Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools?

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

I like Stewart and his commentary on the days events are great but he would become the show if he moderated and his bias would all but ruin it.

I think as an intelligent person he would run a debate differently than he ran a comedy program.

But as I said, Colbert would I believe be even better, because Colbert obviously bleeds for integrity and proper process.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Sure Bernie has passion and says what he believes and runs on that. But I still have serious reservations on two levels...is his 'real world' experience of catering to the likes of Vermont inhabitants much more valid for the POTUS than Fiorina's non-existent resume? And second, I have questions on his ability to bring in a wide variety of points of view...really would his administration be grounded in facts?

Even a great heart can go off the rails if it doesn't have this kind of stuff figured out.

Obama may have exploded the notion that you need real world leadership experience to be a successful president. But Bernie may well actually have that kind of leadership experience. He must have been doing something right to be able to serve not only as a conscience but also as a facilitator of policy over the last 40 years.

The irony here is that Bernie isn't an uncompromising idealist like say Nader because he comes out of a different background. Nader was a consumer advocate -- those people are supposed to anchor one end of a negotiation and never move off it to get the most they can for their "client." But Bernie's been a legislator, so he's had to get in there elbow deep in the blood and slime of making the sausages. To be successful at that you have to be able to motivate and convince but also to know when to pick your battles and recognize when you're getting the best deal the circumstances will allow.

I actually like Bernie more for his head than his heart, since, as you say, there are plenty of Mother Theresas out there that would get their arse handed them going up against the gangstas that politics attracts/creates/nourishes.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Obama may have exploded the notion that you need real world leadership experience to be a successful president. But Bernie may well actually have that kind of leadership experience. He must have been doing something right to be able to serve not only as a conscience but also as a facilitator of policy over the last 40 years.

I am uneducated on Sanders...and am purely going on instinct.

Obama had the magic mix coming. What he didn't have in actual experience, he had in intelligence. He has the ability to be flexible (even being self deprecating in the process) and communicate across barriers (including the aisle). You just knew he had the talent to do anything he wanted in the business world...but chose to serve. And in the end, he hasn't always done what I wanted...but his time in office has turned out well and the country is much better for it.

Sanders comes in as potentially the opposite in many ways (not making any statements about his intelligence though). And I say this probably making unfair accusations (and even as someone who supports many of his views), I'm not sure if a self described socialist from a sheltered state has the ability to navigate the treacherous waters of the POTUS and lead this country forward maximizing our potential in the open fields of the 21st century. There are others in either party (whom I probably even dislike) that I feel more comfortable that can accomplish getting us into the future. In the end, I don't think it matters because Sanders won't get the nomination anyways.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Sanders comes in as potentially the opposite in many ways (not making any statements about his intelligence though). And I say this probably making unfair accusations (and even as someone who supports many of his views), I'm not sure if a self described socialist from a sheltered state has the ability to navigate the treacherous waters of the POTUS and lead this country forward maximizing our potential in the open fields of the 21st century. There are others in either party (whom I probably even dislike) that I feel more comfortable that can accomplish getting us into the future. In the end, I don't think it matters because Sanders won't get the nomination anyways.

Well, yeah, there is that.

The self-described Socialist part just tells me he's likely far more in tune with the rest of the world than most pols. Look, if you're a Socialist in the US most of your models are probably going to come from outside the US because it's not like we've had any sort of Socialist tradition here since Eugene Debs. Socialists also tend to view national politics in the context of international regional and even global political forces because markets and class interests don't care about national borders.

In a fictional Sanders presidency I could see him leading the charge for serious reductions in both military budget and overseas troop presence. You would not see him using the US military as the coercive branch of Exxon-Mobile, for example. All of those measures would be good things. On the other hand I'd expect to see him press for much greater State Department involvement with both allies and adversaries, and maybe even an increase in the sanctions placed on countries with bad civil rights records -- even places like China. The sacrosanct business ties of transnational elites would not be a big consideration for a Sanders administration -- once again, a win for the country.

Domestically obviously he'd have a lot of problems trying to cut back on the corporate welfare that the corporate class and their puppet Senators use the US government to plunder from the public purse. He would likely recommend a tax structure where the effective tax rate on most people would actually go down, counter-balanced by a restoration of progressive rates from the 40s and 50s on high earners. Where one stands on that comes down to a matter of economic theory, but you can be sure he wouldn't be able to get all or even most of what he wanted, with virtually ever corporate-owned media outlet yowling like a toddler.

Bernie becoming president would represent such a shift in the public narrative on taxes and the Empire that we couldn't discount an FDR-like purge of reactionaries in Congress as well, but this isn't 1932 and sadly even the Democrats are neo-liberals now. TPTB have done their job well: there is almost no way for the American public to escape neo-liberalism except through the presidency and, slowly, through the courts.

Not to mention that they'd probably just murder him anyway.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

I think most of the support for Trump is really a no confidence vote in status quo and other candidates who would largely continue the status quo, rather than a real in depth support of Trump himself. Bernie and Trump are hugely different, but I think each in their own way is tapping into voter dissatisfaction with Washington and business as usual. Whether either has any staying power as things get more serious down the road will be interesting to watch. Somehow in the end I expect they'll both fade and we'll get business as usual.

This is the best assessment I've read regarding the whole scene at the moment.

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

I would be in favor of it if I believed for a second that Stewart wouldnt just start debating himself halfway through. He has a tendency to interrupt people in interviews and just speak for them ESPECIALLY when he doesnt agree with them. Usually his points are correct or at least salient, but it is offputting many times.

