~*~Unofficial 2016 US Presidential Election Thread~*~

[FACT-MAN-2]

WAPO announces Paul Ryan is in the race. Okay technically that isn't what they say. They instead wrote an article about Paul Ryan's war on poverty that discussed how he wanted to make it a core issue in 2012 but it was overlooked by out of touch privileged Mittens. Also that he has been traveling around the country meeting with charities, Iowa politicians, and is going to give a hard look at running for POTUS. The article quickly glosses over that Paul Ryan has not yet released any actual, specific policies that would help.

While I guess there is some very brief insight into the fact that Paul Ryan is going to try and portray himself as caring for the poor and tap into the religious inner-city community, I still think this article is an example of everything that is wrong with modern day journalism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... ml?hpid=z4

Well, that may be but I don't think Ryan stands a ghost of a chance of winning the Republican nomination. They've almost got to go with someone who's more of a centrist, not from the lunatic fringe. His stance on Medicare alone would be enough to kill him in an election. He probably is testing the waters and dreaming, but at this stage I'd think the party moguls know better.

[FACT-MAN-2]

WAPO announces Paul Ryan is in the race. Okay technically that isn't what they say. They instead wrote an article about Paul Ryan's war on poverty that discussed how he wanted to make it a core issue in 2012 but it was overlooked by out of touch privileged Mittens. Also that he has been traveling around the country meeting with charities, Iowa politicians, and is going to give a hard look at running for POTUS. The article quickly glosses over that Paul Ryan has not yet released any actual, specific policies that would help.

While I guess there is some very brief insight into the fact that Paul Ryan is going to try and portray himself as caring for the poor and tap into the religious inner-city community, I still think this article is an example of everything that is wrong with modern day journalism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... ml?hpid=z4

Here's a writer who agrees with you (and me):

Paul Ryan, Poverty Warrior? Huh?

By Jared Bernstein
Posted: 11/19/2013 2:27 pm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-ber ... 04000.html

Look, I'm fine with the occasional puff piece, but you gotta give me something to go on. This morning's Washington Post printed a feature on Rep. Paul Ryan's plans to fight poverty by embarking "... on an ambitious new project: Steering Republicans away from the angry, nativist inclinations of the tea party movement and toward the more inclusive vision of his mentor, the late Jack Kemp."

You learn that Ryan's "...been quietly visiting inner-city neighborhoods... to talk to ex-convicts and recovering addicts about the means of their salvation." And that he and his staff have "...been trolling center-right think tanks and intellectuals for ideas to replace the "bureaucratic, top-down anti-poverty programs" that Ryan blames for "wrecking families and communities" since Lyndon B. Johnson declared a war on poverty in 1964."

Then you read page after page, trying to figure out what the dude is actually saying he'd do to lower poverty, and here's what you're left with: vouchers, tax credits, and volunteerism.

All sizzle, no steak.

Continues ...

[NineOneFour]

Warren said again today that she will stay in the Senate.

[Steve]

I like Warren in the Senate. I think she can be more effective there. President is a broader role, more restricted, different skill set.

But one day I would like her to consider the job.

[willhud9]

WAPO announces Paul Ryan is in the race. Okay technically that isn't what they say. They instead wrote an article about Paul Ryan's war on poverty that discussed how he wanted to make it a core issue in 2012 but it was overlooked by out of touch privileged Mittens. Also that he has been traveling around the country meeting with charities, Iowa politicians, and is going to give a hard look at running for POTUS. The article quickly glosses over that Paul Ryan has not yet released any actual, specific policies that would help.

While I guess there is some very brief insight into the fact that Paul Ryan is going to try and portray himself as caring for the poor and tap into the religious inner-city community, I still think this article is an example of everything that is wrong with modern day journalism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... ml?hpid=z4

Well, that may be but I don't think Ryan stands a ghost of a chance of winning the Republican nomination. They've almost got to go with someone who's more of a centrist, not from the lunatic fringe. His stance on Medicare alone would be enough to kill him in an election. He probably is testing the waters and dreaming, but at this stage I'd think the party moguls know better.

I don't know about that one. Mitt Romney carried the 65+ vote. His stance on Medicare was not any better than Ryan's. Heck Mitt Romney also carried the 45+ group. It was the younglings which won the election for Barry, not the older crowd.

