General News Trump and Sanders (projected) as clear winners in New Hampshire

My career choice is law enforcement, and if their recruiting investigators find out you've done anything worse in your life than peel the information tag off a mattress, your prospects are dim. If they find out you lied in an official setting, you're done-- pick a new field. I feel we should hold our leadership to an even greater standard. And in this race, I'm pleased for the fact that we might not have to vote for a criminal.

In principle, you and I are perfectly aligned. But in practice, this doesn't happen. Tyranny by government is passed of to tyranny by corporations. Our capitalist system which led to so much prosperity has now turned to crony capitalism, where greed always wins and the ultra-wealthy sit on thrones made of poor people's corpses. A guy who frequently gets into arguments with a Facebook friend of mine is similarly conservative on the economic front, and he says "If you don't like your job, get a new one or start your own business!" Entrepreneurship is the foundation of our economy. However, it's not feasible for everyone, even those who put in the vaunted "hard work." And the fact that one has the freedom to start a business doesn't mean they have the other resources to do so, nor does it give existing businesses the right to shit on employees.

I don't believe in absolutely everything Sanders says. But he represents a change in the mindset from "finders keepers, losers weepers" into "provide for others' needs and your own wants." It's time we moved past the idea that one must earn the right to live.

 

So apparently Fiorina and Christie dropped out. I figure Carson will follow, then Jeb afterwards. The only two contenders for the primary, unless something miraculous happens, will be Trump and Cruz, as Rubio has gone rogue from the establishment puppet show, and Kasich just seems like a non-entity among the candidates still in this clown car.

I really hope Sanders wins over Hillary; I don't want my life to be ruled by corporate overlords.

 

^ Don't count out Jeb Bush just yet. I think it's very likely he's going to get all of Christie's vote, and that puts him at the top of the log jam for 2nd place.

 

I read on a news link that Kasich had some crossover support in NH (which is allowed there) from a group called "Democrats for Kasich" (?) I heard the next primary is in South Carolina, and you can't crossover vote there. Which means if your an independent or don't like your parties particular candidates, too bad.

My parents, particularly my mother, must be beside herself over Kasich's 2nd place in NH (not that it means anything anyway in the overall nomination process) They think he's a liberal RINO and no different than Hillary, particularly on the social issues. On the subject of same sex marriage, Kasich's response was basically along the lines of he and the AG went to SCOTUS, SCOTUS has spoken, and that's it, just get over it and move on to more important issues, like jobs and the economy. That is not what the religious right in the bible belt wants to hear.

 

KyleD, That wasnt my quote, im on ur side in the argument.

Argentwing, very well said! Couldnt agree more with your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs.

 

But consider this: The Republican party is more deeply divided than the Democratic party. Many Democrats are happy to vote for Hillary or Bernie if their first choice isn't picked. There are, however, several Republicans who would refuse to vote for Trump (more reluctant than anti-Hillary Democrats). With Republican candidates openly bashing each other, I don't expect Trump to win... and if he does somehow win, it would be a very narrow vote.

 

From what I've read from multiple sources and what my conservative friends/family members have said, as much as they dislike Clinton and Sanders they'll vote for them over Trump any day.

 

In North Korea it isn't accepted - they have no choice, it's a dictatorship. In Europe it is accepted and people vote for it - Europe is a democracy, lest we forget. People vote for higher taxation precisely because they see the results first-hand. Why do you think re-nationalising the railways is one of the most popular policies in the UK? Because the private sector sucks and people don't trust it - hence why any attempt at making our National Health Service even remotely like America's insurance-based system is met with protests and anger. People will take to the streets to protect it. The NHS is the most important thing to British voters - beating immigration and the economy.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Images/top%2010%20April15.JPG

No evidence of this exists. Australia has the highest minimum wage in the world but have very low unemployment. The UK has a much higher minimum wage than the US but has a lower rate of unemployment than the US and has done for the past 20 years. Young people would not be penalised at all - not least because in the UK the minimum wage doesn't actually apply to people under 21 (well, it does, but the rate is lower) but also because apprenticeships exists and they have a lower rate of pay anyway.

This is complete shit. Nearly everyone in the US is encouraged to pursue a degree even if it's pointless and not required for the job. In countries like Germany - where many young people enter engineering and manufacturing - far less people attend college despite tuition feels been very low - or in the case of places like Finland nonexistent. The US might want to tone down on 'mickey mouse degrees' - getting yourself into lots of debt just to get a degree in social studies or something is pretty silly.

The US spends more on healthcare than anywhere else in the world - it already spends more than $3 trillion a year - but people there have the lowest life expectancy in the developed world (still 79 years compared to 82 in the UK or 83 in Sweden). The waiting times are greatly exaggerated.

The UK's top tax rate is 45% for people earning more than £100,000. 52% of $10m is hardly anything at all.

The solution to debt isn't to privatise everything or cut essential services either. Spending on things like infrastructure is a proven way to stimulate economic growth.

Also - it's true that Europeans aren't as wealthy, in that they earn less on average, but that only tells you half of the story - the US has the third highest poverty rate in the OECD, comparable to Mexico, Turkey and Romania. Inequality is substantially higher. People might earn less but there's a reason why European countries tend to top quality of life surveys.

 

Imnotreallysure, YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That debate is over. Mic drop!

 

You're missing my point on North Korea. I simply meant that a dictatorship isn't ridiculous there as it is here.

Seattle is proof. The Australian unemployment rate is higher than the United States's, but regardless minimum wage in the U.S. shouldn't be based on other countries success because there are so many factors involved. Even if you take economics out of it, there should be no federal minimum wage (it should be decided at state level) because of the 10th amendment. And if I want to work for $5 an hour, that's a voluntary exchange and the government doesn't need to be involved.

People in the U.S. are encouraged to get degrees so they can get high paying jobs, not just to get a degree.

Bernie Sanders's healthcare solution is better than it is now, but it's still bad. Regardless of if it's "hardly nothing" taxing that high is immoral and they shouldn't be raised any higher than they currently are. It's not their fault people can't afford college or healthcare, so they shouldn't have to pay more than is necessary to keep the country running. 3-4 years is hardly anything, and it's worth it if it means protecting liberties and lowering debt.

When did I say we should privatize everything or stop spending money on infrastructure? The solution is to deregulate to keep people as free as possible and spending as low as possible, but to keep the taxes the same to pay off the national debt.

---------- Post added 11th Feb 2016 at 11:58 AM ----------

 

This primary really disappointed me, on several levels. I'm a libertarian, but I generally find democrats more reasonable. The two people that won here also happen to be the two people that I would not vote for, ever, in my life. If it was Bernie Sanders versus Ted Cruz/Other terrible Republican, I wouldn't vote. If it was Donald Trump versus Bernie Sanders, still wouldn't vote. If it was Bernie Sanders versus John Kasich; I would vote John Kasich. If it was John Kasich versus Hillary Clinton, why, I would hardly know who to vote for!

Bernie Sanders is a madman, being what amounts to a half-communist (perhaps it's more complex than that, but still). He doesn't understand a whit about economics, or what words mean, and he would be one of the oldest, whitest, malest presidents in the history of old white men. When young people support someone overwhelmingly compared to age groups with more experience, it is not a good sign. He sucks.

Donald Trump is a raving lunatic with a hate-on for anyone that disagrees with him. He's uneducated and get's along fine with the uneducated, he was absolutely no political experience (which is not a good thing), and he routinely runs his business' to the ground. He's laughable with foreign policy, naive with economic policy, and has plans to round up inner city kids for trivial offenses and have them perform forced labor. He sucks.