2016 Presedential Race - Who do you got?

Who will become our next President?


  • Total voters
    50

SpamYouToDeath

I asked for a, Custom Rank and, Learned My Lesson.
15 Year Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
6,059
I'm in the highest tax bracket already, so I'm already giving a 1/3 of the dough away anyways...

Since the tax code doesn't give me a choice about being parted from my money, I'd at least like to give it to somebody nice.

Somebody, like Bernie.

Part of the problem is that the tax brackets don't extend upwards far enough. Someone needs to get serious in taxing wasteful executive salaries - no one has a rational justification for bleeding tens of millions of dollars a year out of a company into their personal accounts.

I agree the government should supply simple things like you listed, but they don't...or, if they do, it comes at a cost so high, it isn't worth it. Couple to that the completely lackluster services the gov provides. The US gov is a fat, lazy, corrupt, slow pile of stacked ineffective shit. 4000 cooks in the kitchen all wanting kick backs and fighting to have it their way...meanwhile the people wanting food are starving.

So...putting even more control in their hands is just fucking absurd...

So you want to just give up on the whole endeavor, rather than trying to fix things? Plenty of European countries have strong welfare systems, comprehensive health care, etc., and they're not collapsing under their own weight. It is entirely possible to have social programs that are functional and successful. (Unless you mean to say that Americans are uniquely and inherently incapable of organizing in this way.)
 

oliverclaude

General Morden's Aide
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Posts
7,688
Trump's problem is mainly being only associated with... Trump. This caricature of a multi billionaire, who's more than anything just a pop-cultural reference. There's no president here to be found. It's an open secret that a candidate has to be in large parts something of a white canvas, as to allow every voter to project her/his own image on him. And Trump has his whole persona already tattooed with his widely known past up to a level, where not even a single voter could fit there, let alone the word president.
 

tacoguy

Rasputin's Rose Gardener
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Posts
723
I hate them all but I hate Bernie a bit less.
That's who I will vote for.
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
So you want to just give up on the whole endeavor, rather than trying to fix things? Plenty of European countries have strong welfare systems, comprehensive health care, etc., and they're not collapsing under their own weight. It is entirely possible to have social programs that are functional and successful. (Unless you mean to say that Americans are uniquely and inherently incapable of organizing in this way.)

But all of this is like saying "Man, the guy currently in charge of finances sucks...let's give the checkbook over to the compulsive spender"

Let's really take a step back, shall we?

I'll gladly admit that our system is out of control...many things, like healthcare and higher education are indeed a complete mess. But putting these things in the hands of the government? Really? This is a horribly bad idea.

I just keep going back to this...our government is a complete train wreck. So much in fact that the $$ to do many of these things is already there with no new taxing required. It's just being blown of thousands of insane money-drain projects, wasted in fruitless endeavors and going in the pockets of many people. The US government has already proven it cannot spend money wisely...why would anyone think that giving them even more is a good idea?

Seriously, I'm not talking conspiracy theories here...the US government is a financial disaster, this is a known fact. How can giving them even more of our money and even more control over our daily lives possibly be a good thing?

I haven't had a single good response to this question yet. I keep getting the "Well, shouldn't one's government be capable of bla, bla, bla?" thrown back at me. Never do they address how dysfunctional our system currently is...they just skip right over that reality and go to the blindly optimistic phase.

I guess that in short, I'll gladly admit that things are seriously out of whack in this country...but asking the government to fix it isn't the solution.



Trump's problem is mainly being only associated with... Trump. This caricature of a multi billionaire, who's more than anything just a pop-cultural reference. There's no president here to be found. It's an open secret that a candidate has to be in large parts something of a white canvas, as to allow every voter to project her/his own image on him. And Trump has his whole persona already tattooed with his widely known past up to a level, where not even a single voter could fit there, let alone the word president.

To me, Trump is more of a wake up call than anything else.

He is an extremist clown, there's no doubt about it. But, like Bernie, he's actually being listened to this time. Why is this? So many people are just fed up with Washington. It is a mockery of what a political system should be. Congress is a fucking joke, our presidents have been a joke, we've endured decades of brutal "republican -vs- democrat" celebrity death matches, decades of never ending slander campaigns...it goes on and on. People are tired of it and often, tired people rush to the arms of extremists.
 
Last edited:

Tripredacus

Three 6 Mafia
10 Year Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2012
Posts
5,467
No one has stepped in to fill Raph Nader or David Duke's shoes.
 

TonK

Least Valuable Player
Joined
Apr 24, 2001
Posts
20,049
trump got blown out.

sanders lost literally on coin flips. slightly different.

also trump is a xenophobic racist assface. more people want to see him fail than bernie.

Trump isn't a politician. And he didn't get blown out.
 

NeoTurfMasta

DANCE DANCE KARNOV!,
20 Year Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2001
Posts
4,229
Trump isn't a politician. And he didn't get blown out.

You haven't voted in the poll.

If everyone here votes for Sanders in the election, I'll produce a neo multi/flash cart.
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
I went ahead and said Clinton...not because I support her, but because I'm realistic.

