2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

Being a democratic socialist is not an extreme position in any of the other developed countries. Sanders is not an extremist, he is a centrist. Just because the republicans are so far to the right doesn't mean that it's the responsibility of the democrats to accept moderate right positions as their centre.

In November we'll see what the real mood of the people is. if the republicans win majorities in the congress and the senate then neither Clinton nor Sanders will be able to accomplish any kind of reform, but if the democrats can hold the balance of power, (which would mean a huge number of republicans losing their seats) the appetite for these remaining republican representatives to obfuscate and block the business of government might be stifled out of their own sense of self preservation.

IMHO the most likely scenario in November is the senate will be Democratic controlled as the Republicans have a lot of vulnerable seats up for grabs and only a small current majority. The Republicans will probably lose a handful of house seats but given how gerrymandered house districts are no matter how well Democrats do overall its almost impossible for them to win a majority in the house.

eire4

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Despite the many attempts to demonize the word Socialism as it if inherently was something evil most polls show that Sanders does better nationally head to head against the leading Republican candidates then Clinton does. As I have said before in my opinion the harder task for Sanders by far is to win the Democratic nomination. I am not saying if he did he would be a certain presidential winner but the claim that he cannot win a national election because he is a socialist is not backed up by the polls. There may be many Americans who are brain washed enough to not think for themsleves and think Socialism automatically means bad. But likewise there are many in the middle who would look at what Sanders supports and think hmmm I like that too I could care less what they call him.

20Cent

Akrasia wrote: »

Would anyone really miss the high frequency traders?

All they seem to add is volatility to the marketplace

They don't add any value to it as far as I can see. Just making everything more expensive for everyone else.

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

Your employer will be paying increased social insurance payments to cover your health costs. your health insurance will no longer be directly linked to your employment (so lets say your employer goes bankrupt, you still get to have cancer treatment if you need it)

The reduced cost to the employer for paying private health insurance for employees will be offset by an increase in payroll tax by 6.2%. Your contribution will be 2.2% in additional tax, and this will be further topped up by increasing taxes on the very wealthy.

Single payer universal health insurance with universal access is also a lot cheaper to administer than the system America has at the moment. American spending on healthcare is so ridiculously higher than European countries. 17% of GDP versus 11%. in 2012. There is huge room for efficiency in the U.S. system.

This is completely anecdotal but my wife who is American was saying her US doctor was saying he has had to hire an extra person just to deal with all the extra paperwork Obamacare has caused and that is all this new employee does. Kind of fits in with your point about how much more expensive healthcare is to manager in the US.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

eire4

Overheal wrote: »

I find it baffling that a fractional tax percentage is enough for these guys to pack up and leave.

Additionally to that, I find it harder to believe they would leave Wall Street vs. a smaller market. But sure if they do, screw em.

Leaving a smaller country like Sweden I can see. Leaving the US is such droves I do not agree. I don't have anything to back that up I freely admit but I just see that as the usual fear mongering coming from a sector that tanked the economy then did not suffer for it and has continued to be on the gravy train every since while the majority of Americans have had to suffer the consequences for what wall street and the big banks did.

eire4

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So asking wall street which makes money hand over fist to pay a tiny fractional tax so many great social programmes and things that benefit the majority of Americans is screwing wall street. Hmmm can't say I am seeing how wall street is getting screwed in that scenario. Now given how wall street and the big banks have actually screwed over so many Americans due to their unrestrained greed I think paying a tiny fractional tax is the least they should be doing to help all boats rise so to speak.

Akrasia

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So because wall Street has been creaming a percentage off every transaction in the economy, this is an argument against taking a fraction of a percentage tax on Wall Street trades?

You know as well as anyone that the traders would adjust to the new reality and the markets would continue to trade.

Or are you suggesting that the corporations listed on the nyse and other exchanges would all simultaneously delist and move to the cayman islands?

Overheal

Wall Street as you say, already effectively taxes virtually every transaction in the United States.

