What, the 4 term president that had no compunction to institute internment camps? The one that found no solution to the depression in 10 years, and perhaps elongated it with bad economic decisions like manipulating market pricing of gold? The one that seemed to befriend and talk affectionately about Stalin, a murderous dictator? The one that has saddled us with the first of untenable entitlement programs that now threaten to bury us in debt? Yeah, seems like a good one to compare to.
Sure, also the president who is consistently ranked as one of the top 3 presidents in the entire history of the United States by academics and historians, but use your description if you feel like.
The fact that an outspoken socialist can run for presidential nominee and do well is terrifying - although, yes, it is the Democratic primary, so not altogether unexpected.
What do you see as a distinction between Sanders' philosophy and say, FDR, that you find so terrifying?
Yeah, Sanders was always going to do thrash Clinton in New Hampshire, and I don't think you could find a serious analyst who was predicting otherwise. But I believe his margin of victory was better than expected, and that could mean something going forward into territory that's less favorable to him.
This is my take as well. Yes, Iowa and NH were favorable to him, but he did close large gaps in both states and ultimately outperformed voting day polls in both states as well. He definitely has his work cut out for him going forward, but it's tough to know how much since there have been no polls in Nevada since Christmas and none in South Carolina since before the Iowa vote.
Aaaaaand apparently Chris Christie is suspending his campaign now. Makes sense since with the disappointing finish in NH. On the whole I don't think he ran a very effective campaign up until the debate a few days ago, more of that kind of thing earlier in the campaign and I think he could have done a lot better. Rubio, Kasich, and Jeb! should get a bit of a boost from one of the remaining establishment candidates dropping out. It's essentially down to those three, Cruz and Trump now.
Edit: And Fiorina now out as well. Not to much to say, I don't think she was ever seriously running anyway and was just there so the GOP had a female candidate to call on when it was politically convenient.
Really bad night for Rubio, finishing 5th and behind Jeb! even. After his debate meltdown, his lack of substance and experience, his job attendance, I'm not sure if he's even a serious candidate anymore. Good night for Jeb! though. Bad night for Hillary too. Great night for Bernie.
The libertarian dream is that if only Ron or Rand were on the Republican ballot, people would flock to their banner - that it's only the restraints of the two-party system holding back a sweeping libertarian coalition.
If Libertarians are disappointed that Paul is out of it, then have I got a candidate for them. According to Ron Paul himself, of all the remaining candidates left in the field, the one with the most libertarian friendly views is.....
How does the IA result favor or hurt Bernie? I personally put it at a slight advantage, but not what he would have liked going forward into rougher territory after NH
I would agree, it's a positive, but a small one. I think obviously it would have been a much bigger story had he won. Tying is not as good, but it's still a small victory. He's proved that he's legitimate and can compete, and that the most favored non-incumbent in modern history is not unbeatable. He's also going to win the next state which should give him a bit of a boost since he'll be "leading" for about 10 days. He's still a significant underdog.
Good news for two reasons. First, Trump did not win Iowa. Second, hopefully some of the other candidates will now see fit to drop out. Huckabee dropped out tonight. Like, can we at least pare it down to the top six or so? All these people hanging around who don't have a shot and/or don't even really want to be there is just silliness.
Democratic Caucus is so close it's basically a tie. O'Malley has dropped now as well making it a true 1v1, Sanders vs Clinton.
Do you believe that Cruz is better than Trump?
I do not, I would like to see both of them gone, and Trump not winning Iowa is one of the more probable ways that happens.
It basically shows Cruz, Trump, and Rubio as the contenders, with Carson being the only other candidate with any significant amount of votes.
Good news for two reasons. First, Trump did not win Iowa. Second, hopefully some of the other candidates will now see fit to drop out. Huckabee dropped out tonight. Like, can we at least pare it down to the top six or so? All these people hanging around who don't have a shot and/or don't even really want to be there is just silliness.
Democratic Caucus is so close it's basically a tie. O'Malley has dropped now as well making it a true 1v1, Sanders vs Clinton.
So here's the question, because we've been giving flak to Trump supporters, and deservedly so.
But let's turn to another issue: Why is Ted Cruz doing so well?
Like, why is anyone voting for that guy? Is Ted Cruz worse than Trump? These are valuable questions I think we should discuss.
My impression, as someone who has some conservative Christian friends, is that Cruz is the choice for people who want to support a candidate who really embraces evangelical Christianity. Trump may say he is a Christian and reads the bible, etc, but any reasonable person can see that it's at best lip service. Cruz is just as much a huckster and a fraud IMHO, but he bathes in Christianity like a televangelist.
I also think some of these people are really turned off by Trump's antics. Most Christians don't consider themselves cruel or crude, in fact quite the opposite. So when they see Trump acting like a bully or fascist, it's a turn-off. Cruz on the other hand is a lot more slick and soothing in his delivery. I think he would be infinitely worse as president, but he's a better snake-oil salesman.
