clinton vs. sanders your vote?- Page 72

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 6:08pm

"Sanders promises his health care system will cover pretty much everything while costing the average American almost nothing, and he relies mainly on vague “administrative” savings and massive taxes on the rich to make up the difference. It’s everything critics fear a single-payer plan would be, and it lacks the kind of engagement with the problems of single-payer health systems necessary to win over skeptics."

But single payer health care isn't a universal good?  We don't have a responsibility to bring the poor up from this system of poverty, and bring back dignity.  Other countries can handle it but it's too much for the USA. 

If that's how you want to go PJ fine, like I said she's got my vote, don't ever think I'll be happy about it, and don't forget for a second how much the Republicans hate her and will turn out in droves to vote against her.  She'll have inspired nothing.

 

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 6:11pm

how nuanced

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 6:31pm

As the Times has reported, Clinton may have been satisfied with the changes in the Bankruptcy Reform Bill but Warren clearly was not, remained seriously disappointed with Clinton's change of position, and attributes it to her loyalty to her Wall St. constituents.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/us/politics/the-vote-for-bankruptcy-reform-that-haunts-hillary-clinton.html

I'm not saying this to bash Hillary Clinton.  For all I know Clinton's assessment of the changes to the bill may have been very convincing while Warren's was not.  As much as I admire Elizabeth Warren, she like all politicians is not beyond critique.   

I'm just saying there appears to a lot more to both sides of this story.

What I will further say is this:  as an undecided Democrat voter who sees pluses and minuses in both candidates, I'm sick and tired of BOTH some of the more spurious anti-Clinton rhetoric from some Sanders supporters AND some of the more spurious anti-Sanders rhetoric from some Clinton supporters.  

Can't we leave the sham spin to the GOP?  

Updated On: 2/8/16 at 06:31 PM

[javero]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:16pm

“I'm curious: based on your post, it seems as if you feel that Clinton is a more appealing candidate to libertarians than Sanders. Is that the case?”

 

No, not at all.  Most of my fellow Libertarians don’t care for either Clinton or Sanders.  On the contrary, in most matters I almost always place pragmatism ahead of ideology, groupthink, or emotional appeal.   As a practicing engineer, the question for me professionally is whether I’ve come across a good-enough solution.  That’s a justifiable compromise because the ideal solution is often unattainable due to a number of factors, from projected costs to push back from the client.  Similarly, in the marketplace of ideas there is no guarantee that the best idea (or its proponent) will gain the most mindshare.  Sometimes the numbers are simply not there to support a good idea or its proponent is not the ideal pitchperson for a particular target audience.

 

Also, we Libertarians are hardly a monolith.  We come in all stripes which unfortunately would include several former friends of mine in the Tea Party offshoot.  Nonetheless, the one tenet that we all cling to is the primacy of individual liberty.   We universally abhor a tyrannical majority in any context.  That was what led me to depart the Democratic party back in 2004.  I had issues with John Edwards on the Democratic ticket long before details of his true character came to light.  I grew up in NC and like many others at the time felt tremendous pressure to keep a lid on what was an open secret throughout the state for the sake of the election.

 

"Why would a libertarian pick out Clinton as the best candidate?"

 

Let me respond first by ruling out the competition.

 

Trump: a blow hard with airs of grandeur who fancies himself a king had he only been born in another place and time

 

Christie: a temperamental bull in a china shop who’s in it because his gig as governor of NJ is nearly up; probably has designs on becoming the US Attorney General under a GOP POTUS

 

Bush: a guy who’s in it only because his mom wants him to feel good about himself after being upstaged by his less capable brother who somehow stole his birthright

 

Cruz: an extreme right-wing ideologue who’d shut down public parks and put scores of hardworking federal employees out of work without flinching just to curry favor with those of his ilk

 

Rubio: a JFK & Obama-wannabee who spouts the same 25-sec bullet points prepared by his handlers scraped from the Rush Limbaugh website at every turn; thank you Christie for finally calling him out

 

Carson: a former idol of mine who’d make a better Christian youth counselor than POTUS; likely on the short-list to head up Health and Human Services or for the Surgeon General’s slot under a GOP POTUS which would be the mother of all controversies

 

Kasich: a fairly moderate and conservative governor of a recurring swing state who is the most presidential of the whole lot despite not gaining any traction; the one knock against is his less than stellar marks in the area of LGBT rights which put off many progressives

 

Fiorina: the woman who ran HP off the rails, took a golden parachute as a parting prize, and now believes that the world has amnesia

 

Sanders: a heckuva nice and principled guy who is arguably too anti-establishment and too far left to go all the way in the general election; I personally am not convinced that he’d be willing to do the deals necessary as POTUS to either prevent or work around congressional gridlock

 

Now onto Clinton:

 

She knows what losing feels like on the grandest of stages.  The fact that she’s recovered from being humbled in 2008 and is able to soldier on is a testament to her iron will and resolve.  That experience matters in spite of how it came about.  If Obama’s presidency has shown us anything, it’s that his successor will need both of those attributes in spades.  Both Nixon and Reagan stumbled the first time out as well so she’s in good company depending on your perspective. 

 

Today, Hillary strikes me as a candidate prepared to enter a cage match with either Cruz or Trump if that’s what it takes to ensure victory in the general election.  Hillary’s just as much establishment as Jeb Bush is but his side has shown in this election cycle that a milquetoast candidate will not take up residence at 1600 Penn Ave NW.  I maintain that no Democrat who refuses to dance for his or her supper before the super PACs stands much chance either in what’s likely to be a $3 billion general election showdown.

Updated On: 2/8/16 at 07:16 PM

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:17pm

Namo  **** off you little ****

 

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:27pm

I agree Germany the Clintons and the Sanders should be friends.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg5cwSBnyQU

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:34pm

How did you NOT get my meaning when I pointed out you don't react well to being corrected?  And then you post THAT.  My stars!

