El Zen Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 He describes himself as a democratic socialist/social democrat. It isn't insanity to think that it might work, because it actually works (especially the kind uncorrupted by post 1980s neo-liberal dogma). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) The rest of the candidates are a combination of science deniers, racists, war mongers and special interest PAC whores. Sanders is none of those.Have another like, sir! (And Hillary is at least two of those things). Edited August 11, 2015 by Michelsen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 He has the temerity to call for a higher corporate tax rate and an increase in minimum wage...crazy old man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 The rest of the candidates are a combination of science deniers, racists, war mongers and special interest PAC whores. Sanders is none of those.Have another like, sir! (And Hillary is at least two of those things). Yes she is, and im including the other Dems as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted August 11, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) I think the next president will most likely be Hillary Clinton. Sanders can't win the general. It's not the conventional wisdom, but the biggest danger to Clinton's chances is Trump, who would be calamitous for the world. Things remind me of Britain in 2005. No one's ready to let the conservatives back in, but no one's very excited about Labour anymore either. Edited August 11, 2015 by Plastic Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) Sanders can't win the general. You hear this a lot, and it's probably true and everything, but is the average US voter so f***ing thick he couldn't beat, say, Donald Trump? Edited August 11, 2015 by Michelsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) Sanders can't win the general.You hear this a lot, and it's probably true and everything, but is the average US voter so f***ing thick he couldn't beat, say, Donald Trump? Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public That said, Trump wont last beyond October. Its all an ego trip for him, and as soon as he starts to take some real hits, he will dump the GOP and run as an independent, thus assurring a Clinton win. Edited August 11, 2015 by maqroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Sanders can't win the general.You hear this a lot, and it's probably true and everything, but is the average US voter so f***ing thick he couldn't beat, say, Donald Trump?Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public That said, Trump wont last beyond October. Its all an ego trip for him, and as soon as he starts to take some real hits, he will dump the GOP and run as an independent, thus assurring a Clinton win. You know, I try not to fall for the "stupid American" stereotyping, I really do. I honestly do think most of you are alright. But something is seriously wrong with something and something went seriously wrong somewhere. You look at the GOP debate and know that one of those absolute clowns is going to be the candidate and you know that at least 40 per cent will vote for that candidate in the GE. How did shit get so freaking backwards for those 40 per cent? Then you look at the Blue team and it's only marginally better (Bernie aside). How? Why? Come, America, join us over in the sane corner - the world could be such a lovely place if you would. And I agree with you re. Trump. He really doesn't give a damn about the GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 Contributing factors to American stupidity-Isolation from the world and television. Also a strong anti intellectual streak born from a distrust and antipathy toward New Englanders and the northeast in general which has traditionally run the country and has had closer cultural links to Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Something which I find mysterious about American politics is how the Democrats became the party for black folk. It was the Republicans who were anti-slavery and it was the Democrats who were pro-slavery and white supremacists. Even as late as 1912 the Democrat president was implementing segregation in the Civil Service. So how did the change happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yup Lincoln (A republican) is obviously famous for his anti slavery belief's. I know that because it surprised me, as you say, if you'd had to have picked who Lincoln stood for, you'd have probably guessed Democrat. I think it's when "Corporate" America came to the fore when people switched their beliefs. Maybe even in the 60s with Nixon, Ali, Hendrix etc? All icons for the black community of America. That's total guess work though, I don't know, but I look forward to Maq correcting my ignorance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I suspect that americans are no more or less dumb, selfish and insular than anyone else. We have a choice of a world 'lead' or given basic direction by the USA, or China, or Russia, or other random grouping. You can't tell me that an american voter has less desire to do good in the world than a Chinese guy that doesn't understand how stock markets work or a Russian guy that thinks 'being strong' in the worlds campest stripey blue and white vest whilst riding a bear is the mark of a real man. They are all equally naive, scared, ignorant, boastful, etc etc etc.. As would be the general mass population of any other country that gets a go at being top of the pack. Some might even suggest that the British Empire wasn't entirely all about cream teas and an understanding of how flushing toilets work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted August 12, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 12, 2015 It was a long time ago, but on my one trip to the USA I was shocked at the lack of awareness of the outside world. Even the 'quality' press like The Washington Post was 99.9% American news, virtually nothing from Britain, Europe or elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yep, and I know it's a cliche, but my experience working in hotels in a former life suggests the same. Any number of conversations where I would try to explain firstly that there was a difference between Britain and England, and secondly what that difference might be. So it was even people that travelled and had some disposable income that were arriving in a place they'd elected to visit, but even then not understanding where they were. If I had 50p for every time I had to explain that the land on the horizon was not France but England and no you really really are not in England at present, I'd have well over £4.50 Had what turned into quite an agitated argument with one coach party of americans that were insisting that whilst, yes, they understood Ireland was a separate country, it was still part of England. Eventually I had to back down and admit I may have been mistaken. You could indeed be an Irish citizen, call yourself Irish and live in Ireland, England. I just don't think the buses of Chinese people that now get shipped in to take photos or Cardiff Castle have any more informed an idea where they are either. But then, if I paid my £7,000 for a tour around South America, could I honestly put my hand on my heart and say I understood every nuance of whether I was in Argentina, or Patagonia or half way up Makka Pakka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yep, and I know it's a cliche, but my experience working in hotels in a former life suggests the same. Any number of conversations where I would try to explain firstly that there was a difference between Britain and England, and secondly what that difference might be. So it was even people that travelled and had some disposable income that were arriving in a place they'd elected to visit, but even then not understanding where they were. If I had 50p for every time I had to explain that the land on the horizon was not France but England and no you really really are not in England at present, I'd have well over £4.50 Had what turned into quite an agitated argument with one coach party of americans that were insisting that whilst, yes, they understood Ireland was a separate country, it was still part of England. Eventually I had to back down and admit I may have been mistaken. You could indeed be an Irish citizen, call yourself Irish and live in Ireland, England. I just don't think the buses of Chinese people that now get shipped in to take photos or Cardiff Castle have any more informed an idea where they are either. But then, if I paid my £7,000 for a tour around South America, could I honestly put my hand on my heart and say I understood every nuance of whether I was in Argentina, or Patagonia or half way up Makka Pakka. But surely, being Welsh you could always ask the way if you were in Patagonia? Being halfway up Makka Pakka sounds like a euphemism for something very unpleasant and almost certainly illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Can you imagine the disappointment of anybody, when you tell them that they're not in England - but in Wales? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I may have shifted off American politics slightly. That Obama chap, super cool icon, but appears to have been mostly ineffective by any practical measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 He seems to have become more effective recently but seems utterly defeated any time he has to talk about tackling either gun control or racism. I won't be surprised if we see a final attempt to tackle either one by the end of his term given that he has very little to lose. From what I hear though he's done alright but the problem isn't so much the White House but Congress & the bullshit lobbying that comes with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I may have shifted off American politics slightly. That Obama chap, super cool icon, but appears to have been mostly ineffective by any practical measure. Very disappointing presidency. Obama Care was supposed to be affordable but it is not and if he really wanted to heal the rift between black and white he should have ended the war on drugs which criminalises whole communities and has led to America having more people in jail than the old Soviet Union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 From what I hear though he's done alright but the problem isn't so much the White House but Congress & the bullshit lobbying that comes with that. Hamstrung by the Republican majority. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts