Quote :

"If you were going to make an ordered list of people who Nancy Reagan’s funeral went worst for, number one on that list would probably have to be Nancy Regan. Number two, I think, would be Hillary Clinton, pictured here in a familial embrace with the man who tangentially torpedoed her first presidential campaign and is helping to make her second one much harder than it should be."

3/14/2016 12:58:55 PM

god forbid two of the handful of people alive who know what it's like to live in the White House/deal with all of the pressure that comes with the job share a warm embrace

[Edited on March 14, 2016 at 1:20 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2016 1:10:35 PM

it is silly, yes, but in the reality of how things work that was a bad photo

3/14/2016 1:18:52 PM

which is a sad fucking reality

3/14/2016 1:19:46 PM

Quote :

"i want someone in the white house who can compromise and work across the aisle. hillary is that person, bernie is not."

I can't imagine Republicans will be any more willing to compromise with Clinton than they were with Obama.

3/14/2016 1:20:39 PM

yeaaaah, clinton is not that person, sanders has a better chance than clinton

3/14/2016 1:22:59 PM

to be fair, sanders has a better chance of compromising because Hillary is already a compromise.

3/14/2016 1:31:58 PM

wat? Republicans may hate Hillary, but do you really think they'd be willing to compromise with a freaking socialist? Say what you want about Hillary, but she's definitely to the right of Sanders. I'd even argue that some of her stances are to the right of Obama.

3/14/2016 7:17:23 PM

Republicans may disagree with Sanders, but many have said that they respect him. That is how you work across the aisle, and that's part of the reason why he has a history of bi-partisanship. Plus he wasn't even a Democrat until this election.

3/14/2016 7:48:21 PM

If you say so. I'm not really sure how any the ideas he's using to get elected (free college for everyone, universal healthcare, redistribution of wealth, etc) are things you can get conservatives to change their stance on.

3/14/2016 7:50:26 PM

well it's anecdotal but my mom was a palin super fan and then voted for romney. now she's for single payer and a living wage. and ive seen tons of republicans coming out in support of these things. the more traction these ideas get, the more congress will pay attention.

it would help if the "revolution" carried through with a supermajority though

[Edited on March 14, 2016 at 7:58 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2016 7:56:53 PM

at this point, I'm so utterly terrified of a Trump/Cruz presidency, I honestly couldn't care less who wins the democratic nomination. I'm hoping most voters see it the same way.

3/14/2016 8:08:40 PM

Quote :

"wat? Republicans may hate Hillary, but do you really think they'd be willing to compromise with a freaking socialist? Say what you want about Hillary, but she's definitely to the right of Sanders. I'd even argue that some of her stances are to the right of Obama."

Thats part of my point. Using the geography analogy. If republicans are in north carolina, bernie is in California, and Hillary is in oklahoma. Its much more of a compromise for republicans to meet bernie in oklahoma than hillary saying "i'm in oklahoma and not moving"

3/14/2016 8:40:29 PM

The problem with Sanders is that his ideas require a lot of immediate and drastic changes. In order for his policies to work, he'd have to convince Republicans to completely change their political lenses. Being likable counts for something, but I just don't see how he can convince Republicans to abandon their ideologies. Note: It's never been about disliking Sanders' ideas for me- it's just that I have a hard time seeing them come to fruition given our two party, do-nothing system:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/14/can-bernie-sanders-turn-the-united-states-into-denmark-an-investigation/?tid=sm_fb

[Edited on March 14, 2016 at 9:08 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2016 9:08:09 PM

Quote :

"Say what you want about Hillary, but she's definitely to the right of Sanders. "

Her actual policy ideas won't matter to Republicans though. She's Benghazi, she's top secret emails, she's the Obama administration pt 2. They can't trash her for years and then turn around and work with her.

3/14/2016 10:01:05 PM

^ this exactly. It's the difference, in Republican minds, of working with satan (Hillary) or Santa Claus (Bernie).

3/14/2016 10:11:09 PM

Big day for Hillary tomorrow. If she avoids an implosion in the Midwest, and the pubs anoint Trump as expected, then she can coast to the White House. Her free time will be spent thinking about her SCOTUS pick.

Re: compromising with Republicans. I'm not sure how many will be left come January.