You also have to consider many people in the middle class bracket erroneously hold the dogmatic view that Democrats = tax increase. Most middle class people erroneously view taxation = bad and too high. http://www.gallup.com/poll/1714/taxes.aspx

The gallup poll shows people would rather cut services if it meant cutting taxes then providing more services if it meant raising taxes.

So when you have a candidate who stresses charity and pushing people to lead by example and help the poor through a limelight campaign, while stressing against welfare and taxation the odds of them appealing towards that middle class/middle aged bracket greatly increases.

Remember Mitt Romney still got 47% of the vote. It wasn't a landslide election. Remember, it is common for people to get fed up with one political party after a set year in power. You will always get the flip floppers who will vote Republican for the sake of not having a Democrat in office who voted Democrat to not have a Republican in office. With these factors in mind, Paul Ryan's chances are not slim at all. And if the Democrats nominate someone like Clinton.....well people will vote solely based on the fact that she is a Clinton.

[GT2211]

DNC list of cities under consideration for convention

In addition to Chicago and New York, the cities under consideration include: Atlanta; Cleveland; Columbus, Ohio; Detroit; Indianapolis; Las Vegas; Miami; Nashville; Orlando; Philadelphia; Phoenix; Pittsburgh and Salt Lake City.

Some cities seem more likely than others. For instance, President Barack Obama, who will be leaving the White House in 2017, calls Chicago home and his potential successor Hillary Rodham Clinton is from Illinois. Clinton also represented New York in the Senate.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStor ... n-23423466

[Peter Brown]

Beyond caring. US politics is fucked.

Aye, even the conspiracy theories of barmy army on the right have that 'been here, read that, have you nothing better to make believe in yet?' feeling to them. They been crazy so long now it becomes harder to just laugh and not yawn at them.

[Steve]

[GT2211]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy. The fact that we are in need of a Joe Biden candidacy does not speak well about the state of the party right now...

Run, Joe, Run: Why Democrats Need a Biden Candidacy
Forget Elizabeth Warren. What the Democratic Party, and the nation, need is a real debate between Hillary Clinton's interventionism and the vice president's restraint.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/run-joe-run-why-democrats-need-a-biden-candidacy/361965/

[willhud9]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy. The fact that we are in need of a Joe Biden candidacy does not speak well about the state of the party right now...

Run, Joe, Run: Why Democrats Need a Biden Candidacy
Forget Elizabeth Warren. What the Democratic Party, and the nation, need is a real debate between Hillary Clinton's interventionism and the vice president's restraint.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/run-joe-run-why-democrats-need-a-biden-candidacy/361965/

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPE.

If Biden is a serious choice for a democratic nomination the Democratic party should also kiss its ass goodbye. There are far better candidates.

[NineOneFour]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy. The fact that we are in need of a Joe Biden candidacy does not speak well about the state of the party right now...

Run, Joe, Run: Why Democrats Need a Biden Candidacy
Forget Elizabeth Warren. What the Democratic Party, and the nation, need is a real debate between Hillary Clinton's interventionism and the vice president's restraint.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/run-joe-run-why-democrats-need-a-biden-candidacy/361965/

The Atlantic is frequently written by five year olds.

[GT2211]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy. The fact that we are in need of a Joe Biden candidacy does not speak well about the state of the party right now...

Run, Joe, Run: Why Democrats Need a Biden Candidacy
Forget Elizabeth Warren. What the Democratic Party, and the nation, need is a real debate between Hillary Clinton's interventionism and the vice president's restraint.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/run-joe-run-why-democrats-need-a-biden-candidacy/361965/

The Atlantic is frequently written by five year olds.

The Atlantic is one of the better commentary sites on the net....

[NineOneFour]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy. The fact that we are in need of a Joe Biden candidacy does not speak well about the state of the party right now...

Run, Joe, Run: Why Democrats Need a Biden Candidacy
Forget Elizabeth Warren. What the Democratic Party, and the nation, need is a real debate between Hillary Clinton's interventionism and the vice president's restraint.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/run-joe-run-why-democrats-need-a-biden-candidacy/361965/

The Atlantic is frequently written by five year olds.

The Atlantic is one of the better commentary sites on the net....

Well, they fail at the Biden article.

[GT2211]

Andrew Cuomo could be the future of the Democratic Party — and that has progressives terrified
I like Cuomo. He is very liberal socially and has a record of getting shit done unlike most. I hope he runs as of now him and O'Malley would probably be my preferred choices.

