Election Time Poll

[Collinsworthington]

With Iowa on the horizon, I feel I should make an updated poll as a lot of shifts are going on in candidate popularity. So who would you vote for out of these popular options? Why?

[mattsmith48]

If I was American I would vote for Bernie Sanders cuz everyone else is either Corrupt, Crazy or an American version of Hitler

[Jinglebottom]

Chillary, duh.

[Abyssal Echo]

Trump

[Vlerchan]

Because I'm a cost-minimiser:

Hillary Clinton:

I'd urge people to feign support for Sanders up until the last moment though and get her to commit to the better things in his campaign.

---

I also found the non-mention of Rand Paul - but note of O'Malley - an amusing reminder that off the internet no-one really knows he exists.

[...] Bernie Sanders [...]
He's soft on guns though.

[Kahn]

Robert Reich was the individual that had my support before election season began.

Now that he's announced he's not running, I'm not really a supporter of any of the candidates listed. Sanders has some decent ideals I can get behind. However, I disagree with his stance on weapons vehemently.

I'm just enjoying the show, for the moment.

[Vlerchan]

[...] Robert Reich [...]
I googled and decided he'd get my vote too.

However, I disagree with his stance on weapons vehemently.
The understanding I have is that Sanders comes from a pro-gun state and is soft in a bid to not alienate his base there.

What exactly do you disagree with? I'm not sure of his specific policies here.

[Collinsworthington]

Because I'm a cost-minimiser:

Hillary Clinton:

I'd urge people to feign support for Sanders up until the last moment though and get her to commit to the better things in his campaign.

---

I also found the non-mention of Rand Paul - but note of O'Malley - an amusing reminder that off the internet no-one really knows he exists.


He's soft on guns though.

I'm aware of Rand Paul he's the senator of my state, however I just listed the top few of both parties. I just wanted all three democrats to even out the ticket

[Vlerchan]

I'm aware of Rand Paul he's the senator of my state, however I just listed the top few of both parties. I just wanted all three democrats to even out the ticket
I wasn't commenting on the idea you didn't know him - he's the senator of your state - as much as the idea you realise that no-one really notices his political existence at a federal level.

[Kahn]

What exactly do you disagree with? I'm not sure of his specific policies here.

Bernie has voted in favor of a nationwide ban on assault weapons, a nationwide ban on high-capacity magazines of over ten rounds,

Federalist Paper 46 (http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm)

..To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it..

PUBLIUS

I am opposed to a national ban on any arms, because it would leave the American populace limited in time of necessity, such as invasion, or civil war. However, I do agree with Sander's stance on background checks, and the elimination of the gun show loophole. Guns should be in the hands of responsible and stable citizens, they shouldn't be available for any person who wants to get their hand on a weapon. I'd like the people to remain the last bulwark of this nation, not the Federal government, or the Federal army.

[Vlerchan]

I won't begin to disagree but I'm curious as to how far this extends.

I am opposed to a national ban on any arms, because it would leave the American populace limited in time of necessity, such as invasion, or civil war.
Would you - for example - be opposed to banning grenade launchers?

What about a FGM-148 Javelin or similarly powerful arms-types.

[Kahn]

Would you - for example - be opposed to banning grenade launchers?

The average American cannot afford a grenade launcher. I'd be for adopting legislation appropriately limiting access to a specific type of weapon if it becomes such a problem that it disrupts the daily lives of a portion of Americans, but, at the moment, it is a non-issue. How many attacks, do you think, have been waged with grenade launchers?

Judean Zealot shared a sentiment with me in a thread, that he believed Americans have displayed a gross and insidious use of weapons, which justifies the legislative action being taken against them. I disagree. I don't think it's the weapon that causes harm. It's the individual wielding it. The individual. Banning certain tiers of weapons will do nothing to solve the issues of the individual. It will only lead them to seek other avenues to perpetrate whatever act it is their considering perpetrating.

about a FGM-148 Javelin or similarly powerful arms-types.

