on popular vote.

You're talking about regular pledged delegates. They're tied to a state and vote according to who won their state. Superdelegates can vote for whoever they want and there's 700+ of them. Republicans don't have nearly as many, but they could also play a part in some sort of brokered convention if things are close enough.

 

[kkck]

To be fair is not like I have actually sit to listen to Sanders for long. But it is a little scary how the speech is very similar (thank god not the same) as Chavez back in 98 if you mixed up Bernie + Donald then you will have Bernald and then the speech will be exactly the same. What I find hard to believe is that US politics and "mentality" can change without actually having a downside to it. Take for example. My college (in LA) has a lot of schoolarships for people from random countries, states and random situations. Who pays for that free stuff? Full time students without scholarship :/ All the time, no matter how when something is free, it usually means that someone else is paying. It would be awesome if examples like Canada, Germany, Sweden and such could be follow. The problem is to follow those examples for the right reasons. I think Sanders can do what he propose but from a different seat. I will take my time to actually pay attention to a debate and get back to the discussion

True, the speech is the same and occasionally I do find it unsettling. However the issue here is that the things proposed in general are not necessarily bad to begin with. Offering education, access to healthcare, wealth distribution, giving power to the people, all of those things are inherently good things. It's not even a matter of right or left, at least it shouldn't be. Wealth distribution in particular, it's very easy to immediately think of it as socialist demagogy. However concentration of wealth is an objectively bad thing. Of course, at venezuela the whole thing was taken to "redistribution" of wealth and stuff was expropriated and whatnot... Which is ordinary 20th century socialism which we all know beyond reasonable doubt had unequivocally failed through history. And to add you add oil which allowed the the 21th century socialist parasites to actually give free stuff only to have the price of oil crumble....Countries that have all that universal health care and access to education have each and every citizen pay for it through taxes, the extreme opposite of what went on in venezuela, which did tax the hell out of people but simply wasted the money away. Honestly, oil is a curse to countries that have it...

 

[Taorero]

True, the speech is the same and occasionally I do find it unsettling. However the issue here is that the things proposed in general are not necessarily bad to begin with. Offering education, access to healthcare, wealth distribution, giving power to the people, all of those things are inherently good things. It's not even a matter of right or left, at least it shouldn't be. Wealth distribution in particular, it's very easy to immediately think of it as socialist demagogy. However concentration of wealth is an objectively bad thing. Of course, at venezuela the whole thing was taken to "redistribution" of wealth and stuff was expropriated and whatnot... Which is ordinary 20th century socialism which we all know beyond reasonable doubt had unequivocally failed through history. And to add you add oil which allowed the the 21th century socialist parasites to actually give free stuff only to have the price of oil crumble....Countries that have all that universal health care and access to education have each and every citizen pay for it through taxes, the extreme opposite of what went on in venezuela, which did tax the hell out of people but simply wasted the money away. Honestly, oil is a curse to countries that have it...

Good to see that the situation in Venezuela has given a lot of people an understanding on how "socialism" work when you do it wrong. I say that what they did in my country was simply communism but call it socialism, problem is... a foreigner sees it as it really is, my fellow country folks don't.

Through taxes it can definitely be done and hopefully people will understand that a little raise on taxes is for the good of a bright future. That's what worries me. Is the people ready for that?, from what I take from some friends here sometimes I want to slap them on the face. They don't see the whole picture I guess. But from what you write... there's hope! Excellent understanding my friend!

 

[Momoni]

outstanding businessman

Other than his long history of failure and multiple bankruptcies. The ability to stand back up is inspiring, but it's not outstanding. Especially so if you just go on to fail again, and again, and again.

 

[M3J]

What? Unlike Sanders, Hillary actually generates positive results, so its understandable that the media would love her.

Hillary generates positive results because the media focused on her more than they did on anyone else. If Bernie had equal amount of focus or even just a little less, he'd be more popular and likely be winning. Plus, there are some people who think voting for Hillary is a good feminist cause, which is dumb logic.

Bernie started this race at a huge disadvantage to Hillary, who has dynasty and media from day one. It's pretty remarkable just how popular Bernie is, and the fact that he's still in the race.

Since I am actually from Venezuela, I can tell you this guys with 100% security of what I am saying...

Bernie Sanders and his so-call "socialism" and "free" policy is just a pretty way of convincing people to vote for something that cannot be done just as simple as he says. (It happened in my home country and now that country is the worst place to live in, our resources where wasted by the government and everything is so freaking expensive that nothing actually comes for free...)

Donald Trump, even though the guy is an outstanding businessman and sometimes he is right about a few things, to run you need humility not despotism or a hate speech... We live in dangerous times so a country needs a cool head with experience.

From what I've read, Trump has declared bankruptcy many times, so it's questionable whether he is an outstanding businessman or a good one with lucky breaks. I mean, despite what Trump says, getting $1 million from his dad is a pretty huge amount. The fact that people are actually voting for him, no matter what reason, is sickening.

 

[Taorero]

Well being bankrupt is pretty easy, making all the money again is not, that's why I think he is outstanding but I do understand your points, let's say an "outstanding" better lol.

It is very sickening, specially after so much hate speeches..

 

[xi0]

Well being bankrupt is pretty easy, making all the money again is not, that's why I think he is outstanding but do understand your points, let's say an "outstanding" better lol.

Well sure, but he inherited $200m from his father when he died as well. I mean, the dirty little secret about business is that it's always going to be easier to make money, if you already have some!

I don't think he's a bad businessman necessarily, but if you have competent accountants, it's pretty difficult to lose it all and become a complete and total failure. A lot of his wealth is in his name, since he puts it on nearly everything he does. But with everything else with this guy, his acumen is likely overstated greatly.

 

[Taorero]

Well sure, but he inherited $200m from his father when he died as well. I mean, the dirty little secret about business is that it's always going to be easier to make money, if you already have some!

I don't think he's a bad businessman necessarily, but if you have competent accountants, it's pretty difficult to lose it all and become a complete and total failure. A lot of his wealth is in his name, since he puts it on nearly everything he does. But with everything else with this guy, his acumen is likely overstated greatly.

Haha so that means that I can conclude: The guy doesn't actually have anything positive in favor?, that is rough I thought that at least the guy will know what to do with money but judging from past experiences. He wins, US goes into bankruptcy

 

[xi0]

Haha so that means that I can conclude: The guy doesn't actually have anything positive in favor?, that is rough I thought that at least the guy will know what to do with money but judging from past experiences. He wins, US goes into bankruptcy

About governance? No, not really. About being an executive? Maybe. I mean, I don't personally know how he runs his businesses. But his supporters and himself keep trying to draw these lazy parallels between "making deals" and bla bla bla, meanwhile his language is supremely divisive. Take any issue, and there's quotes of him taking both sides at different times. The guy is just media-savvy and good at being an opportunist.

I've said it before, I'm somewhat dubious about it being the end of the world if he's elected, given his history prior to being an unabashed media attention-whore. He was originally a pro-business liberal. But with that said, why take the fucking chance? He has no issue with debasing himself in order to win.