Hillary Clinton will eat whatever Republican candidate for breakfast

[dcapodic]

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/15/soc ... orting-it/

For the "feel the Bern" supporters. If you are gonna support the leap of faith in having Trump compared to Hitler then you should be good with these comparisons right?!?

Or does that only work for the "bad guys"....liberals, progressives, Democratic socialists would probably be up in arms at drawing these comparisons to Bernie. Let alone, this article chooses to do it in an articulate manner rather than just in posting some memes. Maybe that is the reason people won't like it....too many facts, not enough photoshop!!

[shakespeare]

President Obama roasts Donald Trump At White House Correspondents' dinner.

Hilarious.

Trump was in attendance.

Jeffrey Ross roasts Trump.

Ross is Boss.

[Mr. Glass]

^^^Straight ownership right there.

[Irv]

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/15/soc ... orting-it/

For the "feel the Bern" supporters. If you are gonna support the leap of faith in having Trump compared to Hitler then you should be good with these comparisons right?!?

Or does that only work for the "bad guys"....liberals, progressives, Democratic socialists would probably be up in arms at drawing these comparisons to Bernie. Let alone, this article chooses to do it in an articulate manner rather than just in posting some memes. Maybe that is the reason people won't like it....too many facts, not enough photoshop!!

That article is so far off point that it's comically stupid. First of all, nice job linking to a heavily-biased right-wing site. What facts are in there? A history lesson on Nikolai Bukharin that has absolutely no parallels to the core system of government in place in the United States of America?

Comparing the authoritarian, state-planned socialism of Soviet Russia to Bernie Sanders is irresponsible and disingenuous fear-mongering. Nothing in that article applies to anything in Sanders's platform. Nothing in that article promotes the discussion of actual economic policy. It's just further right-wing scare tactics to demonize the word "socialism" and Bernie Sanders's name is thrown in the article twice to make for some type of shitty word association game.

Do you have a Social Security card in your wallet? Congratulations, you're literally a card-carrying socialist. Now stop treating the word "socialism" like the boogeyman and actually do some damn research on what socialism, communism (no, they are not interchangeable terms), capitalism, and democracy actually are without referring to a biased, garbage article on a neocon blog written by a hack with an agenda. Until the government owns the means of production in America, all this fear-mongering about "socialism" is worthless bullshit.

Bernie's biggest mistake was to describe himself as a democratic socialist. It only gives more ammo to detractors in a non-thinking populace that has the attention span of a peanut, doesn't do any research on their own, and is conditioned to fear buzzwords like socialism and terrorism.

As for Trump, he's a troll pulling off the biggest troll job in the history of American politics. The evidence is so obvious that I don't even talk about him anymore and anyone who does is just wasting their time. You know that if anybody can call out a troll, it's a fucking forum admin.

[bobhait]

Irv, thank you

[shakespeare]

As for Trump, he's a troll pulling off the biggest troll job in the history of American politics.

[dcapodic]

That article is so far off point that it's comically stupid. First of all, nice job linking to a heavily-biased right-wing site. What facts are in there? A history lesson on Nikolai Bukharin that has absolutely no parallels to the core system of government in place in the United States of America?

Comparing the authoritarian, state-planned socialism of Soviet Russia to Bernie Sanders is irresponsible and disingenuous fear-mongering. Nothing in that article applies to anything in Sanders's platform. Nothing in that article promotes the discussion of actual economic policy. It's just further right-wing scare tactics to demonize the word "socialism" and Bernie Sanders's name is thrown in the article twice to make for some type of shitty word association game.

Do you have a Social Security card in your wallet? Congratulations, you're literally a card-carrying socialist. Now stop treating the word "socialism" like the boogeyman and actually do some damn research on what socialism, communism (no, they are not interchangeable terms), capitalism, and democracy actually are without referring to a biased, garbage article on a neocon blog written by a hack with an agenda. Until the government owns the means of production in America, all this fear-mongering about "socialism" is worthless bullshit.

