So now it's down to three

[KingOrfeo]

Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb have dropped out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. That leaves Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O'Malley.

1. Which of these three do you think has the best chance in the general election against whomever the Pubs nominate, and why?

2. Which of these three do you think would make the best POTUS, and why?

 

[KingOrfeo]

3. Is there any chance one of the three will become another's running mate?

 

[Iceprincess12]

I'm still voting for Pedro!

What's a democrat? Ohh those people who want to take money I make and give it to those who don't make any...

Pedro won't do that.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb have dropped out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. That leaves Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O'Malley.

1. Which of these three do you think has the best chance in the general election against whomever the Pubs nominate, and why?

2. Which of these three do you think would make the best POTUS, and why?

3. Is there any chance one of the three will become another's running mate?

Hillary will take it because Clinton.

Sanders would obviously be a superior choice but (D) is so fucking rotten they won't let that happen as long as her Majesty is till around.

Who gives a shit.

I'm still voting for Pedro!

What's a democrat? Ohh those people who want to take money I make and give it to those who don't make any...

Pedro won't do that.

Pedro loves doing that too. Just because he gives your money to a billionaire defense contractor or oil company instead of poor folks doesn't mean he ain't out for your money.

 

[contrifan32]

Hillary will take it because Clinton.
Pedro loves doing that too. Just because he gives your money to a billionaire defense contractor or oil company instead of poor folks doesn't mean he ain't out for your money.

Yes, because we all know that there is a "billionaire defense contractor" that get money funneled right to him/her.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Yes, because we all know that there is a "billionaire defense contractor" that get money funneled right to him/her.

Not a. Many.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb have dropped out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. That leaves Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O'Malley.

1. Which of these three do you think has the best chance in the general election against whomever the Pubs nominate, and why?

2. Which of these three do you think would make the best POTUS, and why?

I am giving Bernie my money and my vote in the primary.

Hillary has the best chance in the General because of the word "Socialist". Bernie has some work to do. Bill Maher nailed it when he had Bernie on the show. The Bern needs to get the boogyman out in the open and own it. That said, I want Bernie to win and face Trump in the general.

Bernie would make the best POTUS. There is a massive undoing of the welfare state that needs to happen. The only way that will occur is if the accelerating wealth concentration in the hand of the "158 families" is undone and a middle class can be allowed to reform. Bernie is the only candidate that understands this and is offering meaningful public policy to move the economy in that direction. He is also correct in that the Obama failure was the "I'll take it from here" mentality he adopted as soon as he took office. This will require a steady dose of populism and nationalism to achieve.

Viva la Bernie!

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm still voting for Pedro!

Sorry, senora, you cannot vote for Pedro. Pedro ees not candidate for POTUS. Pedro ees too busy running cheap tacky turista trap where I-75 crosses border between the Carolinas. The senora can vote for Bernie. Pedro like Bernie, muy mucho!

 

[BotanyBoy]

Yes, because we all know that there is a "billionaire defense contractor" that get money funneled right to him/her.

Bob that partisan knob all you want buddy, corporate welfare is still welfare.

And welfare for the rich doesn't suddenly become not socialism because you like that particular brand of socialism.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb have dropped out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. That leaves Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O'Malley.

1. Which of these three do you think has the best chance in the general election against whomever the Pubs nominate, and why?

2. Which of these three do you think would make the best POTUS, and why?

My heart tells me to vote for Bernie Sanders. My mind tells me to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Bernie Sanders is a bridge too far. The electorate is not ready for democratic socialism yet, but it is becoming ready. Polls indicate growing approval, or at least acceptance of the socialist ideal.

Bernie Sanders is performing a useful service by telling the voters how well things work in Denmark, and by explaining that what existed in the Soviet Union and what exists in Cuba and North Korea is not the only alternative to American capitalism.