Like the grenade launcher, I doubt very many Americans can afford a weapon of this caliber, or are very interested in acquiring one. If it were to become an issue domestically, I'd be for adopting legislation that properly deals with the issue at hand. There aren't any Americans shooting down government aircraft though, although there are instances of citizens shooting down drones over their land throughout the country.

[Vlerchan]

How many attacks, do you think, have been waged with grenade launchers?
That's a rather unfair question given as grenades are illegal.

I do think that grenade launchers are a rather cumbersome weapons to commit assaults with nonetheless. However the point was to see to what extent the attitude questioned extended.

I don't think it's the weapon that causes harm. It's the individual wielding it.
Even when controlling for proportion of Blacks and Ulster Scots ('Scotch Irish') - the specific sorts of individuals - amongst other factors there's still a reasonable claim that the proportion of guns leads high rates of homicide. The point to note here is that individuals don't live in a vacuum. Whilst it's the individual committing the high rates of homicide in the U.S. do have their groundings in some cultural or institutional fact or another.

If it were to become an issue domestically, I'd be for adopting legislation that properly deals with the issue at hand.
This is the point I want to focus on though. If there was an issue - imagine one sufficient to avoid the debate on what one might be: please - would you support curtailment?

[Kahn]

That's a rather unfair question given as grenades are illegal.

I doubt the statistic would increase much were they made legal. At least here.

This is the point I want to focus on though. If there was an issue - imagine one sufficient to avoid the debate on what one might be: please - would you support curtailment?

I would support temporary curtailment in a regional capacity, wherever it is that the problem is taking place, only under the circumstances that an individual or a group of individuals are using the weapons specifically to cause destruction and harm to their fellow human beings. At that point, though, there'd already be militarized police forces dealing with the terrorists, which I feel is a fitting term for the hypothetical group I'm describing.

In the case of the epidemic of public shootings, this is where FOID identification program, more available gun education, and new, more thorough background checks will come in handy.

[mattsmith48]

He's soft on guns though.

Name one candidate who isn't

[Vlerchan]

OK, Oakheart. Thank you for answering my questions.

Name one candidate who isn't
Hillary Clinton is, relatively speaking.

Looking to repeal the immunities of gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed by victims of gun violence.
Introducing stronger background checks.
Focusing on more aggressive inspecting of dealers.
Banning assault rifles and 'military-style' weapons.
It's worth noting though that U.S. culture makes massive undertakings in regards to gun control politically impossible.

That's not the candidates fault. But you can attack Sanders for stepping inside the line of possible reform.

[Kahn]

Hillary Clinton is, relatively speaking.

Looking to repeal the immunities of gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed by victims of gun violence.
Introducing stronger background checks.
Focusing on more aggressive inspecting of dealers.
Banning assault rifles and 'military-style' weapons.
It's worth noting though that U.S. culture makes massive undertakings in regards to gun control politically impossible.

That's not the candidates fault. But you can attack Sanders for stepping inside the line of possible reform.

That sounds incredibly similar to Sander's platform.

The only point I dislike is the final one.

[Vlerchan]

That sounds incredibly similar to Sander's platform.

The only point I dislike is the final one.
The first point is pretty major and as far as I'm aware Sanders isn't keen on it.

He's quite a mixed voting record though (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/10/generation-forward-pac/did-bernie-sanders-vote-against-background-checks-/). He has - admittedly - voted more along establishment-liberal lines in recent times nonetheless.

---

[Though - if I'm honest - I'm just trying to spring controversy with him here.]

[mattsmith48]

That sounds incredibly similar to Sander's platform.

The only point I dislike is the final one.

Banning assault rifles and 'military-style' weapons. really? Theres no reason those things should even be legal

[Kahn]

Banning assault rifles and 'military-style' weapons. really? Theres no reason those things should even be legal

Refer to my previous discussion with Vlerchan to understand why I consider their legality just. Also refer to Federalist Papers 27 (Hamilton) and 46 (Madison) if you wish to examine the second amendment on a deeper level.

