Youseff wrote:

Jim Webb came out of the gate giving the solid performance he needed last night. His opening statement played up his virility by referencing all five of his children by name, by far the largest brood of any of his opponents (plus, like most men with high T levels, most of his kids are daughters, which won’t hurt him with the woman vote). Then Webb put a healthy spin on the major issue of racism by talking up “reverse racism” against whites, a major problem a lot of folks living in places like Bushwick and Harlem can relate to.

While the other candidates got into a slapfight over who hated guns the most, Webb swam upstream like a muscular salmon, and stood up for firearm rights. He also repeatedly brought up his combat experience in Vietnam, a favorite war of Millennial voters. Indeed, Webb projected so much raw masculinity that the other candidates struggled to keep up with the decorated war hero.

http://www.cafe.com/debate-report-card- ... rushes-it/

Is this serious or some kind of parody?

Titlehungry wrote:O'Malley is the perfect VP... with a real shot to be President in 2024

Not likely on the ticket, because Hillary wins MD without him

Gimpy wrote:

Youseff wrote:

Jim Webb came out of the gate giving the solid performance he needed last night. His opening statement played up his virility by referencing all five of his children by name, by far the largest brood of any of his opponents (plus, like most men with high T levels, most of his kids are daughters, which won’t hurt him with the woman vote). Then Webb put a healthy spin on the major issue of racism by talking up “reverse racism” against whites, a major problem a lot of folks living in places like Bushwick and Harlem can relate to.

While the other candidates got into a slapfight over who hated guns the most, Webb swam upstream like a muscular salmon, and stood up for firearm rights. He also repeatedly brought up his combat experience in Vietnam, a favorite war of Millennial voters. Indeed, Webb projected so much raw masculinity that the other candidates struggled to keep up with the decorated war hero.

http://www.cafe.com/debate-report-card- ... rushes-it/

Is this serious or some kind of parody?

parody from twitter weirdos @swarthyvillian & @virgiltexas

slugsrbad wrote:I'm afraid of being a hot taeker, but I feel like people who rooting for Bernie Sanders are a bit too sensitive.

how so? the reaction i'm seeing from most bernie fans is mostly "the media saying that hillary was the clear-cut winner is ridiculous" which data would suggest is true.

He can do no wrong with a lot of the people on Facebook, and people get defensive when you mention some problems, like gun control

there are hillary voters who are the same way.

I guess, I just notice it more with Bernie.

Youseff wrote:

What is possible today? And what is impossible? It’s a very paradoxical situation. On the one hand, the level of sexuality, technology, almost everything is becoming possible…If things go on like this, in a couple of decades it will be possible for us to replace our organs to almost live forever, in sexual life with drugs, new experiences, 10 orgasms at the same time, I don’t want to go into it. So everything is possible there. So it’s possible maybe to live forever, whatever. But if you want to raise taxes for [the] one percent to finance schooling, no it’s not possible, it will cause a financial crisis and so on and so on. So you know, like, what if we just rearrange what is possible, what is impossible. Maybe we will not live forever and just reproduce ourselves through cloning, but maybe just we can do a little bit more for social [something].

But you know what I see—a brief comment, just very short and then you can stop me—? The problem of this last economic crisis, OK financial crisis, 2008: What the right wingers don’t admit is that, I’m sorry, but this was not some social Democrat spending too much money, this was a crisis of the lack of regulation…Once I wrote an ironic article…to the question “Who Is John Galt?” This is John Galt crisis! Alan Greenspan was an objectivist. So you see, we should stop this myth. For me the big result, what people should learn from 2008 financial crackdown is that neoliberalism, first, is a myth. First if you look all around the world, the role of the state is not diminishing, if anything it’s diminishing where it should be more.

-Žižek

Is that Zizek? he's fun!

The Dude wrote:He can do no wrong with a lot of the people on Facebook, and people get defensive when you mention some problems, like gun control

Right. Or they act like there is a conspiracy holding the Bern back (facebook only, not you fine folk'll).