I have thought the same thing myself. Not many things I don't (didn't) like about what he does, though.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

After falling behind Trump and Carson, Walker making a valiant late drive for Eftard of the Week.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Liberal homage for the short-fingered vulgarian.

A love letter to the Donald for doing that thang he does.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Beware! Its a rumor of...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fo...UTixPM.twitter

MITTENS MAKING ANOTHER BID! GOD HELP US ALL!!!

I have to say, I'm thinking of switching allegiances! Not to the cult that Bernie Sanders has formed. Nor to a Draft Lizzy Warren bid, or for Uncle Joe Biden who the Dems owe a big debt of thanks to for crushing weasel Paul Ryan in the VP debate but offers little difference with Hillary....but to...

Donald Trump!!!!

Now before you think I'm a total sell-out, consider this following:

1) My goal, and the goal of Rover Nation, is to crush knuckledragger conservatism, which is currently represented by the Republican party, once and for all. This isn't the same thing as crushing the Rupublican Party itself, which will always exist in some form or another.

2) Backing Hillary seems the best way to do so, as losing 3 Presidential races in a row will cause a revolt on the right. However, that would merely be over changing tactics, not the wholesale destruction of the caveman movement that owns the GOP. (Spare me the Sanders movement please - by the time the GOP and their willing enablers in the lamestream media get done with him he'll be the second coming of The Nutty Professor. Meaning, we have no idea how he'd hold up against a right wing smear campaign and I'd rather not find out in November of 2016.)

3) Having said all this, I never envisioned a stalking horse who could destroy the GOP from the inside! That is Mr. Donald J Trump. What Trump can, and is, doing is simple but brilliant. He's calling out all the frauds, hucksters, grifters, and hangers-on currently making conservativism the angry but impotent do-nothing movement that is it. Unlike Kep, I have no problem with the Republicans being represented by business interests, because at least their honest about their motivations. They want to steal everything not nailed down, and put forward policies that do so. The problem is too many voters, including posters out here (Bob, joecct, formerly Lynah although I'm not sure if he's still a Gooper, etc) vote Republican in the forlorn and foolhardy belief that they're still voting for the Republicans of yonder years (Reagan, Baker, Dole, Bush I, Kemp, etc). These people, who ought to know better, are enabling the nutbags who truly are at the center of power.

As Trump calls out the professional grifters who don't give a rat's *** about the party, but who are only along for the ride to make money (Luntz, Fox News, various pundidiots, think tanks) or to keep their cushy jobs (Boner, Itch, the rest of Congressional leadership) he widens a split between the nutjobs who want to see action on repealing the 14th Amendment, deporting all people with funny sounding accents, putting gays back in the closet, etc and the people who pay lip service to that but really are just in it to make a few bucks and do the Sunday talk show circuit (I know you don't watch those if you're younger than 80, but have you ever seen the line-up for those shows? Its like 5 conservatives to 1 lefty. Some liberal bias...). As Trump makes these people run and cower, he'll bring to the forefront that modern day conservatism has nothing to with mythical Reaganism, but is really rooted in some sort of frenzy for maniacal revenge against...well, there's always something. With him as the nominee, the veil is lifted and there for all to see what's really underneath. Then the aforementioned conservatives who aren't insane can finally stop supporting the crazies, and this country will be much, much better off for it!

I'm just sorry I sent Ted Cruz my 25 bucks. I thought he'd be the one leading this charge.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Yeah, but Hillary is to the Dems what Trump is to the Republicans.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Yeah, but Hillary is to the Dems what Trump is to the Republicans.

That makes no sense, but okay...

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

That makes no sense, but okay...

This entire campaign has been about Trump and Hillary. Not the issues. So, ok, it don't make sense to you but it makes perfect sense to me.

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

The Donald's base.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Spare me the Sanders movement please - by the time the GOP and their willing enablers in the lamestream media get done with him he'll be the second coming of The Nutty Professor. Meaning, we have no idea how he'd hold up against a right wing smear campaign and I'd rather not find out in November of 2016.

That's a risk, but by the same token they are going to paint Hillary as a cross between Elizabeth Báthory and Ethel Rosenberg. The Clintons do know to bring a bazooka to a knife fight, but Bernie is hardly professorial like Dukakis or noblesse oblige like Kerry -- he knows how to fight bare knuckle, and so do the activists who Hillary is going to need after the convention.

You will never win the hearts and minds of liberals by constantly denigrating our positions, motivations, and candidates. Save your bile for the real enemy. Your "come with me if you want to live" drag act just turns us off. There's no doubt in my mind that the coronation will take place, so relax and be magnanimous if you don't want to wreck the Dems the same way the Republicans are wrecking themselves.

As you've said yourself, beating the orcs is too important to let ego get in the way.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools

Sure there is dissatisfaction with the government as always. But I'm of the opinion that that is not what's driving Sanders, Trump popularity.

Society's politics curve is bell shaped. There a good number of centrist democrats...and a decent number of those further left. Same on the right. Sanders and Trumps numbers line up based on those segments just as you'd expect...that's also why Carson, Clinton, and Bush have the numbers that they do.

I think we can validate that by asking Sanders supporters here. I bet they would not say they support Sanders because they hate what's happening in Washington. I'm sure they'd say they support Sanders because he has views similar to theirs. In the end, most in either party come back to those in their party nominees...because they are electable and the closest to their views.