[Babs]

I don't agree with everything Bernie Sanders says, but he's the candidate I like best.

[DriveAlive]

I will be voting for Trump in the primaries and Hillary in the general election. Honestly, though, I would not be all that bothered if Trump were to win. I would rather see him as president than Sanders, Cruz, or Rubio. Why is it impossible for us to have a socially liberal, fiscally moderate, pro-gun president?

[Sir Suomi]

Rand Paul isn't even mentioned.

brb, kms

[tovaris]

As children we boys always played solders, post apocalypse and stuf like that. Vote Thrump! He will make the games of our childhood come true. Who wouldn't want to live in a post apocalyptic world.

[northy]

Trump

Why Trump? Do you agree with his racist and sexist remarks against people? The lies that he tells about things, for example London?
Or do you think that he will give you a 'small loan'?

Trump is either an idiot, or a very clever man that knows exactly how to twist people around his little finger so that he can conduct his agenda. I would like to think that it is the former, not the latter.

[Collinsworthington]

Why Trump? Do you agree with his racist and sexist remarks against people? The lies that he tells about things, for example London?
Or do you think that he will give you a 'small loan'?

Trump is either an idiot, or a very clever man that knows exactly how to twist people around his little finger so that he can conduct his agenda. I would like to think that it is the former, not the latter.

He just says what we are all to scared to say, i honestly dont want to let muslims into the country... i dont want to even take the risk of letting radicals into our country... if taking risks to keep the country safe is wrong then i dont want to be right

[Collinsworthington]

Rand Paul isn't even mentioned.

brb, kms

i didnt mention rand paul as he is sitting on a firm .7 percent of support... even o'malley is over 5

[ethan-s]

If I was American I would vote for Bernie Sanders cuz everyone else is either Corrupt, Crazy or an American version of Hitler

uuuuh, he would

1) take 90 cents to the dollar.
2) ban guns
3) drive us into more debt.
4) put people in jail who have guns
5) gut the constitution.

wadda you say to that?

i voted cruz, btw.

[ethan-s]

Do you agree with his racist and sexist remarks against people?

he has made no racist remarks.
he has ALMOST gone on the verge of sexism, but NOT ALL THE WAY!

[Vlerchan]

uuuuh, he would

1) take 90 cents to the dollar.
2) ban guns
3) drive us into more debt.
4) put people in jail who have guns
5) gut the constitution.

wadda you say to that?
Where do people come across this horseshite?

[ethan-s]

look it up. how would he give free stuff to all the lazy asses if he didnt take a bunch of money from hardworking folks like myself? buddy, i make my money literally with my hands. i dont want that resurrected zombie taking half of it.

i was wrong about the 90%. http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2016/01/17/bernie-sanders-releases-tax-plan-nations-rich-recoil-in-horror/#2715e4857a0b7af9ce77340d

BUT, i would rather vote for someone who LOWERED the rate to 14.5%.

[phuckphace]

http://i.imgur.com/0KDR9Zp.png

----

Rand Paul isn't even mentioned.

brb, kms

http://i.imgur.com/qwLcwTF.jpg

RANDLETS BTFO

[Vlerchan]

buddy, i make my money literally with my hands. i dont want that resurrected zombie taking half of it.
Unless you making 10 million per annum he won't be taking close to half.

I'm doubtful the band for your income group will move at all.

iwas wrong about the 90%. http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2016/01/17/bernie-sanders-releases-tax-plan-nations-rich-recoil-in-horror/#2715e4857a0b7af9ce77340d
You were wrong about all the claims.

BUT, i would rather vote for someone who LOWERED the rate to 14.5%.
Is this for self-centred reasons or is their a sound economic basis to it.

[mattsmith48]

uuuuh, he would

1) take 90 cents to the dollar.
2) ban guns
3) drive us into more debt.
4) put people in jail who have guns
5) gut the constitution.

wadda you say to that?

i voted cruz, btw.

1. not true he will raise taxes for the top 1% but not that much
2. No but it would be better then having mass shootings daily
3. How?
4. Better then putting people in jail for having weed
5. again How?