I think Hillary expected to have no competition. She reluctantly backed down to Obama and gave him her support. Got the Sec gig, and now has been all-in for 2016. No one thought Bernie would be taken seriously. And the mainstream is struggling. Then, the bits and pieces that have been distracting her campaign. She's not a breath of fresh air. She's business as-usual and a return to a power family and DNC vision of what Democratic party is about.

Bernie is not a saint. I don't agree with a lot of stuff. He's no Nader. But NO ONE has come on the scene in a generation or two, that is talking about some of the stuff he is, and its resonating with a lot of folks. People that are even remotely educated about the world, see what Clinton and Obama stood for. A few minor liberal bits - but mostly would have been seen as moderate republicans in a generation or two ago. Repeal of Glass Steagle was Clinton, as was NAFTA and Obama is desperate for TPP. These are not liberal policies.

As well, plenty of milirarim and military bloat and pandering to Wall St. Hilary is trying t find some differentiation but i'ts not easy. She wants to be the 'first woman prez" as Obama wanted to be the first African American prez. She's not a dope. She has a sense of humor and comports herself well enough. But she's also a divisive persona for the extreme right and even the generic conservatives. I'm not sure she can win, and is she does, it will be close. And if she does we'll get more of the same. She'll find her Obamacare issue and she'll do as much for women as Obama has done for African Americans. The Rep House and Judiciary will jam her up at every turn.

Solid liberal democrats I know, bright people - claim Obama has done so much, he's been a realist and fighting obstructionism at every turn. but they won't really delve in to the lost opportuntiies. That he continued to allow the Citibank and U Chicago disciples to do Wall St's bidding. It's about the 1% and .01% and .001% and there hasn't been a president in a long time who is willing to stand up to that in any meaningful way.

I never expected that while the world has become more liberal socially - that my govt would be more repressive and that we'd have more of an oligarchy than when I was a lad.

My concerns about Bernie, are that he's not smooth on delivery. He comes off very cantankerous and loud and unfriendly and cranky. People liked Reagan because he represented some 50's mythology. He was an idiot, puppet - but he's touted as some great communicator. Laughable. Clinton too is credited with things I don't really agree with, but then I'm not the mainstream norm or the mass herds across the heartland. I

Right now, machines are turning as Hilary is hell bent on getting the nomination and a LOT of forces are behind her, big powerful interests. Bernie has caught on with some people as deep down people ARE hungry for substantive change - but i'm not encouraged he can pull it off. Something is gping to happen. Something is going to get him tangled up. Or - he's gonna just alienate the slick parted hair conservatives too much.

He'll need the youth vote and millenials and the tech kids and all the mobilzation Obama got. Is his campaign poised to mobilize that? Tell them some messages they can get behind??

I'm a radical by most people's standards. I want radical change. But I'll take Sanders in a heart-beat and some reigning the insanity back in a tad. And it's time for the minority extreme reactionary republicans evangelists, with their list of social issues and Christian nation agenda stuff to be snuffed out of being taken seriously. They do not represent any majority on any issue of import. This competitioin to see who can be the most anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-non-Christian, anti-govt - no taxes, no services, no social safety net - govt does nothing but get some crazy laws and court decisions to put is in the dark ages.Nuts.

THings will happen over the next year - I'm really curious to see it play out, but I think in the end, it's Hilary and no matter what the polls say, Trump is not viable. He cannot win. That would just be nuts and might drive me to leave the country for an extended period.

Monkeyboy wrote:I hate to say it, but I do think the dems need to have a Latino on their ticket, especially if Rubio is on the GOP ticket.

Sofia Vergara

Gimpy wrote:

CNN apparently deleted this poll this morning.

I'm surprised Ron Paul didn't get at least 20% write-in ballots.

McConnell's fucked on the debt limit thing. This:

McConnell floats entitlement changes in high-stakes fiscal talks

Is a non-starter on the politics, even if it were not on the policy specifics (which it are).

He's got little choice but to roll over and do something like push debt limit approval out to 2017. If he tries to get tough, he'll be laughed at; if he doesn't, the firebreathing Republoons will incinerate him. Tough times ahead for Turtleman.