Would they really throw the table over and shut down over half a percentage point? That's a lot of money to throw away.

edit: Santorum is looking to drop out. The field is really thinning out now. If you're losing track, Bing keeps a great search result which blacks out candidate photos as they drop

http://www.bing.com/search?q=presidential+race&go=Submit&qs=n&form=QBLH&pq=presidential+race&sc=9-16&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=50CAEA2F515B4697A7D08EB8722B32E0

MightyMandarin

I might have a fairly low of opinion of Donald, but one of the funniest things he's done was purchasing the domain for http://www.jebbush.com when it expired, which now redirects to his own website.

Trump does have a good sense of humour; I'll give him that.

BOHtox

The exodus continues:

Santorum suspends his campaign.

I still expect Gilmore (Was he ever really running? Did he forget he had a campaign?), Fiorina, Christie and Carson to drop out before making any real inroads. Kasich may stay put, it mightn't do his chances for VP much harm anyway. A debate with just Bush, Cruz, Rubio and Trump would be very substantive

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

BoJack Horseman

What did people think of Carly Fiorina?

For a while there, she was getting good bumps after every debate, people seemingly impressed with her when they heard her.
But it faded.

KingBrian2

Amazingfun wrote: »

It's not the end of the world, lots more to come :cool:

Well what did he expect. He alienated Fox News, hardline conservatives & female voters, it was always going hit him back. Now can he rebound back into first place and get the support base in the other Republican strongholds. Cruz is even more to the right than Trump ever could be so we'll se if he can push on and secure the independent voters.

Black Swan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

She was born and grew up at Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, where my grans on her side were both naturalised citizens and emeritus faculty, which some Bud-drinking anti-intellectuals would claim is unnatural and "Un-American." So when I run for President in a decade, those anti-types may launch their own version of birther complaints about Swannie? No problem! Bring them on! Then the US will have its first Irish born president, ha!

PopePalpatine

Looks like Trump hates being trumped: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35486983

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What did people think of Carly Fiorina?

For a while there, she was getting good bumps after every debate, people seemingly impressed with her when they heard her.
But it faded.

While I would like to see more qualified women in high US office, I was not impressed with Carly Fiorina in the slightest, especially with her complete lack of governance experience, stiff, cold persona, and all the controversy that was associated with her CEO position at HP. Then again, I do not care for Hillary Clinton, who may have some of the requisite governance experience as US Senator and Secretary of State, but terribly boring and unimaginative.

Now I will stick my neck out and suggest a female candidate for Vice President, who, although degreed in political science, has no governance experience either, did moderate one of the GOP presidential debates, but as a former WSJ international editor, who helped launch the online WSJ, and now Anchor for CNBC "On the Money" I feel is brilliant, knowledgeable, well researched on major US issues (especially business, economics, and international problems), highly articulate spokesperson, and would be absolutely deadly and compelling as a strictly on-issue debater: Becky Quick. Doubt that Sanders or the Dems would pick her for VP, but the GOP presidential nominee, whomever that turns out to be, should really review her qualifications, and how she may draw the women's vote completely away from Hillary Clinton.

Quick is Quick!

K-9

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Bill O'Reilly was on Matt Cooper yesterday and not often I'd agree with him but yep, he called it right, resigning from the debate backfired as he said it would.

Manach

First - Permabear for Treasury in any future Black Swan administration.

Second - On Fiorina, coming from the private sector she did not have a magic money tree and the tech sector (as per today's news on Yahoo) is unkind to those who are deemed to have performed sub-par. On the campaign, she however came across fairly articulate and presented her policies and life experiences well - so a pity she did not do as well.

Hande hoche!

That's a pity as regards Rand Paul failing to gain traction. He seemed quite intelligent and understanding during the debates. Made a sensible counter to those ranting about no-fly zones and shooting down Russian jets in Syria, for example.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

Manach wrote: »

First - Permabear for Treasury in any future Black Swan administration.

Who will referee the debates between Sec Treasury Permabear and Pres Swannie about the cabinet table, in the Oval Office, and the new White Javahouse? If you Manach, you better wear body armour!

Shortly after his honoured comment, Trump now does appear to be a poor loser after his Iowa defeat to Cruz. And unlike the coin-tossing close "Hilliary" Clinton win over Sanders, Trump lost substantially (4 points) to Cruz, while Rubio was so close behind Trump (1 point) to be almost stepping on Trump's heels. It should be noted once again that several of the Iowa polls within a week of the Iowa caucus showed Trump a clear winner, as do the current New Hampshire polls. This has to be encouraging for Cruz and Rubio, and be troublesome for Trump.