Bernie's biggest mistake was to describe himself as a democratic socialist. It only gives more ammo to detractors in a non-thinking populace that has the attention span of a peanut, doesn't do any research on their own, and is conditioned to fear buzzwords like socialism and terrorism.

As for Trump, he's a troll pulling off the biggest troll job in the history of American politics. The evidence is so obvious that I don't even talk about him anymore and anyone who does is just wasting their time. You know that if anybody can call out a troll, it's a fucking forum admin.

Thanks Irv, I could not have written the response any better if I did it myself! Exactly what I was hoping to evoke from a person that looks beneath the surface of a meme.

That article is so far off point that it's comically stupid. First of all, nice job linking to a heavily-biased right-wing site.

Yup, just like all the bull that people quote on here from MoveOn.org or progressive.org. Has anyone ever posted a pro liberal article from a site not controlled by Soros? I doubt it. The worst part, they prob don't even know who Soros is or what he has to do with all of this.

Do you have a Social Security card in your wallet? Congratulations, you're literally a card-carrying socialist. Now stop treating the word "socialism" like the boogeyman and actually do some damn research on what socialism, communism (no, they are not interchangeable terms), capitalism, and democracy actually are without referring to a biased, garbage article on a neocon blog written by a hack with an agenda. Until the government owns the means of production in America, all this fear-mongering about "socialism" is worthless bullshit.

Have I mentioned that my college major was economics Oh, I get it, totally. The idea of that reference is that it carries about as much merit as posting Hitler comparisons to Trump. No, I take that back. It carries less of an impact, yet it got you all up in arms. Oh, yea, there is a ton of stuff to point Trump at Hitler just like Sanders and that article. At least Sanders puts himself in that category. His biggest mistake was calling himself a Democratic socialist?!? Even you have to see the irony in waht you said there. So, he doesn't even know what he is huh, yet people support him for president?!? He actually uses that term to soften his look to people because calling himself what he actually is, a socialist would be more harmful to his approach. Again, the irony is not lost.

You can think wha tyou please and write what you please and I like that you look below the surface. However, you are doing the same harm in your "educated" observations that the meme crowd is by looking at things through a biased and non-centric view. I am not telling oyu to be a centric but at least go in seeing both sides for what they are..

Think about it....you post this, people post clapping hands, etc. and no one even stops to at least agree that putting up Hitler comparisons to Trump is way overboard.

Think about that for a moment and tell me how it is that people are not seeing through their own, colored glasses. Trump is a troll, I guess by your admin definition.

[Irv]

I said that it was a mistake for Bernie to call himself a democratic socialist because the majority of the ill-informed public instantly recoil at any association with socialism when they don't even understand what it is and to what degree. America is already partially socialist by definition. If Sanders said he was a pure socialist, he wouldn't have polled more than 10% anywhere because a massive chunk of the population still suffers from McCarthyism. It would have been better for him to avoid labels altogether.

Labels are all detractors have against Bernie now because they can't assassinate his character. Oh, he's a damned socialist, people say. In the big picture, who cares? He'll be just as effective as anybody else as President, just like every other President that had to deal with a dumbfuck obstructionist Congress. I don't like every single one of his positions and not all of them are viable, but I am glad he's putting them on the table for discussion whether you agree with him or not. His stances have been on the right side of history more often than not, and I'm not going to question his integrity or susceptibility to being in the pockets of corporate interests. Sure, that could change in the future as was the case with Obama, but all you can go by is the track record a candidate has up to the present day.

I've seen both sides for what they are for years now, so I don't need any kind of reminder. So why did I not address the Trump and Hitler comparisons? Because I don't care about Trump. I'm less intimidated by the idea of a Trump presidency than that of Ted Cruz. I don't think Trump is Hitler, but it serves me no purpose to defend him because he's playing a completely different game than everyone else and the only people who know what it really is are himself and maybe his children. In case you forget, Trump has been a reality TV star for nearly a decade and a half now. He's not as dumb and simple-minded as his fans. He gave freaking Omarosa a career because she was good for the ratings despite the fact that she has a harder time telling the truth and is less likable than Hillary Clinton.