[willhud9]

If Cuomo dropped his stupid stances on gun-control I may consider him a potential candidate. As of now though assault weapon bans are nothing but fluff legislation which shows how overbearing the government is. Want to fix the problems of murder? Fix the reasons for crime first and then evaluate whether or not a weapon ban is needed.

The other thing is his economic policies. The article says it correctly New York is a unique state, and yet its economy is not doing so hot. 33rd in the nation for unemployment, running a deficit and he believes cutting taxes would generate enough income from added businesses to make up for the increased spending. New York is already the 3rd largest economy in the country and holds most of the world's corporations already. His economic position was not very strong.

Aside from that I really can't criticize his policies.

But I will not vote for a man who advocates an assault weapon ban. It is not useful legislation considering the majority of gun crimes are with handguns anyways.

[NineOneFour]

Andrew Cuomo could be the future of the Democratic Party — and that has progressives terrified
I like Cuomo. He is very liberal socially and has a record of getting shit done unlike most. I hope he runs as of now him and O'Malley would probably be my preferred choices.

He's a complete and utter douchebag, another guy who wants to mollify Republicans.

[GT2211]

Why no Biden love?

By most measures, Joe Biden has been a damn good vice president. When President Barack Obama wanted to make sure stimulus money didn't disappear to fraud, he turned to Biden — "nobody messes with Joe," he said — and Biden succeeded. When the White House wanted to avoid the fiscal cliff, it was Biden who closed the deal with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. When Obama flubbed the first debate against Mitt Romney, it was Biden who restored the ticket's mojo by bullying his way past Rep. Paul Ryan. When the Democrats held their 2012 convention, it was Biden's speech that pulled the highest ratings — beating both Bill Clinton and Obama.

But what I wrote of Biden in January 2013 is still true today. "In the continuing drama that is the Obama presidency, Biden often appears as comic relief. He's the zany neighbor, the adorable uncle. As a result, his presidential ambitions, which burn brightly even today, have mostly been laughed off. Somehow, the sitting vice president of the United States, the former chairman of both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee, a man who's on a nickname basis with many of the world's most powerful leaders, is seen in many quarters as lacking the gravitas to be president."

Or, to put it into numbers, according to Real Clear Politics' average of polls, Biden is running 44 points behind Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2016 — and only one point ahead of Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

As for why? The author speculates that Biden's gaffe's are doing him in.

Rather, these comments keep exposing a cultural gulf between Biden and the party he seeks to lead. Biden is an old-school, white, male politician in a party that's increasingly young, multicultural, and female. One of the biggest frustration for Team Biden is that their boss has become something of a joke on the internet — and that's partly because the people driving opinion online are young and very sensitive to the particular kind of gaffes Biden keeps making.

http://www.vox.com/2014/9/18/6354359/jo ... inton-2016

I like Biden. A lot more than I like Hillary as a candidate. Even though I think its more likely than not Hillary loses in the primary, I think its hard to see Biden being the one doing so. He is so well known at this point, changing the narrative and re-branding himself will be difficult. Especially since being VP he can't sit out of the spotlight for a while.

[Warren Dew]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy.

Given VP outranks Secretary of State, Biden would have a hard time distancing himself from Obama's hawkish foreign policy, even if he did have less influence over it.

[Loren Michael]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy.

Given VP outranks Secretary of State, Biden would have a hard time distancing himself from Obama's hawkish foreign policy, even if he did have less influence over it.

Given that Hillary supported the initial conditions that led to the ISIS mess (Bush's Iraq war), I don't think he would have difficulty making that a major issue. A lot of the Obama FP missteps have been missteps in putting out the fires that Bush lit.

[Warren Dew]

The Atlantic thinks we need a Joe Biden candidacy to draw attention to HRC's hawkish foreign policy.

Given VP outranks Secretary of State, Biden would have a hard time distancing himself from Obama's hawkish foreign policy, even if he did have less influence over it.

Given that Hillary supported the initial conditions that led to the ISIS mess (Bush's Iraq war), I don't think he would have difficulty making that a major issue. A lot of the Obama FP missteps have been missteps in putting out the fires that Bush lit.

Biden voted for the AUMF, so he's in the same boat Clinton is in with regard to supporting Bush there.