The popular vote is horse shit...who wins it doesn't really matter. Don't believe me? Here:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html

2000 presidential race:
Popular vote-Gore 48.38%, Bush 47.87%
Electoral- Gore 266 (49.5%), Bush 271 (50.4%)

2012 Presidential race:
Popular vote- Obama 53%, Romney 46%
Electoral- Obama 365 (67.8%), Romney 173 (32.1%)

Those two votes show that one can win the popular, but lose the electoral...or that the electoral can vary in an extreme fashion from the % of the popular.


In other words, in the end, who the majority of those truly calling the shots in the country want to sit in that chair, will. Those "calling the shots" does not mean us.
 

SpamYouToDeath

I asked for a, Custom Rank and, Learned My Lesson.
15 Year Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
6,059
I guess that in short, I'll gladly admit that things are seriously out of whack in this country...but asking the government to fix it isn't the solution.

I'm trying to be pragmatic - the private health care system in the US costs us twice as much, per capita, as essentially any universal (i.e. government) systems. In effect: however bad the government is, the private industry is currently even worse. We've tried reform after reform to fix the private system, and none of them have improved the situation. To me, that means it's time to kick out the bloated insurance-company model and go for a government-run system.

I'm not disagreeing that the federal government is often inefficient. There are just some cases where it's still the best option, in spite of that.

Or, being even more pragmatic, I guess I'd be fine with individual states running their health care as well. It's worked out relatively well for Hawaii, at least. Everyone seems to ignore that option, though - in the continental US, I think it may be open to abuse (head over to the border, buy fireworks and antibiotics...).
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
I'm trying to be pragmatic - the private health care system in the US costs us twice as much, per capita, as essentially any universal (i.e. government) systems. In effect: however bad the government is, the private industry is currently even worse. We've tried reform after reform to fix the private system, and none of them have improved the situation. To me, that means it's time to kick out the bloated insurance-company model and go for a government-run system.

I'm not disagreeing that the federal government is often inefficient. There are just some cases where it's still the best option, in spite of that.

Or, being even more pragmatic, I guess I'd be fine with individual states running their health care as well. It's worked out relatively well for Hawaii, at least. Everyone seems to ignore that option, though - in the continental US, I think it may be open to abuse (head over to the border, buy fireworks and antibiotics...).

The price is indeed out of control...I've long said that. I pay a silly amount for health insurance.

But.

I can get it, and the quality is high (at least where I live).

It's the quality/quantity thing that scares the shit out of me. At the moment (pretty much), if you can pay for it, you can get it. You can also pay for quality. If the gov gets involved, I have a strong feeling this will be a bad thing for US citizens. I can almost assure you that not only will the quality go down, but the availability will also go down.

To add to that, there is the swept under the rug tax-cost of healthcare. So yeah, the premiums may be cheaper, but how will that reflect come tax-time?

I just know this...there is no such thing as a free lunch. Money is money and the price has to go somewhere. A $50,000 surgery isn't going to become $12,000 magically...it just isn't.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
I'll gladly admit that our system is out of control...many things, like healthcare and higher education are indeed a complete mess. But putting these things in the hands of the government? Really? This is a horribly bad idea..

Who has proposed putting higher ed in the hands of government (any more than it is already in the hands of government)?
 

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
College Tuition: All public colleges and universities should be tuition free.

A government takeover of government colleges by subsidizing them?

Do you actually think that the government would be "hands off" with them and simply pay their sky high rates outright? The government is incapable of keeping their mitts out of shit, I'm sure they'd fuck it royally...
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
Do you actually think that the government would be "hands off" with them and simply pay their sky high rates outright? The government is incapable of keeping their mitts out of shit, I'm sure they'd fuck it royally...

I hear ya!
Keep government out of Public Colleges and Universities!

We can't let Government mess up public colleges and Universities!
 
Last edited:

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
I hear ya!
Keep government out of Public Colleges and Universities!

We can't let Government mess up public colleges and Universities!

...pretty sure you're being a smart ass.

Unless I am out of my mind, state colleges are exactly that...STATE run, not FEDERALLY run. If the Fed began paying 100% tuition, it would b a different story concerning how thy're regulated.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
So it isn't that you don't trust government, it is that you don't trust the federal government.

Never mind that it already covers many costs of public college tuition and funding(albeit by direct grants,, GI Bill Funding, covering loans, Work study, and pell grants).
 
Last edited:

smokehouse

I was Born This Ugly.,
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Posts
12,919
So it isn't that you don't trust government, it is that you don't trust the federal government.

Never mind that it already covers many costs of public college tuition and funding(albeit by direct grants,, GI Bill Funding, covering loans, Work study, and pell grants).

I don't trust any government...it's all shit. Federal is just a larger, more shitty, more reckless form of state government.

Comparing the GI Bill and grants to what Sanders is proposing is apples to oranges.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
I don't know, there are (and have been) some really shitty state governments out there.

And don't get me started on local governments.
 
Last edited:

DNSDies

I LOVE HILLARY CLINTON!
Joined
Mar 15, 2015
Posts
1,983
The amount of trust I have in a government is inversely proportional to the size and complexity of it.
 
Top