At this point, Trump is deliberately catering his speeches and rallies to the low-intelligence, authoritarian-inclined electorate. As far as I'm concerned, it's all a ruse. His stances are not only logically inconsistent, but also inarticulate. Perfect for an authoritarian-inclined electorate that doesn't care much for research or facts, but even Trump himself has to know that he can't solve problems with a fence. Should he win the Republican nomination, which I don't think is a given considering they're on pace for a brokered convention, I expect him to make a hard turn towards the middle (which is funny because he can't be defined by the classical left-right continuum) after he's secured the votes of the authoritarian-loving sheep in this country who need to be told what to do and what to fear.

If you give a troll attention, you legitimize their presence by giving them a platform to express their ridiculousness. If you give a troll with supporters attention, you galvanize the supporters by uniting them in their sense of persecution. He's not a politician (which is both good and bad). He's an entertainer with a rabid fan base. Miley Cyrus. Justin Bieber. Kim Kardashian. Who here seriously talks about them? So why the fuck are any of us still talking about Trump?

The Apprentice: Presidential Election 2016

[shakespeare]

Great post, great processing.

At this point, Trump is deliberately catering his speeches and rallies to the low-intelligence, authoritarian-inclined electorate. As far as I'm concerned, it's all a ruse. His stances are not only logically inconsistent, but also inarticulate. Perfect for an authoritarian-inclined electorate that doesn't care much for research or facts, but even Trump himself has to know that he can't solve problems with a fence.

John Oliver breaks down the lies surrounding Trump and his wall. This is pure comedy.

[cragganmor]

most people equate the name with the hitler of 1941, crushing europe and launching his campaign of genocide, but do not forget that there is also the hitler of 1932, as his party rose to power; those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. the xenophobia, the ethic scapegoating, talk of strong actions instead of strong words, the promise of a return to glory...

plus the bad haircut which always signals crazypants in a political leader...

[MrMajik2]

That article is so far off point that it's comically stupid. First of all, nice job linking to a heavily-biased right-wing site. What facts are in there? A history lesson on Nikolai Bukharin that has absolutely no parallels to the core system of government in place in the United States of America?

Comparing the authoritarian, state-planned socialism of Soviet Russia to Bernie Sanders is irresponsible and disingenuous fear-mongering. Nothing in that article applies to anything in Sanders's platform. Nothing in that article promotes the discussion of actual economic policy. It's just further right-wing scare tactics to demonize the word "socialism" and Bernie Sanders's name is thrown in the article twice to make for some type of shitty word association game.

Do you have a Social Security card in your wallet? Congratulations, you're literally a card-carrying socialist. Now stop treating the word "socialism" like the boogeyman and actually do some damn research on what socialism, communism (no, they are not interchangeable terms), capitalism, and democracy actually are without referring to a biased, garbage article on a neocon blog written by a hack with an agenda. Until the government owns the means of production in America, all this fear-mongering about "socialism" is worthless bullshit.

Bernie's biggest mistake was to describe himself as a democratic socialist. It only gives more ammo to detractors in a non-thinking populace that has the attention span of a peanut, doesn't do any research on their own, and is conditioned to fear buzzwords like socialism and terrorism.

As for Trump, he's a troll pulling off the biggest troll job in the history of American politics. The evidence is so obvious that I don't even talk about him anymore and anyone who does is just wasting their time. You know that if anybody can call out a troll, it's a fucking forum admin.

Best post I've read on this or any site in ages. Right on the nose with this Irv.

[shakespeare]

Donald Trump will (almost certainly) never be elected president. Here’s why. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... heres-why/

[Irv]

Donald Trump will (almost certainly) never be elected president. Here’s why. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... heres-why/

The entire premise of this piece relies on a shaky assumption: That people believe they really only have two choices when the frontrunning candidates are so scummy and dirty that no matter who wins, the White House cleaning crew loses.

