Politics Thread

"Free to those willing to work for it".

There's not even effort to appreciate at this point. It's just a talking point to get people excited about a promise that won't be delivered. If you want to focus on education, why not focus on making public schools better and actually preparing high school students for the real world and adulthood?

"I have a proposal!"

"That's stupid."

Nothing changes.

The end.

I live all the people who say the Republicans will just squash the idea. It's a nice gesture, but how do you pay for it? Besides, community colleges are subsidized by their respective states, so what does the federal government have to do with this? This is just a pandering move, it's completely wreck less with no real plan behind it other than "hey, who wants more freebies?" There has been zero plan from the disaster known as Obama on how he would pay for it, what the federal government's role would be in what is individual states matters, etc. What this is is simply a political ploy. Obama throws the idea out there as fishing bait, people bite, then those "evil republicans" (and many democrats) say "wait, what's the real plan here?" and then he says "those mean republicans hate poor people and don't want you to have free stuff. This is a joke of an idea if not followed by solid plans. The idea of free education is difficult because your state universities and colleges are already subsidized. So, you get a situation like what Frizzo described and that's accomplished because the state budgeted for it and compromised in other areas. If you attend any community college or public university (state) than you are already receiving a discounted education. Federal grants are provided to help assist in this. The federal government can increase grant amounts, but hey, throwing out "freebies" gets people more excited, regardless of ability to deliver.

Why not give people free groceries? After all, people need to eat to live; isn't that a "right"?

To be fair to Sanders, John McCain was 72 when he was running in 2008, people thought he would die in office if he won, and he's still alive 7 years later and I doubt he's going to croak in the next three years.

Either way, Sanders is well aware of the fact that he has zero chances of ever winning this nomination and I'm willing to bet most of his supporters do too. Sanders isn't playing to win, he's playing in order to get his policy ideas heard. When Bernie Sanders the fringe Vermont senator makes policy proposals no one really pays attention, when Bernie Sanders the semi-plausible presidential candidate makes a policy proposal it gets written about. Beyond that I think he's trying to act as a means of forcing Clinton to move left a little. If she's just running against... fucking nobody... there's no reason for her to impress democratic primary voters so he's forcing her to move closer to his positions on a number of things. It's the same thing the Denis Kucinich was doing all the time.

The people supporting Sanders are probably doing so either for the same reason (to push Hilary to the Left) or just out of general principal. Personally I don't blame them given that they're being given, like, zero options.

Side rant: Seriously Democrats, what the fuck? The Republicans are being given a cornocopia of different options, granted each one has more repulsive ideas than the last, but at least they're options and if you "swing that way" you're bound to find at least one personality you find agreeable. On the other side it's pretty much Hillary or the highway. Sanders has no shot and he knows it. O'Malley is... very boring... and rumor has it that Mayor Carcetti from The Wire is based on him... I'm not voting for Mayor Carcetti. Webb is a white southerner who leans right on a number of issues (not exactly what this party is trending towards). Now I don't hate Hilary, if she's the candidate I'll hold my nose and vote for her in the general election, but I've never particularly liked her for a number of reasons and I definitely want more than that one choice. How can there possibly this much of a shortage of left leaning people who want to be the leader of the free world? Is Bill Clinton sending out death threats or something? Are we that content to put all our eggs in this one basket? What happens if Hillary gets mired in a scandal (which is like, highly likely given this family's history)? There's a reason this lady lost the last primary and it sucks more than a little bit that everyone seems to be under the impression that she's such a slam dunk that it isn't even worth competing against her this time around. Granted, I may just be spoiled after having a more or less ideal candidate in Obama, who I'd vote for a third time in a heartbeat if he could run again.

I was never even aware this thread existed. As far as the candidates and potentials, I have no hope for the next election cycle. Every one of them is a big fat zero. Maybe Trump, but that is just for the insane factor, like Ross Perot.

About as bad as the 2012 election, not quite as bad but damn close.

How Hillary is even still being considered I do not know. She is just as scandal plagued as her husband. Truly a match made in hell.

2012 was a disaster. We get the default Dem vs a robot billionaire. Either way we lose. In 2008 McCain might have been bad, even with Palin dragging him down but he would have been better than Obama and Biden. Biden's stupidity ranks right up there with Palin's. At least McCain had experience.

This is not the week to say Obama was a shit President.

Every week is a week to say he is a shit president.

I don't use facebook. Facebook is the DEBIL!

Neverending

Coming from Massachusetts, I can say with absolute certainty that Elizabeth Warren would make a shit president.