Btw they dont even know if Cruz is eligible to be president

[RiHouse]

As much as I want Sanders to win I just know he won't -- America isn't ready for a socialist to be the leader. They're scared of it. They're scared of change.

[phuckphace]

new avatar please r8

(and as always, vote for phuckphace it is your duty)

[Judean Zealot]

As much as I want Sanders to win I just know he won't -- America isn't ready for a socialist to be the leader. They're scared of it. They're scared of change.

For good reason. America sucks now, but there's always room to deteriorate.

[Abyssal Echo]

Why Trump? Do you agree with his racist and sexist remarks against people? The lies that he tells about things, for example London?

The main thing I like about Trump is he tells it like it is.
Racist ? that's BS he's against "Illegal" immigration not "legal" immigration. The word "Illegal" is something that the lying politically correct media like to/constantly leave out of his statement. As for the Muslim refugees (that the majority of Americans didn't want brought here in the first place) all he said was to screen them so we don't a bunch of radicals that threaten national security. Lets face the facts we (America) can't support our own people by bringing in more that no doubt take jobs away from Americans and or end up on welfare will do nothing more that put us further in debt which our generation and the ones to follow will be paying for.
In my opinion in re: to England is that's their political correct actions because Trump called for closing our boarders to Muslims until we get things sorted out (which I stated his reasoning above). As for the " Illegal" immigration from Mexico our southern boarders should have been closed a long time ago. "Illegal" Immigrants should be located and deported immediately if not sooner by stopping them at the boarder.

[phuckphace]

mfw Bernie gets the most support from people who aren't old enough to vote anyway

http://i.imgur.com/4au1eja.png

[Stronk Serb]

xbob18

More like Killary, they caused some messed up crap abroad

mattsmith48

Every politician is corrupt, he does what he does for something, being power, the glory, the fortun or the fame. In the whore market, politicians are the biggest ones. Ayy lmao at the Hitler remark, though.
Abyssal Echo

Very well worded, couldn't have said it better myself. What I like about him is that he:
Voted against Iraq
Is supported by our nationalist party which asked Americans of Serbian origin or Serbs who are first generation immigrants to vote for him
Some of our media has said he apologized for Kosovo and called the Clintons a bunch of genocidals, citation is needed. I am pretty sure phuckphace can dig it out pretty fast
Generally wants to employ all the Americans first, before even thinking about foreign labor, hence the anti-illegal immigrants policies
Treats illegal immigrants the way they are supposed to be, in North Korea you get shot for border jumping, in Iran you get 8 years of prison, in Russia you also get imprisoned, only in America you are treated the well. What message does that send? Hop in! No need for paperwork or visiting the embassy to get checked out and stuff!

[Porpoise101]

It's pretty telling that either ROTW, the VT crowd, our generation, or the Internet in general is something totally different compared to our parents' generation when Trump and Sanders are the most popular among the two parties.

[Sir Suomi]

image (http://i.imgur.com/qwLcwTF.jpg)

RANDLETS BTFO

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/213/225/1323132038001.jpg

Honestly, I've pretty much given up on the elections already. I almost don't even want to vote, it's that discouraging. But at the end of the day, I'll most likely vote for whoever gets the Republican nomination in hopes that Bernie and Hillary get crushed.

Fuck, democracy sucks sometimes.

[phuckphace]

anyone want to throw out some guesses as to what the final showdown will be? I was sure it would be Trump vs. Shillary, but it's looking more like Trump vs. Sanders.