[dcapodic]

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomasso ... d-n2171042

Yea, all of the right wing extremists that do not understand socialism or Bernie. They just sell fear and scare people with the word "socialism" then write articles for these conservative "rags".

In case you want a bio of this author:

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/

[Irv]

Are you posting articles again that decry socialism while not actually addressing how Bernie Sanders's policies would work or even be passed in a representative republic (because the US government is structured and functions 100% totally and obviously exactly like the Venezuelan government) and then hiding behind the claim that since you didn't write the article, that we shouldn't shoot the messenger?

[dcapodic]

Are you posting articles again that decry socialism while not actually addressing how Bernie Sanders's policies would work or even be passed in a representative republic (because the US government is structured and functions 100% totally and obviously exactly like the Venezuelan government) and then hiding behind the claim that since you didn't write the article, that we shouldn't shoot the messenger?

Actually, not at all Irv, just the opposite. It has become apparent that when someone posts something in this thread that is even the slightest bit right of center that it is immediately attacked for things such as its source or author. I am not looking for any "don't shoot the messenger" cover, simply making it easy for people to not waste their time with those arguments so that maybe they will actually read the contents or think "originally". Actually, you had done this earlier in the thread. I admit to not being very familiar with this particular site but a quick glance at the recent articles and it seems to shoot pretty much down the middle.

As you are well aware, it just touches on Venezuela as an example to show a point. Actually, I think this is pretty fair in that the tactic of the usual Bernie/Socialism supporter is to use an example of similar sized country with a small mixture of ethnicities to equate how things would work in the US. Both of these arguments are silly, but there it is.

Did you actually read the article before you commented? A couple of quotes that I found interesting:

When Senator Sanders cries, "The system is rigged!" no one asks, "Just what specifically does that mean?" or "What facts do you have to back that up?"

Seems like they attack Trump all the time for doing this, glad to see it thrown out there about Sanders.

The great promise of socialism is something for nothing. It is one of the signs of today's dumbed-down education that so many college students seem to think that the cost of their education should -- and will -- be paid by raising taxes on "the rich."

Here again, just a little check of the facts would reveal that higher tax rates on upper-income earners do not automatically translate into more tax revenue coming in to the government. Often high tax rates have led to less revenue than lower tax rates.

In a globalized economy, high tax rates may just lead investors to invest in other countries with lower tax rates. That means that jobs created by those investments will be overseas.

None of this is rocket science. But you do have to stop and think -- and that is what too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach their students to do.

As I am sure you are aware Irv, one of Bernie's biggest support groups are college aged or recent grads with either large tuition debts due or pending. Hence, it is easy to promise that those will simply go away and tada, a whole flood of voters that jump on board When most politicians do this, it is called pandering.

[Irv]

I think you're giving far too much weight to the stereotypical Bernie supporter, of which I know a handful, and applying those attributes to Bernie Sanders himself. Just like how I won't wrongly attribute Trump supporters' beliefs to Trump himself, I'm not going to wrongly characterize Sanders as well.

You'd be better served by paying attention to what Bernie actually says rather than what his supporters have distorted, since you quoted a false quotation about Sanders declaring the system is rigged. Sanders himself recently refuted his supporters' notion that the system is rigged, but rather pointed out that the system has issues, which it does. You know who said the system was rigged? It was Trump himself.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... not-rigged

Personally, I would take it a step further and say that the "First Past the Post, Winner Take All" system that the US uses in conjunction with the Electoral College is absolute garbage that stifles choice and forces people to settle for the "lesser of two evils" which happens to always be the two establishment parties that have suckered people in this country into thinking that politics is a game between the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls and 2015-16 Golden State Warriors rather than choosing between individuals who have their own unique beliefs. Also, even if it were a damn game, it would be far closer to a shitshow between the 1972-73 Philadelphia 76ers and the 2015-16 Philadelphia 76ers. The system is not rigged. It just completely sucks.

