Democratic Debate

NotConvinced · 11-15-2007, 11:44 PM

For those who don't know, there was a democratic candidate debate earlier tonight in Las Vegas, Nevada. CNN hosted, and they discussed a variety of issues. It seemed more time was obviously given to the top 3, Obama, Clinton, and Edwards. Biden had some cool tidbits, he seems to come out on top of a lot of these debates. Does Bill Richardson annoy the hell out of anyone else whenever he talks in these debates? He doesn't seem to address the questions directly, and talks to you like you're a little kid. After watching the debate, I'd love to see an Obama-Biden democratic ticket, and personally, it wouldn't matter which was VP. I'm impressed on how Obama sticks to nuclear energy as the one of the current major solutions to energy independence. Kucinich was....well, Kucinich. It seemed the key phrase that always got applause from the audience was "yeah that policy we currently have/that policy the republicans came up with, is a Total Disaster!" Apparenly we need to spend more than 5% of our budjet on education, raise teachers minimum pay, increase border security, give economic aid to Pakistan, invest more money into research for renewable energy, put Kyoto Protocol-like regulations back into place, and fund universal health care..........what the hell are they gonna do, increase taxes by 2 fold? Any other thoughts on how this debate went, on how any of the debates went, or just on the election race in general?

Buddha · 11-16-2007, 12:02 AM

Kinda makes me glad I don't have cable.

Geshtinnanna · 11-16-2007, 12:03 AM

Oh I watched part of it. Sadly became bored.

greywolf90 · 11-16-2007, 07:10 AM

one of the things i learned in economics: "there is no such thing as a free lunch" and we will be the ones paying for all of this stuff. i don't want a president that will increase government interference. i think we need someone who will decrease it and care about our freedoms. if they don't protect them, then we have to protect them ourselves (second ammendment).

**Skepticologist** · 11-17-2007, 03:10 PM

There's not a chance that a viable candidate for high public office in this country hasn't already been bought and sold. That's why Dennis Kucinich was the only one on stage in Las Vegas who came even close to making sense to average Americans. But he'll never be elected because he hasn't gotten in bed with those from the top 1% of wealthy Americans who can provide the bucks required to be a serious contender.

Or, maybe make that the top 6%, which is the percentage of American taxpayers who get a free ride on Social Security because they earn more than the $97,500 salary cap.

As long as the rules that apply to 100% of us continue to be made by only 6%of us, 94% of us get the short end of the stick.

NotConvinced · 11-18-2007, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skepticologist

As long as the rules that apply to 100% of us continue to be made by only 6%of us, 94% of us get the short end of the stick.

What the top 6% have is more influence, and influence won't stop their taxes from going up if a Democrat gets into the White House. Influence is also much harder to track, like singling out an issue where their influence played a key role. If enough Americans get behind an idea, like anthropogenic gobal warming, politicians pretty much have to do "something" about it, even though it's not in the best interests of the top 6%.

Geshtinnanna · 11-18-2007, 12:58 PM

So last night the interviewer asked a yes or no question: If there is no immigration reform in the works, do you support giving driver's licenses to illegal immigration?
First, Obama could not in any shape or form answer in any way that did not visually look like a dog chasing its tail over and over in a continuous circle. And all the others could barely muster a yes or no. Man, it was disgusting.

**Skepticologist** · 11-18-2007, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotConvinced

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skepticologist

As long as the rules that apply to 100% of us continue to be made by only 6%of us, 94% of us get the short end of the stick.

What the top 6% have is more influence, and influence won't stop their taxes from going up if a Democrat gets into the White House. Influence is also much harder to track, like singling out an issue where their influence played a key role. If enough Americans get behind an idea, like anthropogenic gobal warming, politicians pretty much have to do "something" about it, even though it's not in the best interests of the top 6%.

IMHO, more influence = more money in today's US political realm. When the Democrats took back control of both houses of Congress is the 2006 election, I was elated. But, with the possible exception of a modest increase in the minimum wage, which still leaves millions of Americans south of the poverty line, nothing has changed. Any why?

Despite a clear mandate by the voters to end the senseless war in Iraq, all the Democrats have done is float a couple of bills that were predestined to be vetoed by an incalcitrant president who quixotically seems himself as the sole champion of good vs. evil in the political arena.

Basically, the mandate provided to the Democrats by a majority of voters has produced no tangible results. And that's because neither the Democrats nor the Republicans answer to the majority of voters. They answer, instead, to the less-than-1% of Americans who butter their bread and who, in actuality, call all the important shots.

Buddha · 11-18-2007, 04:31 PM

Anarchy is the answer.

Maximus · 11-19-2007, 12:40 AM

Like I say so often, U.S. politics make me laugh, if I was living in America I would vote for one of THE OTHER CANDIDATES!!!!!

You know, BESIDES THE TWO PARTIES THAT HAVE RULED YOUR COUNTRY FOR OVER A CENTURY!

Yeah, oh, I've seen a few democratic debates, I'm not impressed, and Clinton won't win because Nostradamus predicted 2012 as first year for a female U.S. pres and I'm sticking with him because his writtings make more sense than U.S. social structure.