3/14/2016 10:24:12 PM

it continues to be hilarious to see all you butthurt posters from the bernie thread over here

3/14/2016 10:44:04 PM

Obama offered up social security to compromise the budget and that still wasn't good enough for the right, Hillary is just more Obama or Bill and they will act exactly the same. Sanders has a history of bipartisanship in congress and does not create the same reaction that Hillary does from the right, they may not compromise on his bigger plans but they will not be so obstructionist in everyday governing like they have been for the past 8 years

3/15/2016 8:23:38 AM

Clearly, as evidenced by the passage of multiple bills that Bernie has floated, correct?

Bernie is a clown.

3/15/2016 8:44:42 AM

its going to be interesting to see if hillary's message can finally spread out of the south. the last two southern states are today. if not, she doesn't have anything left.

3/15/2016 8:46:08 AM

Quote :

"Johnny Swank All American 1885 Posts user info edit post Clearly, as evidenced by the passage of multiple bills that Bernie has floated, correct? Bernie is a clown. 3/15/2016 8:44:42 AM"

oof, let's find out how your very liberal customer base likes that comment

3/15/2016 9:05:52 AM

clown was harsh, but given his time in office, he's not exactly been effective, IMO.

Frankly, this entire election season has been disappointing. This is the best we can do?

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 9:11 AM. Reason : .]

3/15/2016 9:09:04 AM

one thing this election has shown me (and the two before it, really) is that non-traditional candidates are making bigger and bigger gains in the mind of public opinion.

Ron Paul with his every passionate, loyal following in 2008 and 2012. Trump and Bernie with their die hard supporters and strong delegate counts.

If the next 4 (or 8) years don't go in a direction that leads the general public to feel their voice is heard, then we could very easily see a nonconventional candidate win then. It could be good ... but slightly prophetic mockumentaries make me feel it could swing the other way.

3/15/2016 10:27:45 AM

It should be pretty clear that the current corporate-sponsored oligarchy is not sustainable, and we are going to need to confront that at some point

3/15/2016 12:00:21 PM

That's got to start at the local level though. I used to vote for 3rd parties in the general, but it's frankly pointless. A the local elections that nobody bothers to show up for have far more impact on a daily basis to people.

3/15/2016 12:32:16 PM

Sanders is probably the best chance we will have in our lifetime, so why are you laughing at him instead of campaigning and supporting him?

Sanders winning would be a major political change for the democratic party, but instead of supporting him you are shilling for Clinton and then saying that voting 3rd party is pointless. How can you not see that you are what's wrong, you are the problem. It makes absolutely no sense to recognize that we need change, and then support Clinton in a primary. None, zero.

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 12:41 PM. Reason : .]

3/15/2016 12:40:19 PM

Quote :

"so why are you laughing at him instead of campaigning and supporting him? "

Because he's a conservative.

3/15/2016 12:50:50 PM

^^^^^
trump is pretty much Waldo in human form

3/15/2016 1:00:06 PM

Why is Sanders the best chance? What is to stop someone else from popping up in the next few election cycles?

3/15/2016 1:59:20 PM

Quote :

"Ron Paul with his every passionate, loyal following in 2008 and 2012. Trump and Bernie with their die hard supporters and strong delegate counts. If the next 4 (or 8) years don't go in a direction that leads the general public to feel their voice is heard, then we could very easily see a nonconventional candidate win then. It could be good ... but slightly prophetic mockumentaries make me feel it could swing the other way. "

To be fair, Trump is very unconventional, just not the kind most people expected.

Sanders policies could be a nightmare; most mainstream economists agree. The U.S. doesn't have the cash to do most of what he's talking about. Nordic countries built their welfare state on top of economies that came from decades of robust, market-driven growth. The United States economy is still a house of cards built on debt - we never even addressed the problems of 2008, we're just in sort of a holding pattern.

Sanders may have appealing rhetoric but his solutions are absolute madness.

3/15/2016 2:11:52 PM

^They're not absolute madness per se, but the way he's suggesting we can implement them sort of is.

3/15/2016 2:32:04 PM

Quote :

"Sanders policies could be a nightmare; most mainstream economists agree."

only shitty supply-side economists who have been wrong about everything for the past 30 years

3/15/2016 3:00:06 PM

Nope, I'm talking about garden variety, mainstream economists.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/02/26/468298576/economists-on-candidates-proposals-mostly-bad

Quote :

"Make tuition free at public colleges and universities."

Rated "bad".

Quote :

"Raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour."

Rated "bad".

In fact, Hillary's economic proposals, while bad and wrong, are at least in the realm of feasibility compared to Sanders.