Shillary's corruption runs deep, but the Emailgate scandal will probably put her away for good. she's now got at least a couple 3-letter gubmint agencies pissed off at her, and if having classified dox on an illegal server isn't bad enough, she's also lied about it over 9001 times with this shameless "who cares?" attitude. it's shit like this that makes me wonder why *anyone* supports her - even if you don't believe Shillary really Vince Foster'd several of her political enemies, it's obvious from a glance at her crazy ass face that she's a crazy bitch driven mad with power, and we most definitely do not need her at the helm of a superpower.

tl;dr - high chance of Clinton hauled away in the party van. 5/5

[Porpoise101]

tl;dr - high chance of Clinton hauled away in the party van. 5/5
Military coup pls

[tovaris]

uuuuh, he would

1) take 90 cents to the dollar.
2) ban guns
3) drive us into more debt.
4) put people in jail who have guns
5) gut the constitution.

wadda you say to that?

i voted cruz, btw.

Doesn't Berni like guns? Thats what Clinto keeps saying how he voted for guns?

Military coup pls

Assemble a paramilitary and do it!

[northy]

he has made no racist remarks.
he has ALMOST gone on the verge of sexism, but NOT ALL THE WAY!

No racist remarks? You have a distorted view of what racism is. He called all mexicans 'rapists' and 'criminals'. Explain how that isn't racism?

The main thing I like about Trump is he tells it like it is.
Racist ? that's BS he's against "Illegal" immigration not "legal" immigration. The word "Illegal" is something that the lying politically correct media like to/constantly leave out of his statement. As for the Muslim refugees (that the majority of Americans didn't want brought here in the first place) all he said was to screen them so we don't a bunch of radicals that threaten national security. Lets face the facts we (America) can't support our own people by bringing in more that no doubt take jobs away from Americans and or end up on welfare will do nothing more that put us further in debt which our generation and the ones to follow will be paying for.
In my opinion in re: to England is that's their political correct actions because Trump called for closing our boarders to Muslims until we get things sorted out (which I stated his reasoning above). As for the " Illegal" immigration from Mexico our southern boarders should have been closed a long time ago. "Illegal" Immigrants should be located and deported immediately if not sooner by stopping them at the boarder.

As above. If he wants to screen people, he should screen everyone. Anyone could be a terrorist.

He just says what we are all to scared to say, i honestly dont want to let muslims into the country... i dont want to even take the risk of letting radicals into our country... if taking risks to keep the country safe is wrong then i dont want to be right
Ah, you've been brainwashed. Sorry for your loss.

[West Coast Sheriff]

I just new that Bernie would be so popular here.

[phuckphace]

No racist remarks? You have a distorted view of what racism is. He called all mexicans 'rapists' and 'criminals'. Explain how that isn't racism?

no, he didn't. Lügenpresse up to their old tricks.

As above. If he wants to screen people, he should screen everyone. Anyone could be a terrorist.

:lol3: because we all know that the demographics of Islamic terrorism aren't overwhelmingly Middle Eastern. but I forget, facts are racist.

Ah, you've been brainwashed. Sorry for your loss.

Jesus you are insufferably snarky, like every post of yours drips with condescension. ugh all these bumbling low-IQ Trumpenproles who don't even belong to Mensa like me!

[northy]

Jesus you are insufferably snarky, like every post of yours drips with condescension. ugh all these bumbling low-IQ Trumpenproles who don't even belong to Mensa like me!
You missed a comma and a capital letter.

[Vlerchan]

The main thing I like about Trump is he tells it like it is.
This is actually the most interesting product of expanding political correctness.

There's a feel-good component to Trump's vote that really will deserve future study when the election's all past. It will probably be one of the most important determinants of future races.

The word "Illegal" is something that the lying politically correct media like to/constantly leave out of his statement.
No. He's in favour of capping legal immigration too until he feels the labour market for domestic labour has cleared.

That means until it becomes politically acceptable.

[...] take jobs away from Americans [...]
I've posted paper on top of paper outlining that this isn't an effect of immigration.

It presumes an infeasible constant demand for labour.

[...] end up on welfare [...] debt [...]
Immigrants tend to be a net benefit in terms of government revenues.

---

People should also consider what I've highlighted in the last two quotes with reference to people graduating from high school.

Or births generally if that's not doing it for you.

"Illegal" Immigrants should be located and deported immediately
Not feasible. It would lead to a considerable shortfall in aggregate consumption and the U.S. economy is in a tenuous enough position as-is.