Unfortunately, as far as most Americans are concerned, the U.S. economy under President Obama is not performing well. Although unemployment has declined, so has median income adjusted for inflation. Millions of Americans have gone for years without a raise. Millions have taken pay cuts in order to keep their jobs. Millions are working at jobs that pay less than the jobs they lost. This makes the Democrats vulnerable on economic issues, and makes voters susceptible to the Republican illusion that tax cuts for the rich, paid for by painless, unspecified spending cuts, can revive the economy.

The failures of the Obama administration have reinforced my conviction that good intentions are not good enough. After Franklin Roosevelt had been in office for two years life for most Americans had improved. This enabled the Democrat Party to increase its majorities in both houses of Congress. This in turn gave Roosevelt more power to deal with the Great Depression.

After President Obama had been in office for two years the unemployment rate increased. This enabled the Republican Party to gain seats in the Senate, and to win a majority in the House of Representatives.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Bob that partisan knob all you want buddy, corporate welfare is still welfare.

And welfare for the rich doesn't suddenly become not socialism because you like that particular brand of socialism.

Look, "socialism" is not anything and everything that involves the government spending money. Government spending money is a practice much, much older than any idea of socialism, and exactly as old as government.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Look, "socialism" is not anything and everything that involves the government spending money.

Then what is it?

What do you call it when the collective (government) takes from one individual/group and gives to another for the 'greater good'? What term do you use to describe that process?

Government spending money is a practice much, much older than any idea of socialism, and exactly as old as government.

Yes but it's also the very foundation of modern socialism.

Socialism doesn't get to exist unless the government shows up to regulate and tax me out of as much money as they can.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Then what is it?

Socialism:

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production,[1][2][3][4][5] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[6] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative ownership, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[7] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[8] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[9][10]

N.B.: Social ownership is not necessarily state ownership. A worker-owned company is a form of social ownership.

What do you call it when the collective (government) takes from one individual/group and gives to another for the 'greater good'? What term do you use to describe that process?

"Government." Government, of any form or ideology, and of any post-Mesolithic historical period, can't do much of anything without doing what you're describing.

Socialism doesn't get to exist unless the government shows up to regulate and tax me out of as much money as they can.

See Libertarian socialism.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Bernie Sanders is a bridge too far. The electorate is not ready for democratic socialism yet, but it is becoming ready. Polls indicate growing approval, or at least acceptance of the socialist ideal.

What are you saying here -- that Sanders would be unelectable as the nominee, or that he would be ineffectual as POTUS?

Unfortunately, as far as most Americans are concerned, the U.S. economy under President Obama is not performing well. Although unemployment has declined, so has median income adjusted for inflation. Millions of Americans have gone for years without a raise. Millions have taken pay cuts in order to keep their jobs. Millions are working at jobs that pay less than the jobs they lost.

Well? Who do you think is more likely to do something about that -- Clinton or Sanders?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Socialism:

N.B.: Social ownership is not necessarily state ownership. A worker-owned company is a form of social ownership.

And so is the state telling someone how to run their shit.


so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/Submit
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Every definition of socialism out there, no matter how twisted and convoluted it's phrased, boils down to fucking with the individual/entity and their business private or commercial for the greater good of the community.

"Government." Government, of any form or ideology, and of any post-Mesolithic historical period, can't do much of anything without doing what you're describing.

Government is the title of the legal entity that enforces the socialism.

So? Doesn't change the fact that when the government spends your money for you, tells you how to run your business, fuck your S/O and scratch your butt that's by definition socialism.

 

[Iceprincess12]

Sorry, senora, you cannot vote for Pedro. Pedro ees not candidate for POTUS. Pedro ees too busy running cheap tacky turista trap where I-75 crosses border between the Carolinas. The senora can vote for Bernie. Pedro like Bernie, muy mucho!

I would renounce my naturalization status before I voted for a democrat.

I wish Scott Walker was still in it. He has the backbone to make decisions without checking first to see how many fb likes it has.