When I hear Sanders speak, I hear someone that has clearly failed to understand the root causes of some of the most serious problems in the economy right now. He never talks about root causes. He doesn't talk about deeper understanding, he talks about action. In this way, he's very similar to Trump.

3/15/2016 3:22:38 PM

they are spread politically, not by economic school of thought


you have repeatedly espoused your support for supply-side economics, so your opinion is shit on the subject

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 3:32 PM. Reason : you're as wrong as them, and also uncredentialed ]

3/15/2016 3:31:13 PM

plenty support his proposals, plenty don't. plenty on both sides have a political agenda

choose whatever you want to believe, but I think the richest country in the world can do better.

3/15/2016 3:31:40 PM

Quote :

"they are spread politically, not by economic school of thought"

So you're saying all of those economists are "supply-side economists", and none are Keynesians?

Quote :

"http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/"

Is Krugman a supply-sider now?

3/15/2016 3:34:27 PM

Krugman is a clinton shill

3/15/2016 3:37:13 PM

Krugman is a Hillary fanatic

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 3:37 PM. Reason : ^ stop beating me]

3/15/2016 3:37:20 PM

Quote :

"Nope, I'm talking about garden variety, mainstream economists. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/02/26/468298576/economists-on-candidates-proposals-mostly-bad"

Ha I love how Sanders had 5 initiatives listed there and you only cherry picked the 2 "bad" ones, which a means test would address the tuition objections and the minimum wage one was more "debatable" going by the listed comments.

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 3:39 PM. Reason : Totally not biased though, i'm sure]

3/15/2016 3:38:06 PM

"Only supply-siders would oppose Sanders"

Link most prominent economist on the left opposing Sanders

"He must be a shill"

You can't make this shit up.

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 3:51 PM. Reason : ]

3/15/2016 3:48:46 PM

Quote :

"On domestic issues, Krugman said that the former secretary of state actually sounds now “substantially to the left of the old Hillary Clinton.” But “if she becomes president and then turns around and runs back to the right, that’s going to be a problem.” “I guess part of one’s hope, if she becomes president, she will in fact feel some need to avoid alienating the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, which is for all practical purposes led by Elizabeth Warren right now,” Krugman added. He said his ideal would be a Clinton presidency with Warren “looking over her shoulder so she doesn’t stray too far from the good stuff.”"

3/15/2016 3:57:30 PM

Does anyone even know what the word shill means anymore? Hint: it's not synonymous with "supporter".

3/15/2016 3:59:42 PM

Krugman's editorials have been criticized by Keynesian's for being partisan and often intellectually dishonest since way before this primary, dude is an establishment hitman

If you want an example of how left doesn't automatically equal keynesian, just look at how the the party establishment reacted to this paper by Friedman:
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/What-would-Sanders-do-013016.pdf

3/15/2016 4:02:41 PM

Here's Krugman advocating for single payer "Medicare for All" in 2008.

http://pnhp.org/blog/2008/10/13/nobel-laureate-paul-krugman-on-single-payer/

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 4:11 PM. Reason : wrong link]

3/15/2016 4:05:55 PM

I'd love to hear what these "root causes" of the problems are. Thats usually just some sort of dog whistle.

Quote :

"he U.S. doesn't have the cash to do most of what he's talking about."

Thats just a damn lie. We spend much more in the long run by NOT doing the stuff he's talking about.

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 7:07 PM. Reason : k]

3/15/2016 7:07:32 PM

Quote :

""Only supply-siders would oppose Sanders" Link most prominent economist on the left opposing Sanders "He must be a shill" You can't make this shit up."

bernie supporters literally have an excuse for everything.

Quote :

"Thats just a damn lie. We spend much more in the long run by NOT doing the stuff he's talking about."

but baby, if I didn't go to the BOGO shoe sale, it would be like giving money away.

[Edited on March 15, 2016 at 10:59 PM. Reason : .]

3/15/2016 10:58:40 PM

we could spend an extra 10 billion a year feeding children

OR

we could save that 10 billion a year and spend 50 billion extra on subsequent healthcare, special ed, and criminal justice issues that result from developmental malnutrition.


we could spend 40 billion per year on college tuition

OR

we could spend 3000 dollars per second on student loan interest.

3/15/2016 11:08:49 PM

someone paying $100K for a masters from the university of phoenix doesn't deserve a bailout any more than the shopaholic who rings up $100K of credit card debit

3/17/2016 11:22:28 AM

False dichotomy

3/17/2016 11:24:30 AM