[...] in North Korea you get shot for border jumping, in Iran you get 8 years of prison, in Russia you also get imprisoned [...]
Them being pinnacles of governmental excellence, mind you.

Trump and Sanders are the most popular among the two parties[.]
Trumps popular amongst the mainstream but that isn't surprising. Like I mentioned above: there's the feel-good factor. But more important is that this same attitude towards minorities prevailed in establishment-right speech at a much more subtle level. The rhetoric of the establishment right is full of what's called dog-whistles to the theme.

Lots of the anti-redistributionist rhetoric - for example - is racialised.

White people tend to become more hostile to redistribution when blacks are brought into the picture. Gillian Franklin (1999) (http://escholarship.org/uc/item/17m7r1rq#page-5) is a real interesting paper on this racialisation. McElwee (2015) (http://www.salon.com/2015/11/29/the_truth_about_the_white_working_class_why_its_really_allergic_to_voting_for_de mocrats/) replicates it's basic findings in this newspaper article for confirmation that it still holds.

General Social Survey and National Election Studies data from the 1970s to the present indicate that whites residing in the old Confederacy continue to display more racial antagonism and ideological conservatism than non-Southern whites. Racial conservatism has become linked more closely to presidential voting and party identification over time in the white South, while its impact has remained constant elsewhere. This stronger association between racial antagonism and partisanship in the South compared to other regions cannot be explained by regional differences in nonracial ideology or nonracial policy preferences, or by the effects of those variables on partisanship.

Valentino, N. and Sears, D. (2005) Old Times There Are Not Forgotten: Race and Partisan Realignment in the Contemporary South, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 672 - 688. (http://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/race-party-realignment-in-the-south-old-times-not-forgotten2.pdf)

This isn't me arguing that all establishment-Conservatives are racist. I'm rather arguing that a racialist component to their voting isn't surprising.

---

Sanders is popular among younger people because younger people have a decreased likelihood of holding a stake in the current system.

I'll most likely vote for whoever gets the Republican nomination[.]
Guns and lower taxes [though not for your tax band]?

Fuck, democracy sucks sometimes.
For the ultimate taste of political disenchantment check out Irish politics some time.

[...] and we most definitely do not need her at the helm of a superpower.
I'll reiterate my belief that the president is weak vis-á-vis congress - and more-so when we consider the civil service. The president's actual power lies not in their position but in their large base of votes and persuasive abilities built on that. Notice that Obama has been quite incapable of achieving things. He was able to leverage his popular support at one stage but that's been used up and now he's impotent.

I'm afraid this is what will happen to Sanders from the get-go. Even if Democrats held Congress. Because these are on the look out for a career's worth of terms the likelihood is going to be a much more conservative approach to the change hinted at.

I'm imaging similar results for Trump. Even though it's a Republican house. There's precedent for this. Carter went into the role of president at odds with establishment-liberals - and establishment-liberal egos - and preceded to get nothing done. Trump's bluster - and undermining of establishment-conservatives as independent actors in their constituents view - is bound to bring about similar results.

Given that: expect a slightly nastier establishment candidate.

[...] Trumpenproles [...]
I'm totally stealing this if you don't mind.

[Collinsworthington]

I love watching people argue about politics. Anyways Iowa will show a lot. Jimmy Carter was decently known but wasn't the front runner, and after the caucas he shot up in the polls, i feel this will happen with Bernie. If the voting age was 14 then Bernie would win in a landslide XD

[phuckphace]

I'll reiterate my belief that the president is weak vis-á-vis congress - and more-so when we consider the civil service. The president's actual power lies not in their position but in their large base of votes and persuasive abilities built on that. Notice that Obama has been quite incapable of achieving things. He was able to leverage his popular support at one stage but that's been used up and now he's impotent.

I'm afraid this is what will happen to Sanders from the get-go. Even if Democrats held Congress. Because these are on the look out for a career's worth of terms the likelihood is going to be a much more conservative approach to the change hinted at.

