Democratic Election Thread

[Lil' Red]

 

 

Oh....this is going to get interesting. Can you imagine if this were said at a Republican rally?

 

 

 

 

Rapper Killer Mike at Bernie Sanders rally: “a uterus doesn’t qualify you to be president”

 

 

 

I don't see it as sexist. Just really crass. Testicles don't qualify a person to be president either. *shrug* Also, it's kinda hard to see what he's getting at. That people shouldn't vote for Hillary just because she's female? I guess?

 

Yes, if you look at his full statement that appears to be the point he was trying to get across. I believe he said it to refute the comments made by Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright.

[Lil' Red]

 

 

And....if it were made by a middle aged white guy, it DEFINITELY would be described as sexist by more people than it is now.

 

The original quote was actually made by Jane Elliot.

 

I know.

 

When a woman says that, and a man repeats it, is it the same as when a black guy uses the "N" word and then a white guy repeats it?

 

Sometimes but it really depends on the context. Plenty of quotes I've repeated contained words that I would normally not use but I still use them since they convey my point and I want to show that the person I'm quoting supports my argument. I believe he was trying to emphasize that Jane Elliot supports the view that gender should not play a role in deciding who to vote for which is difficult to do without using her exact words.

[BigRedBuster]

I would bet the DNC is having major phone conversations right now with both campaigns saying..."SHUT THE F*** UP about this". "Sweep it under the rug and don't say anything."

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

We are now to the point where for the first time, we have more independents than any one party. Meaning, if they were all together, they are the biggest party in the country right now.

 

I believe that will keep growing. This is what is needed to get rid of the stranglehold.

 

Not sure where it goes from here though since the two parties are the only ones that the media (that is bought and paid for by those parties) pays any attention to. We are to the point where only 23% of the country identifies as a Republican and 32% identify as a Democrat. That means that barely over half of the country identifies with a party.

 

Independents have now been the largest group and have grown over the last 5 years from 35% to 39%.

 

Since 2010, the graph appears to show these independents have come from both parties almost equally. That tells me that this group is not going to bind together as a third party. They cover a spectrum of liberal to conservative that simply don't think a party represents them anymore.

 

Most people I know seem to think a four party system would work best. I tend to agree.

 

If you think about it in terms of this years election:

 

1. Far left: Sanders
2. Middle left: Clinton
3. Middle right: Trump, probably the governators
4. Far right: Cruz

It'd be very intersting if it was all four of these duking it out instead of the left and the right trying to whack all but one of their own.

 

 

I would redefine this chart.

 

1. Socialist-Sanders

2. Far Left-Hillary

3. Center-left-Trump (I don't believe he's truly a Republican)

4. Center-Kasich, Bush

5. Center right-Rubio

6. Far Right-Cruz (and maybe Carson)

 

There's no way to consider Trump left of center if one of his central tenants is to deport 11+ million illegal aliens and build a wall. I don't believe he really is a Republican either, though. His political views are really best described as a hodgepodge. I'd probably slide him into the Center category along with Bush and Kasich, ideologically. I just put him Center-right since he's running as a GOP.

 

I agree with most of that, though. I'd argue that Clinton is more a Center-left candidate who's been pushed farther left as the election has worn on by Sanders. For the majority of her time in politics, she's had some strong centrist views on things. But she also veers to the far left on others. It could go either way to me, I guess.

 

 

First off, Trump says whatever he wants to get attention. In November 2012 after Romney lost, Trump blasted Romney for alienating Hispanics by suggesting that they be deported. This was just 3 years before he began pushing his own deportation approach.

 

Trump also have been pro-universal health care and continues to be though he wont' come out and say it fully. That is about as far left as you can go. And with so many other past leftist views, my gut tells me he's still a center-left guy despite his views on migration and immigration.

 

Good discussion though.

[Huskerzoo]

 

 

 

 

We are now to the point where for the first time, we have more independents than any one party. Meaning, if they were all together, they are the biggest party in the country right now.

 

I believe that will keep growing. This is what is needed to get rid of the stranglehold.

 

Not sure where it goes from here though since the two parties are the only ones that the media (that is bought and paid for by those parties) pays any attention to. We are to the point where only 23% of the country identifies as a Republican and 32% identify as a Democrat. That means that barely over half of the country identifies with a party.

 

Independents have now been the largest group and have grown over the last 5 years from 35% to 39%.

 

Since 2010, the graph appears to show these independents have come from both parties almost equally. That tells me that this group is not going to bind together as a third party. They cover a spectrum of liberal to conservative that simply don't think a party represents them anymore.

 

Most people I know seem to think a four party system would work best. I tend to agree.

 

If you think about it in terms of this years election:

 

1. Far left: Sanders
2. Middle left: Clinton
3. Middle right: Trump, probably the governators
4. Far right: Cruz

It'd be very intersting if it was all four of these duking it out instead of the left and the right trying to whack all but one of their own.