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:39pm

Do you like that Bugs Bunny thing when he;s giving the Monster a permanement?

[South Florida]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 7:46pm

Want Hilary, want Bernie, want us to ignoble ourselves while they self destruct.

[BeadleDeedle]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 8:31pm

South Florida, please learn to write or proofread your posts. They're indecipherable. And weird.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 9:57pm

Javero, thanks for the very detailed reply! I still have a question, though. Accepting that you think Clinton is the one who can win and get things done, what reason do you have to believe that they'll be, you know, libertarian things? :) 

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 10:31pm

I don't think "ignoble" means what he thinks it means.  But I'M the one who speaks in tongues.  Isn't that interesssssting?

[HorseTears]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 10:39pm

PalJoey said: " The Zachary Leven link I posted a few messages above responds directly to the Elizabeth Warren video.

https://medium.com/@zacharyleven/the-case-for-hillary-3564233d524f#.op9snhptl "

 

 

Glad you reposted that PJ.  I missed it the first time.  As much as I admire Elizabeth Warren, the details she left out of her assessment of Hillary's voting record on the bankruptcy bill paint a much more nuanced picture.  

 

[javero]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 10:57pm

kdogg36, I have no assurance whatsoever that Hillary as POTUS would be synonymous with the L word.

Thanks to ISIS/ISIL, I suspect that a Hillary Clinton presidency would be more Thatcheresque than many of her staunchest supporters care to admit.  Her record is somewhat hawkish.  A friend of mine recently suggested that I brace myself for Netanyahu in a pant suit which I didn't find amusing one bit.

 

I'm at a complete loss for how to beat back ISIS/ISIL apart from blowing each and every one of the combatants & recruits to smithereens.  Take a look at the model of female empowerment that FoxNews is putting out at the link below.  That plus serious talk in conservative circles of requiring young women in the US to register for selective service I suggest are traps set for Hillary as POTUS.  If would difficult for her to retain feminist bonafides while suggesting that women should be shielded from selective service registration.  Call me paranoid but Hillary as POTUS would be forced to show more force in both character and in dealing with our adversaries than Obama.  

 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/02/08/former-isis-sex-slaves-now-army-sun-ladies-ready-to-defeat-terror-group.html  

Updated On: 2/8/16 at 10:57 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/8/16 at 10:59pm

Maybe women never should have been shielded from it.  Now that the gays can't be anymore.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 8:36am

Another terrifying Hillary moment her supporters will blithely ignore:

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-iran-idUSN2224332720080422

[PalJoey]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 9:33am

 

The latest ARG poll has the Sanders lead in New Hampshire down to 9, from double digits.

 

Today's single-digit win in New Hampshire will be his last.

 

The upcoming states are all polling in favor of double-digit wins for Clinton in all states except for Vermont and Wisconsin:

 

South Carolina    64-27
Georgia        63-22
Florida        62-26
Michigan    61-34
Minnesota    59-25
Arkansas    57-25
Michigan    57-28
North Carolina    55-29
Texas        50-16
Pennsylvania    46-29
Oklahoma    41-16
Wisconsin    45-43

 

Also, most of those states require 1-month-prior party registration in order to vote in the primary. (A few allow you you register for the party at the poll before you vote.) This means many fewer independents will be voting than in Vermont and New Hampshire, where anyone can vote in any party.

 

He'll end up with Vermont and Wisconsin and maybe Massachusetts and then he'll endorse her in his charming curmudgeonly way, vowing to keep her feet to the fire on progressive issues, and teh Democratic Party will unite to defeat Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.

 

 

 

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 9:48am

Another terrifying Hillary moment her supporters will blithely ignore

 

Ignore now, or when she said it eight years ago?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 10:00am

Well, she better not have changed her mind or we'll have to go after her for that, too!

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 10:06am

I knew a girl who changed her mind once. 

 

Now she's dead. 

Updated On: 2/9/16 at 10:06 AM

[javero]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 10:08am

Emerson has Bush & Kasich coming in 2nd & 3rd place respectively on the other side.  Despite Trump still being untouchable, I sense a correction occurring within the GOP.   The governors minus Christie are on the march.  In the long run, I suspect that Christie will be rewarded for his hit job on Rubio.  I don't see Rubio recovering from a bottom tier finish in NH.  A smart move for Bush would be to do a deal with Christie now to thin the herd and to set his sights on a 3rd place finish in SC after Trump and Cruz.  Cruz is Santorum 2.0 so he'll play well in SC but Bush has to take out Carson who's still in it just to slow Cruz' roll.

I don't give a fig about the GOP but don't want Cruz or Trump anywhere near the White House.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/08/social_media_nh_voters_searching_establishment_options_129590.html

Updated On: 2/9/16 at 10:08 AM

[kdogg36]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 12:42pm

javero, thanks again for the response. I gather from this thread, and the other one I just responded to, that you're a rather more hawkish libertarian than I am. That goes a long way in clearing things up! :)

[javero]

Posted: 2/9/16 at 12:50pm

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/387948/libertarian-hawks-david-french

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 2/10/16 at 6:20am

"Today's single-digit win in New Hampshire will be his last."

 

He won by 20 points!

 

[javero]

Posted: 2/10/16 at 7:59am

Too soon I tell ya...too soon.  Just kiddin'.  She got her butt handed to her and NV could be a challenge as well.  So far both sides have delivered indictments of the establishment.  Her concession speech was riveting but a bit too self-laudatory.  That works for Donald but not her for some reason.  It'll be interesting to see whether Mrs Clinton can turn the corner in SC.  I also think the big winner last night was Bloomberg.  His team is no doubt reading the tea leaves this morning.