I'm imaging similar results for Trump. Even though it's a Republican house. There's precedent for this. Carter went into the role of president at odds with establishment-liberals - and establishment-liberal egos - and preceded to get nothing done. Trump's bluster - and undermining of establishment-conservatives as independent actors in their constituents view - is bound to bring about similar results.

Given that: expect a slightly nastier establishment candidate.

I don't disagree with much of this but bear in mind I was referring more to "extra-legal" activities IYKWIM. Clinton's corruption is simply made funnier by her "pro-underdog" routine and the fact that she's already dirtied her hands more totally than a billionaire (Trump). hilariously she called Obamacare "the greatest achievement of the Obama administration" or something along those lines, just about as disingenuous as you can get. it's like accepting a Nobel Prize in 2013 while wearing a "What Bubble?" T-Shirt.

I'm totally stealing this if you don't mind.

I totally stole it from a randomer on Twitter, credit where it's due :P

I love watching people argue about politics. Anyways Iowa will show a lot. Jimmy Carter was decently known but wasn't the front runner, and after the caucas he shot up in the polls, i feel this will happen with Bernie. If the voting age was 14 then Bernie would win in a landslide XD

if the voting age was 14 we'd be living in Hoovervilles already

[Katie96xox]

I'm not particularly keen on any of the Democratic or Republican frontrunners but if I have to support someone I'll through my support behind Ted Cruz. I think he'll do the best job at fixing America after many years of mismanagement. What he lacks in personality is made up for in sensible policy on most, but not all, major issues.

I like a lot of what the Donald is saying but if, God forbid, he happened to become President it would be a complete disaster. I don't mind Marco Rubio either but I think he's too weak on several key issues, immigration being one. Ben Carson clearly possesses a brilliant mind and talks a lot of sense, to me he's the most likeable candidate on this poll as a person, but I'm not sure he's suited to being President.

I think Hillary would be awful for America and would leave it in an even worse state than Obama but if she's the Democratic nominee then she will probably become the President and that would be awful. For that reason I sincerely hope that Bernie is made Democratic nominee because then the Republicans could nominate the Donald's hairpiece and still win every state in a landslide. The old man's bonkers, he couldn't win a community raffle, let alone the election.

[Judean Zealot]

My preference: Michael Bloomberg.

[Vlerchan]

My preference: Michael Bloomberg.
I too would be quite willing to submit to the ascension of our rightful Jewish overlords.

It's only ever been a matter of time.

[phuckphace]

I too would be quite willing to submit to the ascension of our rightful Jewish overlords.

It's only ever been a matter of time.

seems to be working out quite well for us in ROTW, if I do say so myself

[StoppingTom]

My body is ready for the Trump v. Sanders meme election of 2016.

As for the (criminal, in my opinion) Clinton, she had talked to Goldman-Sachs plutocrats, assuring them she was on their side in 2013 (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047), and then when asked about this and if she would release the transcripts of what she was paid to tell these people, she basically just laughed it off. (https://theintercept.com/2016/01/23/clinton-goldman-sachs-laugh/)

[Kahn]

My preference: Michael Bloomberg.

I too would be quite willing to submit to the ascension of our rightful Jewish overlords.

It's only ever been a matter of time.

And so it begins. (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/nyregion/bloomberg-sensing-an-opening-revisits-a-potential-white-house-run.html?referer=https://www.google.com/)

[Judean Zealot]

And so it begins. (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/nyregion/bloomberg-sensing-an-opening-revisits-a-potential-white-house-run.html?referer=https://www.google.com/)

Yeah, I was referencing that report.

NWO, here we come! :D

[Rydar8]

Well id be voting Fiorina if she wins the primary but she wont, so Trump it is in the General.
Trump could honestly fix major parts of our country and then isis and illegal immigration wouldn't be a problem anymore.

[phuckphace]

kek I hope Bloomberg does run, the memes would be real. literally Hitler vs. le happy merchant, the eternal yin and yang. but who has more hitpoints?