MightyMandarin

If Rubio's rise continues, I genuinely think the GOP could win the White House. Trump and Cruz haven't a hope in an election, but Rubio could beat Hillary or Bernie, especially Bernie. The DNC should be scared if Rubio keeps rising.

oscarBravo

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

What did people think of Carly Fiorina?

Her outright dishonesty in relation to the manufactured Planned Parenthood fiasco is a total deal-breaker for me.

AbusesToilets

MightyMandarin wrote: »

If Rubio's rise continues, I genuinely think the GOP could win the White House. Trump and Cruz haven't a hope in an election, but Rubio could beat Hillary or Bernie, especially Bernie. The DNC should be scared if Rubio keeps rising.

I think he would be picked apart for his complete lack of experience. For all of the justified criticism of Obama's lack of achievement in office as a Senator, Rubio is probably worse. He's a total lightweight and lacks any conviction, as evidenced by his abandonment of immigration reform.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

Regardless, losing Iowa has caused Trump to melt down.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/02/03/donald-trump-twitter-says-cruz-stole-iowa-calls-caucus-results-be-nullified

an earlier version of one of his comments said cruz "illegally stole" Iowa. He wants the entire Caucus to be nullified and redone :rolleyes:

-1 for basing your opinion on media reports. The media are painting this like Trump lost his marbles after losing.

Here's his immediate reaction to the result.

"I'm really honoured. And I wanna congratulate Ted, and I want to congratulate all of the incredible candidates including Mike Huckabee who's become a really good friend of mine."

Care to revise your "meltdown" comment?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7W5wtuUxR4

Trump is now drawing as much attention as possible to the sneaky tactics used by the Cruz campaign. He convinced people Carson had dropped out of the race and told people to vote for him. Gutter politics. Worst of the worst. Trump is absolutely right to go after him. If this gets the coverage it deserves Cruz is a dead man walking.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

-1 for basing your opinion on media reports. The media are painting this like Trump lost his marbles after losing.

Here's his immediate reaction to the result.

"I'm really honoured. And I wanna congratulate Ted, and I want to congratulate all of the incredible candidates including Mike Huckabee who's become a really good friend of mine."

Care to revise your "meltdown" comment?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7W5wtuUxR4

Trump is now drawing as much attention as possible to the sneaky tactics used by the Cruz campaign. He convinced people Carson had dropped out of the race and told people to vote for him. Gutter politics. Worst of the worst. Trump is absolutely right to go after him. If this gets the coverage it deserves Cruz is a dead man walking.

I don't care to do any revision, and I don't care for your insinuation that I get my opinions from some editor. His words are his own, his tweets are his own. Right after the loss he was congratulatory of Cruz and the process; the next day he was flipping out on social media about how the media treated his underdog status unfairly, how Cruz illegally-stole it from him, and how he wants a do-over.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694879900256354304

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694890328273346560

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694964856609439745

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694558166697271297

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694559410488737793

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694560681090248704

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

I don't care to do any revision, and I don't care for your insinuation that I get my opinions from some editor. His words are his own, his tweets are his own. Right after the loss he was congratulatory of Cruz and the process; the next day he was flipping out on social media about how the media treated his underdog status unfairly, how Cruz illegally-stole it from him, and how he wants a do-over.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694879900256354304

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694890328273346560

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694964856609439745

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694558166697271297

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694559410488737793

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/694560681090248704

Which is all brilliant media grabbing stuff. It doesn't indicate that he's a sore loser as you're suggesting considering his earlier congratulations. It doesn't show he's having a meltdown. He's all about fairness and being treated fairly and he's perfectly playing the saviour. The fact that you're doubling down on your mischaracterisation of Trump's reaction to losing shows that you're starting to learn from Trump.

eire4

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Hahah that is funny. Got a good laugh out of that last line. So true. He will most likely be doing the exact opposite next week after New Hampshire though and going on like he just scored the winning goal in a World Cup final.