I have no delusions about Bernie's full campaign platform ever coming to fruition in this country, nor do I want that to happen. However, I admire what he has accomplished by putting these issues on the table, even if I think some of his ideas are not fully viable and one or two of them are simply terrible. Politics have always drawn anything from disinterest to absolute disgust from a vast portion of the population, across all ages, races, genders, and socioeconomic levels. Funny how people who have gotten used to politics as usual would rather dismiss Sanders's ideas without thought and instead continue to talk about some fucking classified emails or a Mexican border wall. I don't have to agree with everything Sanders believes to respect that he wants to solve real problems and he's nowhere near as ego-driven as Hillary or Trump.

To a lesser degree, I can also respect Trump, but for him, it's a backhanded acknowledgement because his platform stifles discourse and my respect has to do with him destroying the GOP. Also, because he's a master troll and he has enough money to not give a fuck what you think about him even if you catch him out on an obvious lie. He's better than any Scott Layden, Xavier, or birdstealsit could ever hope to be.

In what world is it acceptable that we have obvious career politicians who are so decidedly full of shit that we've accepted their sanctimonious elitism as the norm? You seem bent on calling out Sanders supporters and targeting them because they're young and inexperienced, but if you continue to peddle the same old crap and just accept that this is just the world of politics, then you're deliberately keeping people disinterested and disenfranchised by the pathetic political machine that runs this country. How does that help a democracy? What you and the authors of the articles you link to seem to promote is a political elitism that targets and mocks those who don't know better rather than tries to educate them.

If you want to properly discuss Marxist socialism, then do so. Alternatively, if you want to properly discuss the viability of Sanders's policies, then do so. I definitely don't agree with the former and don't always agree with the latter, but it's wrong to say that there are no legitimate points to be made in favor of them. Don't post these half-assed articles that attempt to slam Sanders based on false, incomplete, or inaccurate assumptions that try to link him to failed socialist experiments in world history. Sanders doesn't have the power to even attempt those kinds of ideas—if he even believes in them at all—in an American political system if he were to become President.

[qdman]

Boy the elections this year are really a mess huh? I'm very much enjoying them, considering I thought a few months ago it'd be Jeb vs Hillary. Surprised/not surprised more has not been made of Mr. Trumps "non interventionist foreign policy" which is something that's been pretty important to me. Pretty shocking to see it on the world stage so soon.

Hey dcap I'm a fan of Thomas Sowell, he's a cool guy. I bought his book "Intellectuals and Society" a few years ago, it's about the history/pattern of smart guys who get really good at their area of expertise, like literature or mathematics, and then use their career as a platform to talk like they know everything about everything. They lecture the public with incredible pompousness about stuff they don't really know, and they just look bad. They also had a propensity for forming " the society of xyz" type private groups where they can give speeches and hold lunch clubs and disseminate their bloated opinions amongst the rich gala attending philanthropic donoring types that want to believe they know something. It was entertaining.

btw alan greenspan actually did just compare the US's current state to that of venezuela
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-3 ... e-disaster
still don't agree with him, still don't like him but he's alan greenspan and he said it

Irv, I personally think you are being too muscular in your two rebuttals.
If you want to say there's a line between socialist defined as countries like Maoist China and USSR and Sou. Vietnam, and "mixed" economies like France and Sweden, ok, but it's also true that these systems have shared principles, and you can compare the results of both groups based on what they have in common.

A principle like "getting something for nothing" is not rooted in either stereotypes or a false understanding of history and policy, it is the fundamental promise made by these structures, as viewed through a critical lens' language, and there are practical problems that come out of that principle. I won't speak for dcap but I personally believe that a little socialism is a bad thing (including the SS cards, a perfect example of a failed policy), a little more is a systemic problem, a lot is an inevitable disaster. But they are all wrong for the same principle they are commonly based on, and the outcome is a question of how much you commit to that wrong principle. So you can criticise Bernie and other aspects of western political structure for their ideas by comparing them to the failed states of collectivist history based on the ideas that they share in common.