[davdev17]

This is a brief summary of my view:
If I could vote, I would definitely vote for Bernie Sanders.
All of the Republicans are ridiculous. They don't make sense to me. They are very ignorant
O'Malley is kind of a joke.
Hillary Clinton's views change with popular opinion and she is backed by Super PACs and has to go with what they want.
Bernie is for the average man. The top 1% owns more than the other 99%. Wall Street doesn't pay it's fair share of taxes. We need universal healthcare, low cost university education, and more money available to the middle class.

[Judean Zealot]

kek I hope Bloomberg does run, the memes would be real. literally Hitler vs. le happy merchant, the eternal yin and yang. but who has more hitpoints?

If he runs, would you consider voting for him?

[phuckphace]

If he runs, would you consider voting for him?

not even for a second. he's a gun grabber, way too socially liberal approaching "Tumblr wow just wow I can't even" levels and essentially an anarchist on the economic end. he's the incarnation of what the Trumpenproletariat is reacting against.

[Vlerchan]

Robert Reich was the individual that had my support before election season began.
But the political system we now have is profoundly broken. Bernie Sanders is the most qualified candidate to create the political system we should have because he’s leading a political movement for change.

Robert Reich (2016) Want to reverse sky-high inequality? Bernie Sanders is the pragmatic choice (The Guardian, 27 Jan 2016). (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/27/want-to-reverse-sky-high-inequality-bernie-sanders-is-the-pragmatic-choice)

Thoughts?

[Kahn]

But the political system we now have is profoundly broken. Bernie Sanders is the most qualified candidate to create the political system we should have because he’s leading a political movement for change.

Robert Reich (2016) Want to reverse sky-high inequality? Bernie Sanders is the pragmatic choice (The Guardian, 27 Jan 2016). (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/27/want-to-reverse-sky-high-inequality-bernie-sanders-is-the-pragmatic-choice)

Thoughts?

My thought is that I wish Mr. Reich had run for office because he very clearly cares about the people of this country and I hope that he is given a position in any administration that finds it's way into the White House.

That being said, I do agree with him that Americans are sick of crony capitalism. Sanders is a staunch opponent of it, and for that reason I feel as though he is the lesser of the two evils when compared with Trump.

[ethan-s]

No racist remarks? You have a distorted view of what racism is. He called all mexicans 'rapists' and 'criminals'. Explain how that isn't racism?



um, no. he said undocumented illegal's are rapists and criminals and crack pots and meth heads. facts are stubborn things, BUT, not ALL mexicans or illegals are what i sad above.

[northy]

um, no. he said undocumented illegal's are rapists and criminals and crack pots and meth heads. facts are stubborn things, BUT, not ALL mexicans or illegals are what i sad above.

Please see this article (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/02/donald-trump-racist-claims-mexico-rapes) so that you can see that you're wrong.
I particularly point you to this sentence: There are no centrally recorded government statistics on the ethnicity of convicted rapists in the US.

[Sublime Demonz]

#FeelTheBern

[Vlerchan]

Please see this article (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/02/donald-trump-racist-claims-mexico-rapes) so that you can see that you're wrong.

Just adding to this is that as the population of illegals rose (significantly) in the U.S. the number of rapes fell (significantly). The likelihood is that the events are entirely uncorrelated.

First generation Hispanics also commit crime at a lower rate than average. This converges towards the scores for descendent. However the likelihood is that this is biased upwards as a result of there being a larger proprtion of second- and third-generation Hispanics upper-middle self-reporting as white.

---

[Vlerchan]

Hope no-one minds if I just revive this thread to discuss election issues, because the issues are important too.

Bernie Sanders: You don't need an economics Ph.D to predict the effect of trade deals that put American workers in competition with workers making $5 a day.

https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/726894495946657794

It is - of course - quite possible it predict the direction*.

So, Sanders-supporters, what do we imagine it going to happen with more free trade?

---

* The magnitude is another question, and that's what trade economists do.

[Trumpetplayer]

Bernie, due to the his economic, domestic and international trade and peace policies