 

 

I would redefine this chart.

 

1. Socialist-Sanders

2. Far Left-Hillary

3. Center-left-Trump (I don't believe he's truly a Republican)

4. Center-Kasich, Bush

5. Center right-Rubio

6. Far Right-Cruz (and maybe Carson)

 

There's no way to consider Trump left of center if one of his central tenants is to deport 11+ million illegal aliens and build a wall. I don't believe he really is a Republican either, though. His political views are really best described as a hodgepodge. I'd probably slide him into the Center category along with Bush and Kasich, ideologically. I just put him Center-right since he's running as a GOP.

 

I agree with most of that, though. I'd argue that Clinton is more a Center-left candidate who's been pushed farther left as the election has worn on by Sanders. For the majority of her time in politics, she's had some strong centrist views on things. But she also veers to the far left on others. It could go either way to me, I guess.

 

 

First off, Trump says whatever he wants to get attention. In November 2012 after Romney lost, Trump blasted Romney for alienating Hispanics by suggesting that they be deported. This was just 3 years before he began pushing his own deportation approach.

 

Trump also have been pro-universal health care and continues to be though he wont' come out and say it fully. That is about as far left as you can go. And with so many other past leftist views, my gut tells me he's still a center-left guy despite his views on migration and immigration.

 

Good discussion though.

 

 

I think trump is doing what he has to do to get votes. My impression is that he doesn't have a firm stance on many things other than get elected. This could probably be spun as "represent the people you're serving". As a pretty extreme progressive who's all about "big government" (at least in some regards), Trump scares me. The right side of the aisle is free to spin it however they want, but I believe there's a large chunk of individuals voting in the democratic primary who would vote for whoever it takes to keep Trump out.

[Landlord]

 

 

And....if it were made by a middle aged white guy, it DEFINITELY would be described as sexist by more people than it is now.

 

The original quote was actually made by Jane Elliot.

 

I know.

 

When a woman says that, and a man repeats it, is it the same as when a black guy uses the "N" word and then a white guy repeats it?

 

 

 

 

If the white guy is using it in the form of a quote or recitation of something previously said, that'd be fine by most people. My black friends often give me a hard time because I ask them stupid questions like, "If I really like this rap song and I'm at a show and the lyrics have the n word am I not supposed to sing along?" and they tell me absolutely sing along, appreciate the art, respect the people, and enjoy it.

[zoogs]

Hm, that's interesting. I'd probably still feel really, really uncomfortable about saying it. I do think it's fair game to acknowledge the importance of optics, and that it affects what is being communicated even holding words the same.

[Landlord]

Hm, that's interesting. I'd probably still feel really, really uncomfortable about saying it. I do think it's fair game to acknowledge the importance of optics, and that it affects what is being communicated even holding words the same.

 

 

 

Most of us would. Because it's been stigmatized. But not using it in reference when what you are referencing something that actually uses the word is giving the word way too much power.

[zoogs]

I do think that word does and always will have a lot of power. It represents something powerfully heinous that shouldn't be forgotten or sanitized. I don't mean to say it should never be uttered or quoted, but I think the particular uses of it we see in music can only come from a black voice. It's a weird thing, I admit, and I'm sure everyone has a different perspective.

[knapplc]

Seems like, whoever wins the primary, there won't be a division amongst Democrats.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

And....if it were made by a middle aged white guy, it DEFINITELY would be described as sexist by more people than it is now.

 

The original quote was actually made by Jane Elliot.

 

I know.

 

When a woman says that, and a man repeats it, is it the same as when a black guy uses the "N" word and then a white guy repeats it?

 

 

 

 

If the white guy is using it in the form of a quote or recitation of something previously said, that'd be fine by most people. My black friends often give me a hard time because I ask them stupid questions like, "If I really like this rap song and I'm at a show and the lyrics have the n word am I not supposed to sing along?" and they tell me absolutely sing along, appreciate the art, respect the people, and enjoy it.

 

There is no way in hell I would still ever use that word even if I had ten black guys standing around me telling me to.

 

Nope....it won't be uttered from my mouth. I don't even care if I'm quoting someone else like the guy did at the Bernie rally with the word Uterus.

[BigRedBuster]

Seems like, whoever wins the primary, there won't be a division amongst Democrats.

 

 

I'm not sure anyone thought there would be.

[knapplc]

Everyone's worst political nightmare.

 

 

 

[Saunders]

*Barf*

 

Hillary v Trump would be a disgrace.

[teachercd]

*Barf*

 

Hillary v Trump would be a disgrace.

It would bring in the biggest ratings in presidential debate history...I would bet that commercials would cost in the area of (maybe 75%) of what they cost for the super bowl. It would be crazy