Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Are you being sarcastic? I can't tell... I'll oblige either way....
His rationale for opposing *poor* reform is to avoid making it easier for corporations to displace American jobs with workers treated like slaves.
Nothing you quoted actually debunks his stated belief in the lump of labor fallacy. He supports amnesty for immigrants already here (like most of the US population), but opposes further immigration because he thinks Americans need those jobs. He has been nothing if not consistent on that point.
Q: So basically, there's never been a single trade agreement this country's negotiated that you've been comfortable with?
SANDERS: That's correct.
I repeat: he thinks the US should withdraw from the WTO and end permanent normal trade relations with China. Surely the reasons why these are bad ideas are self-explanatory?
edited 27th Jan '16 2:06:35 AM by Nihlus1
![]()
Ah. Thank you.
Though I am not a Republican, I just oppose ideas that I think are actively harmful from both extremes of the right and left. I probably lean more to the left than the right on most issues actually. This is because I am a Communist pro-asiatic pro-immigration partisan who worships B. Clinton, known rapist.
[I'm sorry, I was just looking for an excuse to quote/paraphrase that hilarious copy-pasta]
Sanders also thinks that Denmark is a socialist economy (Denmark says: "What? No."
) and that his anti-free trade, anti-WTO policies are like their's...
edited 27th Jan '16 2:26:32 AM by Nihlus1
@Nihlus: I have a question. If Sanders' policy prescription (which is, indeed, immigration reform to allow more legal immigrants in and give illegals protection) is broadly correct, does it matter whether he actually understands economics?
His campaign explicitly supports immigration reform in favor of these things, so any countersource is arguing with exactly what Sanders says. (You can argue that he's flip-flopping, but not that he's not saying what he's saying.)
Regarding that "attack" ad in Ohio that was mentioned earlier, apparently it's borrowing from Claire McCaskill's playbook from 2014 where she ran a pro-Todd Akin ad in order to get him nominated as her general election opponent, painting him as "too conservative" so that red meat voters would rush to support him.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Sanders has a higher score against GOP candidates largely because he has not been tested at a national level in the same way as Clinton has. He hasn't weathered eight-plus years of personal attacks, muckraking, and Congressional investigations specifically aimed at poisoning his future electability.
The risk of nominating Sanders is that the Republican machine would go all-out in destroying him and might find avenues of attack that haven't come out yet.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I have been trying to give different perspectives for a long while about immigration and othersubjects from a third world country!
Senpai, why won't you notice me?
Y'all Qaeda was making an emotional argument. They get an emotional response. Logic doesn't come into place here at all, and furthermore, it would have achieved nothing. Also, is one even able to donate to a government institution such as a reserve?
But yeah this is like that gay book about Trump. Guy hates stuff, he gets compared and likened to that he hates the most for the lulz, people complain about it being the incorrect way of reaching him. Sure is, but it certainly is an efficient way of making a point.
edited 27th Jan '16 7:18:20 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes![]()
![]()
Literally every mainstream media article and interview has pointed out that Sanders is a socialist. Pundits ask him nearly every appearance "Can a socialist win?"
I'm fairly certain the majority of Sanders' support is already aware of his socialist tendencies and don't care.
Trump has also beat on Sanders no less than Bush in his rallies and on social media—just yesterday someone threw a tomato at him after he called Sanders a 'communist.'
Rand Paul has held an "anti-Sanders" fundraiser.
And a Wall Street Super Pac has pledged to spend over $600,000 in attack ads in Iowa this week.
So, it seems like the GOP is well aware of Sanders' electability.
Also, according to a Jan. 21 - 24 poll conducted by CNN/ORC, Sanders now slightly leads Clinton in net favorability among non-white voters, 34+ to 26+:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2697606-rel3a-Democrats-2016-2.html#document/p1
edited 27th Jan '16 8:17:27 AM by SolipsistOwl

Or they know they don't have a candidate that can beat Clinton in the general, so want Sanders to get the nom instead.