Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-13-2016, 06:04 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,267,512 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
no, I'm going to vote against whatever moron the Democrats believe should be in the oval office..
Whether they are any different or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-13-2016, 07:17 AM
 
285 posts, read 177,056 times
Reputation: 263
In other developed nations, Bernie's views as a whole would be considered pretty ordinary. If not upholding the political insanity that is unique to the United States makes you a "socialist", then so be it. Cool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 07:52 AM
 
Location: In Transition
1,637 posts, read 1,911,618 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Are you supporting Bernie's positions more or Hillary's more? If going by electability, the latest poll shows Sanders leading Cruz by 19% in the important swing state NH, while Hillary is losing by 4% to Cruz.

The "strongest candidate" is losing to Ted Cruz in NH!!! Similar numbers regarding Trump.

People need to realize that Sanders is the strongest candidate as he has so much more cross-party appeal than Hillary and Hillary is unable to create the type of excitement that Bernie is getting which brings more people who previously didnt vote out to vote. People who support the policies of Bernie should not feel the need to pick Hillary even if they dont want to because of "electability".
I agree, however in any case electability implies the attributes of picking a candidate in the same manner that you are rooting for a sports team!

If you go by how electable a candidate is rather than position, then if you vote for a candidate who does not represent your views yet gets into office, what have you gained? You can say "whohoo" my candidate won! OK, but what if that candidate doesn't do anything you want for the next 4 years? What have you accomplished? Nothing!

Voting for a candidate on what you believe in should NOT be connected to the odds of a candidate winning. You should vote for a candidate based on principles, and if the person loses, oh well there's next time (kind of like a lottery ticket!). However, if enough people think like you, then the odds of a candidate getting in gets better.

We need to quit thinking of elections like sports games. When the football season is over, our lives just go on as always as if nothing happened. When an election season is over, our lives can dramatically be impacted based on what we do. I only have to point out the last 16 years as evidence of what I'm talking about.

This is probably the only shot we have to vote on a clear cut choice (Bernie vs Hillary), don't blow it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 07:53 AM
 
12 posts, read 8,790 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Why should dirt poor students with good grades not be allowed to go to public uni, while a rich lazy kid with bad grades in HS can? Tuition free college levels the playing field somewhat. Its called a meritocracy.

And why can't poor kids take loans or work hard and get academic scholarships? Sounds like sour grapes to me? I wasn't from a rich family and I did not ask for my college tuition to be paid for by everyone else..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 07:57 AM
 
12 posts, read 8,790 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
This explains how they just used other tax payer monies to partially pay back the first round of welfare.

Bailed-Out Banks Paying Back TARP With Govt*Money - Home - The Daily Bail

Banks: Paying Off One Government Bailout With Another | Marketplace.org

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...dT1R_blog.html

And.....

National Review Online

This also doesn't take into account the billions in bad loans the government took from them and placed in F&F. And who has to pay that off? The taxpayers.

Then we have to consider the billions the Fed paid the banks in interest for holding the money taxpayers gave them in the first place.

Do I need to continue?



Shouldn't you find out before condemning him? He plans on a small tax on each trade made on Wall Street. As I said, getting the taxpayers a little of their money back.

16.6 billion lost on the auto bailout.

It's Official: Taxpayers Lost $16.6 Billion On The Auto Bailout - Conn Carroll



Your sources are old....I can find sources that say the money was paid back...


https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/


And I am not for a small tax on trades, how is taxing money I invest with a broker, giving money back to me, it is being redistributed to someone else....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 08:03 AM
 
12 posts, read 8,790 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
If Bernie could, he'd restructure the tax code to break up large fortunes and distribute them more evenly toward the middle and working classes. This is what they do in the democratic socialist countries he admires. I think this is great. There is very little Bernie and I diagree on.

So you mean, you are for confiscating some ones wealth, someone who's family has worked years to obtain, through starting a business or having an invention or making an investment that grows....you are for, saying, once someone gets so much money (fortune), that it should be forcible taken, and redistributed to the middle class....so they can spend it on comforts of life? And that is Bernie's position?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 08:08 AM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,499,887 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kool Krab View Post
In other developed nations, Bernie's views as a whole would be considered pretty ordinary. If not upholding the political insanity that is unique to the United States makes you a "socialist", then so be it. Cool.
Those are the same nations that allow immigrant men to gang rape native women and then tell the victims they should've dressed more modest and not gone out allow after sundown. I'll pass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 08:10 AM
 
Location: In Transition
1,637 posts, read 1,911,618 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchoolAtHeart View Post
So you mean, you are for confiscating some ones wealth, someone who's family has worked years to obtain, through starting a business or having an invention or making an investment that grows....you are for, saying, once someone gets so much money (fortune), that it should be forcible taken, and redistributed to the middle class....so they can spend it on comforts of life? And that is Bernie's position?
A) Please cite statistics on how many people in this category will be impacted. With the way wealth is distributed nowadays, your notion of a person who worked to build a business and became wealthy is rapidly becoming an anachronism. Most wealth nowadays is being accumulated due to huge tax breaks and lack of regulation

B) I believe no matter who we elect into office at the end of the day, my tax load is going nowhere but up. So, I might as well vote for someone who will distribute that load more equitably. By the way, I cannot count how many times a politician has said they were going to cut taxes, and after 4 years, my tax bill kept going up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 08:30 AM
 
12 posts, read 8,790 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkbatca View Post
A) Please cite statistics on how many people in this category will be impacted. With the way wealth is distributed nowadays, your notion of a person who worked to build a business and became wealthy is rapidly becoming an anachronism. Most wealth nowadays is being accumulated due to huge tax breaks and lack of regulation

B) I believe no matter who we elect into office at the end of the day, my tax load is going nowhere but up. So, I might as well vote for someone who will distribute that load more equitably. By the way, I cannot count how many times a politician has said they were going to cut taxes, and after 4 years, my tax bill kept going up.
I am not sure of the numbers, but there are over 28 million small businesses in the U.S., so I would be very concerned about tax policy that affects over 50% of the US employers by number of emloyees


https://www.sba.gov/content/small-bu...-trends-impact


However, I don't see how the below idea is an equitable way to handling tax policy.


Economic Inequality – FeelTheBern.org
I heard Bernie wants to raise the top tax bracket to 90 percent. That seems too high.

That’s actually not true. Bernie has never said he wants to do that. He has recently said that he is “working right now on a comprehensive tax package, which I suspect will, for the top marginal rates, go over 50 percent.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2016, 09:01 AM
 
1,553 posts, read 926,821 times
Reputation: 1659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkbatca View Post
LOL here we have "Market Junkie" and his "strongest candidate" is in the hip pocket of Wall Street. Color me shocked

It's pretty straightforward, jkbatca.

The disheveled old guy from VT basically has ZERO CHANCE to win a general election in this country.

Bubba's wife is our BEST BET to keep a dem in there.

Do you, or your fellow MISGUIDED Bernie cheerleaders, really want another INEPT republican administration in the White House?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top