Random Politics & Religion #00

So what you're saying is...

I'm all natural! Nothing phony about my razor claw nails!

Let's put it this way, there are literally a million better qualified and less dangerous women with good ideas, plausible policies, and a better track record than Hillary. Personality and charisma have very little do with anything.

Encourage and support them.

It goes without saying, but sometimes it needs to be said that all people vying for power should solely be based on their previous record of what they support, how they support, and their ability to change with public opinion (rather than attempt to change public opinion). However, one must also consider their ability to implement change when needed and in a fashion that doesn't cause more problems than it creates. Obamacare is a perfect example of not doing this. Rather than fix the cost of healthcare (the main problem), the solution here is to have everyone obtain health insurance. So supporters brag about some kind of victory, because more people have insurance while ignoring everything else. Thanks Obama lobbyists!

However, it seems people give up this type of scrutiny when it comes to electing a non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual (fixed), etc. and actually try to use it as an argument to defend whomever is running. If you want whatever elected, at least vote for one that has a decent record. This shouldn't even be an issue though...

This seems to be the weakness of democracy a republic. Turning into a popularity contest with money as the backbone. Ultimately anything goes as long as your person and/or party wins.

In this case it's Hillary supported by 'too big to fail' banks. The very same people and institutions responsible for decimating the global economy in 2008, which not only hasn't recovered, but only made problems worse, are supporting this person. This is one area where I can understand the theoretical appeal of Bernie Sanders. His biggest supporters are labor unions. While I personally don't like unions, in theory it makes sense that a candidate whose main supporters are unions is more representative of the working class rather than Hillary whose supported by known corrupt financial institutions. Suddenly those liberals who despise capitalism are split between those who truly support socialism versus the ones that like capitalism only when their side holds the capital.

It really boggles the mind to the point where all one can do is protect themselves in the event this person actually gets elected and watch the people who support her suffer (except the financial institutions of course). The only problem is it's not funny and the whole prospect of being able to say "I told you so" seems too cruel and it's effects will be too widespread to provide any satisfaction in doing so. Luckily the chances of Hillary actually being elected president are slim, but the idea is still holding strong.

If people really want the system to change in order to level the playing field so that more people have an equal opportunity to succeed if they put some work into doing so, it's easier than it seems, yet extremely difficult at the same time. It requires effort and an ability to come up with constant compromises, rather than promises of free stuff and disagreeing solely based affiliation.

Stop rewarding crooked politicians, stop rewarding crooked financial institutions, and stop rewarding crooked businesses. Punish crooked politicians, dismantle crooked financial institutions, and shut down crooked businesses. Start encouraging and support politicians who actually make things better for ALL people (rather than what they can do just for a select group). Commend and invest with financial institutions that play by the rules rather than make, change, and 'bribe' for control of the rules (of course limiting the revolving door between government and financial institutions may take a little more effort). And finally reward businesses who can make a profit by selling a product with decent quality all while paying their employees a livable wage under fair working conditions.

Yeah I know, it all seems crazy, but one can dream.

Really? Dangerous? She is no more dangerous than Bernie Sanders or Marco Rubio. The only difference with Bernie Sanders is he wants to back-stab immigrants and has these archaic ideas on how immigration effects the economy, and he's a socialist so he believes in making sure the poorest poor don't need to work a day in their life. He also doesn't think racism exists lol That's why he's had a big problem with blacklivesmatter and has had to drop reference to his MLK walk countless time.

Dangerous is Mike Huckabee visiting that religious lunatic in jail. I might even use dangerous to describe Donald Trump, but most of what he's promising can't realistically be fulfilled. Trump is a pandering to the stupid, so I don't really consider him dangerous.

It's called the American Dream for a reason.

And pretty much everything you've touched on has so far been what Canada, and many other countries have been doing for decades. (Federally of course, Canada's Provincial heads are almost, if not more corrupt than state senators and politicians)

The PPACA was a step in the right direction, just executed very poorly. Like My Little Brony poorly. While I can maintain my position that it was a step in the right direction, I think a little more forethought and planning, as well as compromise amongst the Dems and Reps should have been had by both sides. I've said it before, but this is where Mitt Romney succeeded as Governor, and should have ran on that platform instead of the sinking ship of political puppet to the GOP. Like making sure doctors, insurance companies, etc. were on board for the most part.

What really needs to happen, is to get rid of this "appointed for life" ***, career politicians, and political dynasties among the other things you mentioned.

Then you clearly underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Congressional term limits are something only a couple candidates are talking about.

it's also considered political suicide to talk about it as well.

Yeah definitely this.

It's why a whole Bush v. Clinton election should be cause enough for worry alone.

