US Election 2016
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
GW is still very popular among Southern Republicans, but I'm not sure even the ghost of Reagan appearing on Fox News and endorsing Jeb could save him now.
He might've been a chance back in 2000, but the tearaway black sheep of the family ran and won and the rest is history.  |
|
|
|
 |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ WPT, the question is not whether the Communist party wanted a free cake for every one year-old's birthday. The question is how they wanted to go about achieving it, and the costs and consequences of that kind of model whenever it has been enacted. If you subordinate the individual to the force of the state across most of life, you create tyranny because the state itself is ultimately run by a few capricious and flawed individuals. It doesn't matter what they promise you, or even if they are temporarily benevolent. History shows that it ends in tears, and that this is the mechanism.
knowing the vile crimes of the cultural revolution, knowing the Chinese communist support for North Korea and The Khmer Rouge through the 1950s, it is no exoneration to just "have a different take". You would not afford that excuse to the Nazis, and you should not do so to the (admittedly slightly les evil) Maoists because you like some of their (pretty standard ACTU) economic policies. The death of millions and the imprionment and persecution of intellectuals and free thinkers is a high (and unnecessary) price to pay for a toilet break in a car factory.
Finally, you say you are not defending Langer but the sole reason for this exchange is that I described Langer as "appalling". .... and you rolled right out to do just that, with your list of ALP policies.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^Anyway, boring Cold War conversation, surely. What's on the table now? Colonel Sanders has a political record you can see; so does Clinton. So does Trump. So do Cruz and Bush.
Colonel Sanders is a stock progressive in most respects, from what I can see. Clinton is a stock institutional Democrat in most respects, from what I can see. On that basis alone, you'd assume Clinton will tighten as the process tightens, despite the futile yawn of such a narrow range of possibility.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yep, Sanders political record for 30 years is Co-sponsering 3 bills that have passed. Two of those were renaming post offices. What a juggernaut of politics.
Sanders is such a nobody, was running as nothing more than a cardboard cutout for Hillary to beat and now he's within sight of winning a nomination.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261736/bernie-sanders-only-passed-3-bills-2-renamed-post-daniel-greenfield
Of course, those who oppose the Clintons tend to meet sticky ends, so hopefully Bernie's secret service people are up to the task. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | ^Anyway, boring Cold War conversation, surely. What's on the table now? Colonel Sanders has a political record you can see; so does Clinton. So does Trump. So do Cruz and Bush.
Colonel Sanders is a stock progressive in most respects, from what I can see. Clinton is a stock institutional Democrat in most respects, from what I can see. On that basis alone, you'd assume Clinton will tighten as the process tightens, despite the futile yawn of such a narrow range of possibility. |
To progressives, with their finger in the future, history is often "boring". My hypothesis is that they do not like what it says about their past. 
Like you, I find Sanders interesting, and certainly more palatable than the other ghastlies in this race. Though it is better than most of the alternatives, there is much that is unattractive about American capitalism, and it could do with a foot up the backside. As a President, he'll be constrained by the checks and the balances, and I am interested to learn more about him.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Sun Feb 14, 2016 2:51 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Yep, Sanders political record for 30 years is Co-sponsering 3 bills that have passed. Two of those were renaming post offices. What a juggernaut of politics.
Sanders is such a nobody, was running as nothing more than a cardboard cutout for Hillary to beat and now he's within sight of winning a nomination.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261736/bernie-sanders-only-passed-3-bills-2-renamed-post-daniel-greenfield
Of course, those who oppose the Clintons tend to meet sticky ends, so hopefully Bernie's secret service people are up to the task. |
The full list of bills that he has sponsored or co-sponsored:
https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?q=%7B%22sponsorship%22%3A%22sponsored%22%7D
Obviously as one of the few independents in congress, it would have been very difficult for his own bills to get cross-party support, just as it is for independents like Andrew Wilkie or Cathy McGowan in our own parliament. It's possible as president he might have a bit more leverage. 
A commenter under that article also points out that Sanders effected more amendments to bills than anyone else in the house of reps. So, he was in fact an active and adept negotiator.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Someone should ask him to explain what communism is in 50 words and/or discuss the difference is between communism, socialism and European social democracy. Not that I think he wouldn't be able to, of course...
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
But that's a good and reasonable critique, unlike the communism nonsense. I agree with you, FWIW; it's obviously easy to hide away in a trivial little liberal oasis like Vermont and deliver rousing speeches. You're preaching to the converted on that. (Although, to be consistent you also need to dismiss other candidates not so much for doing very little, but for proudly engaging in acts of cringeworthy lunacy, as such acts also don't qualify as "achievements").
Many of Bernie's ideas are still sensible, though; far more sensible in a world context than anyone else's. But, in the US context, his role is to force Hillary to be more progressive and therefore to connect with the post-Cold War generations by being less blindly imperialistic and less banker-friendly. And that's a great thing for US politics, if he can achieve it even partly.
Love or hate them, that sort of serious Kucinich/Nader/Ron Paul effort should never be confused with the purely time-wasting, chest-beating narcissism of a Trump, George Galloway or Clive Palmer. (Unless said serious type ruins their mainstream counterpart's chances, which does happen on occasions (I vaguely recall Nader being criticised for it a couple of elections ago??)).
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Ross Perot did it twice, handing victory to Bill Clinton over HW Bush first then Bob Dole and Nader is known as the 'Spoiler' who cost Gore against Bush the younger. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The fact that Nader and Perot could cost mainstream candidates the presidency is a real indictment of the first past the post voting system, I feel. One should be able to vote for a minor party candidate without worrying about costing the nearest mainstream candidate a vote, as is the case here.
But given the system they have, Sanders is doing the right thing by seeking the Democratic nomination rather than running a separate ticket like Nader. If he lost the nomination and continued to run as an independent, then American progressives would have a problem on their hands.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Big risk/Big reward play going on there. Trump can cut a swathe into moderates for the general election IF he already thinks he's got the nomination wrapped up.
I think he also just hates the Bushes
He announced his campaign the day after Jeb for example.
One of his best lines from the debate came after Jeb said something about his mum being great and Donald quipped "Maybe she should be running then". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