I agree that if you are going to talk it's not right to just slander Bernie Sanders as if he is some radical, if anything Sanders' "democratic socialism" is simply a populist stance that uses the same toolkit the left and right have been using in America for the last 100 years. You are right when you say SS cards are nothing new, and that they are not alone in the "socialist" presence they represent.

[dcapodic]

Kinda rushed today but I couldn't leave the last couple of posts without some commentary. Maybe the good thing is that having little time will keep me brief and it seems that detailed posts that take more than a few lines tend to get passed over which leads me back to the original point.

Why post the link Irv? 'Cause i am trying to play by the rules of the current society. Being a bit older than most around these parts, I try to adjust for change when I see that it is needed. We could open a debate about Bernie from a platform point of view but I am not sure it would even be relevant. I do not think that most of his supporters would even be able to take part in that debate. Hence, one of my strong and seemingly inarguable points (at least no one seems up for the challenge) that much of our society is a "meme society". You better form your thought and get it across in 140 characters or less and truth/accuracy be damned. The medium has indeed become the message.

Q, you have found me out Yea, Thomas Sowell is definitely an interesting person with his own take and point of view. This is why when I saw a short blurb by him about Bernie go across a news feed, I clicked on it. He can say a lot in 140 characters, more than I can for sure! His points are so spot on and interestingly enough, he seems not to have a side to his commentary....just kinda shoots out at silliness as he sees it. So interesting that you brought in the link about Greenspan. yea, hard to argue his logic but I am just not sure of the current relevancy. I was weened on Greenspan fed policy as much as Friedman's economic theory but the landscape has changed so much I am not sure if they still apply. Is there impending economic disaster or has the playing field just dramatically changed and all of these wonderful thoughts and theorems just gone the way of the dodo bird?!?

Want to talk about Bernie for "real" Irv, open the debate and I will gladly join in. But, i will not go there as I have seen that in depth thoughts and posts tend to get passed over in favor of "links" or memes and whereas that hurts me to no end, I can adjust to change and am willing to play in that game if it is the only one in town.

Respectfully Irv....you call me out about using a link to a right wing story and then post a URL to view with "MSNBC" and "Rachel Maddow" in it ?!? I looked at the link and get why you posted it and it is actually well written and makes a good, valid point. It is good that I do not play by the rules of dismissing a thought just because of the source. THAT is as important as anything else mentioned in any of these posts.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... not-rigged

[Irv]

I posted that link because it was the first one that showed up in Google and didn't add much irrelevant commentary, because I honestly didn't feel like trying to find the actual excerpt from the Face the Nation interview transcript. I don't see that having much in common with a disingenuous Federalist article that was really reaching to link Sanders and early-Soviet authoritarian politics.

I don't feel a need to take the matters of socialism or Bernie Sanders any further than we have already, but let's stop acting like his ideas are so radical and destructive, as if they haven't been reiterated in some form or another by other candidates past and present. Many of his policies don't matter in American politics. Maybe that would dismay some of his more idealist supporters, but it would be an easier lesson for them to learn through practice than political theory because it would at least get them involved and invested. They sure as hell aren't any more destructive than policies by other establishment party candidates, and perhaps some people could actually learn something and actively work to improve things rather than remain frustrated and disenfranchised.

From my view, we're not in any disagreement as to what political discourse has largely become, which is the meme society that you reference. However, just because that's what it has become doesn't mean that you have to play by its rules or attempt to flip the script on those who perpetrate it. That's a complete waste of time. Are you not familiar with the saying, "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience"? Don't play by the rules of the current society if you don't like the rules. Discourse is not law. Memes are only useful for Kristaps Porzingis, banning trolls, and to show that Jared Jeffries can hit three's [sic] so now we should keep him. Otherwise, ignore them and just play your game.