I'd hardly compare the Bush's to the Clinton's. 1) George H.W. Bush was a pretty good president and fixed a lot of ***left for him by the Reagan administration. George W. Bush didn't do his family name justice. Jeb Bush would have made a better president. 2) Hillary is her own can of worms completely separate from Bill. We already knew she had greater aspirations than First Lady when she penned Obamacare Clintoncare. This isn't like some of the other ditsy First Lady's like lol Laura Bush running for President...that would concern me. Honestly if it weren't for political aspirations, it's safe to say Hillary would have left Bill Clinton. She should have honestly left him, it might have helped her campaign now that I think about it.

That's why I say in theory I understand the appeal of Sanders. Personally I don't like the idea of Sanders either. I think it's the whole debate over how most politicians have become centered on the right, so an appeal for a leftist candidate might even things out. Almost like some kind of balancing act. I don't buy it though.

I don't pay much attention to Huckabee. He's never gotten enough support to be a real contender.

Trump is definitely interesting though. I like his whole "I've gotten plenty of money so I can't be corrupted" appeal. However, this is of course part of the pandering you mentioned. I doubt much of the rhetoric he's been spewing over immigration could actually be implemented either. Is he dangerous? Not likely. If anything he has at least brought up the issue of immigration as a main topic. The downside is the vocal, unrealistic, and degrading tone of the conversation. Immigration is certainly a problem, but it's entered scapegoating territory.

I consider Hillary dangerous due to her popularity. It's a combination of no one wanting to really challenge her so anyone who might actually do any good has given up already plus her actual history in politics starting in Arkansas. I'm not going into her whole career right now, but it's pretty dark and disturbing.

How great would it have been if you had Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and Kirsten Gillibrand all competing for the democratic nomination?

Now that would have been some great politics that required some real debating and Clinton would have been demolished in that competition.

Funny apart is that George H.W. Bush was probably the best president since I've been alive.

Of course I was only 7 years old at the time of his election so I really didn't understand it at the time.

The problem with Sanders is he has zero support with latinos and blacks. He isn't going to change his stance on immigration so I don't see Latinos supporting him anytime soon. Blacklivesmatters is up in the air, but his initial stance on racism was ridiciulous. He knows that too and he's not really trying to do anything about it. I think he thinks he can win the general election with just liberal white voters, and that is terrifying.

Yeah that's socialist. 40 hours mininum wage isn't supposed to pay your bills. EDIT: I'm not strugling to pay my regular bills ontop of my student loan debt so that some entry level worker who makes as much as me. It's a slap in the face to individuals who have college degrees or work experience.

I really wasn't aware that Sanders had a problem with black and Latino voters. I don't recall reading anything about it. The only thing I remember was the BlackLivesMatter people taking over one of his speeches.

His immigration stance is a huge problem with Latino voters, particularly 1st gen latinos. It's kinda like me saying Oh thanks for letting my parents in the country so I could have a better life. *** everyone else waiting at the border! lol

It's not that a full time minimum wage job should afford luxury. It's that it should allow a person to have sanitation, health, and a measure of stability. Right now, it doesn't even allow a person to rent an apartment and have transportation, let alone any kind of higher education or savings.

We've been then through this debate about the raising the minimum wage....ugh I lost count on FFXIAH....

Raising the minimum wage has an affect on the whole economy. You just don't raise the minimum wage and expect the salaries of your coworkers to be unaffected. Employers will retain their profit margin whether it be lowering the salary requirements for the positions or downsizing.

They are also supporting more than a few Republican candidates. Not to mention owning outright or having long term leases on a majority in both houses.


Her popularity is fading. Challengers are arising.

Let's raise the min wage to 20 bucks an hour they we can all feel better !

Actually if you raise the min wage to 20 bucks an hour people will drop out of their women's studies program at Liberal U and work at Burger King. Beats being in 100k dollars debt and never paying it back !

France to begin war on ISIS


Meanwhile Russia supports Assad and warns the west about not touching other countries' governments.

Meanwhile Hungarian PM says the wall along Serbian border has to be built faster.

Mind blowing stuff. The immigrants don't even want to stay in Hungary, they're just using it to pass by and reach Germany or northern countries.
And Serbian governemtn is mad at this wall thing.

Obama presides over what can really be argued over the WORST economic era since the Great Depression where incomes have fallen over the last 6+ years in real dollars. And the liberal approach to the terrible economy is to not stand up and demand a more robust economy, but rather to demand Obama bleed their boss to death.

Brilliant!

I mean it's stupid on two fronts because if you've got a college degree and you advocate for a higher min wage, you're just devaluing your own work. You're artificially decreasing the your own worth as it is compared to someone without skill. You're actively making that college degree just a little more worthless.

No, no it isn't.

Yes, yes it is.

^

No, no it can't. Not factually anyway.

So, instead of demanding that no-skilled minimum wage labor buys you the top-of-the-line products, why not do something for yourself and get an education that actually pays (liberal arts doesn't count as a worthwhile paying education).