Je ne parle pas espagnol mon ami. Je me regrette

 

[KingOrfeo]

So? Doesn't change the fact that when the government spends your money for you, tells you how to run your business, fuck your S/O and scratch your butt that's by definition socialism.

If you define socialism so broadly as to effectively equate it with government as such, which is what you are doing, you weaken all arguments against it, and also equate your own libertarianism with utopian anarchism, deserving to be similarly dismissed. Sure you want to go there?

 

[about_average]

I wish Scott Walker was still in it. He has the backbone to make decisions without checking first to see how many fb likes it has.

Backbone doesn't help when you're a person who says things like Reagan firing the air traffic controllers was "the most significant foreign policy decision of my lifetime."

 

[KingOrfeo]

I wish Scott Walker was still in it. He has the backbone to make decisions without checking first to see how many fb likes it has.

So does Sanders. Clinton, not so much.

 

[sr71plt]

So does Sanders. Clinton, not so much.

I can't agree with that on Hillary Clinton. She lost the nomination to Obama primarily because she refused to offer the pie in the sky that Obama did (and didn't deliver on).

 

[BotanyBoy]

If you define socialism so broadly as to effectively equate it with government as such, which is what you are doing, you weaken all arguments against it

I'm not equating it with government, you're just mad because my views don't fit your narrative.

Government can do all kinds of things that don't involve them telling me how I'm allowed to make my money, how much I'm allowed to make and then spend my money for me.

Like copyright/trademark/patents.....protecting intellectual property....maintaining and distributing currency...

And I'm not opposed to all socialism. I think cops, roads, fire trucks, schools etc are all good things for the most part.

But as they all exist here in the USA, they are still socialism.

and also equate your own libertarianism with utopian anarchism, deserving to be similarly dismissed. Sure you want to go there?

Yea let's go there KO, let's start with where the fuck did I ever become a libertarian and when did I equate my nonexistent brand of it to utopian anarchism??

 

[Sunshine]

Bernie!

I'd walk 100 miles for him.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I can't agree with that on Hillary Clinton. She lost the nomination to Obama primarily because she refused to offer the pie in the sky that Obama did (and didn't deliver on).

Standing next to CSM Real Talk (and thus 'unelectable')Sanders, she looks like the slimiest used car saleswoman of all time.....she beams like the career Wall St. dick sucking pol that she is.

It's so bad he just might win the Republicans the WH if he doesn't get out of her way.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm not equating it with government, you're just mad because my views don't fit your narrative.

Government can do all kinds of things that don't involve them telling me how I'm allowed to make my money, how much I'm allowed to make and then spend my money for me.

Like copyright/trademark/patents.....protecting intellectual property....maintaining and distributing currency...

All of those things involve government telling you how you are allowed to make your money -- i.e., not by publishing copyrighted materials or marketing patented inventions without paying royalties, not by printing your own currency, etc. And all government functions that cost money, i.e., pretty much all of them apart from the designation of state birds and flowers, involve the government spending your money for you.

And I'm not opposed to all socialism. I think cops, roads, fire trucks, schools etc are all good things for the most part.

But as they all exist here in the USA, they are still socialism.

Most people would not call those things "socialism," and for once most people are right. Once again, you weaken any arguments against socialism by defining it so broadly as to include all government functions.

Yea let's go there KO, let's start with where the fuck did I ever become a libertarian and when did I equate my nonexistent brand of it to utopian anarchism??

You seem so consistently down on government-as-such most of the time that that was my interpretation. What political-ideological label, if any, would you embrace? (N.B.: You have a political ideology regardless of whether you're willing to name it or not. Anyone has who takes an interest in politics at all, which you do or you would not post in this forum.)

 

[Aglaopheme]

I will vote for Bernie in the primary. Hillary will win both the primary and the Presidency. She will not choose either of the other candidates as her running mate. Admittedly, I have not given any thought as to whom she will choose. Now my wheels will be spinning.