Protracted debate will expose the R government finance brain trust as a passel of imbeciles. Of course being exposed as a government finance imbecile hasn't hurt Candidate Carson, so

TomatoPie wrote:

Titlehungry wrote:O'Malley is the perfect VP... with a real shot to be President in 2024

squ
Not likely on the ticket, because Hillary wins MD without him

Exactly. Think about how important Biden was to Obama's narrow victory in Delaware, and how critical those EVs were.

SK790 wrote:

MoBettle wrote:

pacino wrote:

MoBettle wrote:

pacino wrote:Sanders wins this answer, by a mile. Not a 3rd term. Clinton's answer was #$!&@.

Well Webb was right. Bernie's answer was fantasy land.

that Congress wouldn't approve the spending? Sure. But he thinks they'd work with him? That's stupid.

Right but Webb isn't a serious candidate. Bernie can say all of this stuff but until he actually explains how he's going to get any of it through congress it's kind of a waste of breath. He's saying stuff some people want to hear, which makes the other candidates look bad when they take more reasonable positions that actually have a chance of getting through congress. Which is kind of ironic coming from a guy who is supposed to be such a straight shooter.

Pretty much everything brought up on stage tonight won't get through Congress regardless of who the President is. I mean, Obama is more moderate than Hillary and he can't get anything done so I don't really see what your point is?

I also don't see how it's ironic, but he's not delusional. He's said in pretty much every major address he's had that him being President won't change anything and the change needs to come at local and state levels before actually seeing change.

There's a clear difference in pragmatism between him and the other candidates. My comment here was in response to him literally calling for a political revolution.

He's not literally calling for a political revolution.

How is Hillary's gun legislation pragmatic? How's about Martin O' Malley's? How about Chafee's environmental policies? The idea that the President of the country has to be pragmatic is ridiculous given the current state of Congress.

All Bernie wants is for lots and lots of Democrats to come out and vote so they can take back the Senate, which is very likely based on how many Republicans are defending their seats in 2016.

The House is a problem due to Republicans rigging the system but Democrats need to start chipping away there as well.

Exactly. It's obvious, at least for now, that Bernie is going to take it easy on Hillary and really try to push the progressive vote for the senate and house. Winning the house is a pipe dream until after 2020 unless Lessig/Warren sweeps the nation!!!!

His message of "revolution" isn't a literal revolution. It's comprehensive campaign finance reform that is desperately needed in this country. It's making sure that our representatives in office are actually representing the people and not lobbyists. It's (probably) fixing the way we allocate our representatives to the lower and higher houses of Congress(you know, something a little more modern than something developed in the 17th century, maybe). these are not "revolutionary" ideas. these are things that are common sense and done in most 1st world countries. kinda sad what a state we're in where things like this and making sure gun owners undergo a background checks are "revolutionary" ideas.

He's not calling for a literal revolution, he's telling lazy people to fucking vote so we stop ending up with terrible Senators and US Reps.

slugsrbad wrote:

The Dude wrote:He can do no wrong with a lot of the people on Facebook, and people get defensive when you mention some problems, like gun control

Right. Or they act like there is a conspiracy holding the Bern back (facebook only, not you fine folk'll).

i do think he's been unfavorably treated in the media a bit, but some of the conspiracy theories are ridiculous. i posted a dozen pages or so that i know at least 5 people who think Trump is only in the campaign as a false flag to take headlines away from Bernie.

the bernie loyalists are just a bit more crazy than the clinton ones, but there are plenty of clintonistas who conveniently ignore some of the shitty things she's done. they're both blindly loyal, but in a different way.

met a guy today who said he's fiscally conservative. then he told me he strongly consider voting for bernie sanders if he wins the democratic nomination if Paul or Bush doesn't win the nomination. um, wat?

i know some of these i post sound ridiculous, but the average person knows surprisingly little about politics beyond if they like the gays and abortions or not.

i pretty much just stared and blinked at the guy for about 20 seconds then said "cool" without correcting his bad option for a fiscally conservative candidate.