Is anybody else confused by Bernie Sanders essentially labeling himself anti-establishment? He is a socialist so if anything he would bring more establishment. More taxes, government programs, more control essentially.
"Establishment" doesn't mean government. It means the dominant group or elite that holds power. It is saying that there is a relatively small group of wealthy people who have a lot of influence in politics, financial systems, media, etc. and use those systems to keep themselves in power and rig the system against everyone else.
Trump absolutely denied that he was advocating internment camps in the same interview that the subject was brought up. He referenced as an extreme example of something that the USA has done in the past under the leadership of a well respected president, FDR. Sounds like it was brought up as a way to soften the sound of an immigration ban. Political misstep? Probably. But it is disingenuous to claim he advocated it.
You need to listen to the full interview. Because a few seconds later he said "I don't want to bring it back. I don't like it doing it. That's why it would be a temporary measure". So he did advocate for it. He claims he doesn't *like* doing it, but he would do it anyway. He is straight up playing to xenophobia and fear. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmLCSTvaN2E
If he wins the Republican primary I'll throw Trump a vote. Tired of the same old washed up politicians on the left and right. He clearly is of a different breed... I'm just a tired voter that actually wants to see a different style, this will be my 4th time voting for a president and will go out of my way to cast my vote this time(if Trumps the primary). If not, just going to sit this election out.
So just curious, the voice he gives to white supremacists and neo-nazi groups doesn't bother you at all?
Sure, also the president who is consistently ranked as one of the top 3 presidents in the entire history of the United States by academics and historians, but use your description if you feel like.
What do you see as a distinction between Sanders' philosophy and say, FDR, that you find so terrifying?
Fun Fact: In the New Hampshire *Republican* primary, Bernie Sanders got more votes than Jim Gilmore.
This is my take as well. Yes, Iowa and NH were favorable to him, but he did close large gaps in both states and ultimately outperformed voting day polls in both states as well. He definitely has his work cut out for him going forward, but it's tough to know how much since there have been no polls in Nevada since Christmas and none in South Carolina since before the Iowa vote.
Edit: And Fiorina now out as well. Not to much to say, I don't think she was ever seriously running anyway and was just there so the GOP had a female candidate to call on when it was politically convenient.
If Libertarians are disappointed that Paul is out of it, then have I got a candidate for them. According to Ron Paul himself, of all the remaining candidates left in the field, the one with the most libertarian friendly views is.....
Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders.
http://personalliberty.com/ron-paul-bernie-trumps-cruz-on-wall-street/
I would agree, it's a positive, but a small one. I think obviously it would have been a much bigger story had he won. Tying is not as good, but it's still a small victory. He's proved that he's legitimate and can compete, and that the most favored non-incumbent in modern history is not unbeatable. He's also going to win the next state which should give him a bit of a boost since he'll be "leading" for about 10 days. He's still a significant underdog.
I do not, I would like to see both of them gone, and Trump not winning Iowa is one of the more probable ways that happens.
Good news for two reasons. First, Trump did not win Iowa. Second, hopefully some of the other candidates will now see fit to drop out. Huckabee dropped out tonight. Like, can we at least pare it down to the top six or so? All these people hanging around who don't have a shot and/or don't even really want to be there is just silliness.
Democratic Caucus is so close it's basically a tie. O'Malley has dropped now as well making it a true 1v1, Sanders vs Clinton.
My impression, as someone who has some conservative Christian friends, is that Cruz is the choice for people who want to support a candidate who really embraces evangelical Christianity. Trump may say he is a Christian and reads the bible, etc, but any reasonable person can see that it's at best lip service. Cruz is just as much a huckster and a fraud IMHO, but he bathes in Christianity like a televangelist.
I also think some of these people are really turned off by Trump's antics. Most Christians don't consider themselves cruel or crude, in fact quite the opposite. So when they see Trump acting like a bully or fascist, it's a turn-off. Cruz on the other hand is a lot more slick and soothing in his delivery. I think he would be infinitely worse as president, but he's a better snake-oil salesman.
"Establishment" doesn't mean government. It means the dominant group or elite that holds power. It is saying that there is a relatively small group of wealthy people who have a lot of influence in politics, financial systems, media, etc. and use those systems to keep themselves in power and rig the system against everyone else.
You need to listen to the full interview. Because a few seconds later he said "I don't want to bring it back. I don't like it doing it. That's why it would be a temporary measure". So he did advocate for it. He claims he doesn't *like* doing it, but he would do it anyway. He is straight up playing to xenophobia and fear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmLCSTvaN2E
So just curious, the voice he gives to white supremacists and neo-nazi groups doesn't bother you at all?