The CNN Democrat Debate Thread

[jamil]

Sure, we can ignore the "free college" debate for a while, but this is characteristic of Sanders' entire worldview. His political identity is based on fantasy economics. If we're not debating his embarrassing college plan, we're going to be dealing with the same debt explosion when it comes to the subject of federal healthcare, federal retirement, federal housing, federal food subsidies, and any other type of amenities he can rally support for, and so on, et cetera.

I just want to know what's next? I don't understand why people don't look at entitlements and see that they're unsustainable. And Alpo's point about military spending isn't lost on me either. We spend ridiculous resources on the military. And his points about corporate cronyism are spot on as well. But with all the unsustainable entitlements we have now, how can we think of adding more?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I just want to know what's next? I don't understand why people don't look at entitlements and see that they're unsustainable. And Alpo's point about military spending isn't lost on me either. We spend ridiculous resources on the military. And his points about corporate cronyism are spot on as well. But with all the unsustainable entitlements we have now, how can we think of adding more?

I think it was you, in another thread, that wondered if there'd be adult conversation allowed in the next GOP debates. The adult conversation in this past democrat debate would have involved how is it permissible under the Constitution to even consider these programs? This sort of sophomoric "wouldn't-it-be-great" sort of dreamy-eyed talk is just-----sophomoric. Instead of figuring out how to make college free to everyone, we should be asking why aren't our kids ready to enter the work force with a high school diploma (for a great many jobs that now "require" a degree). Another question: Why is the cost of a college education rising so fast that students have to take on 10's of thousands of dollars in debt and take years and years to pay it off.

 

[printcraft]

..... Another question: Why is the cost of a college education rising so fast that students have to take on 10's of thousands of dollars in debt and take years and years to pay it off.

Again, look at who is in charge of the colleges and who is in charge of guaranteeing loans for college tuition.... hand in hand.

 

[Twangbanger]

I just want to know what's next? I don't understand why people don't look at entitlements and see that they're unsustainable. And Alpo's point about military spending isn't lost on me either. We spend ridiculous resources on the military. And his points about corporate cronyism are spot on as well. But with all the unsustainable entitlements we have now, how can we think of adding more?

People don't care about sustainability, they care about "evening the score." They're fine with a massive, rippling, muscular government, as long as it enforces what they hold to be important. They want their "fair share." I've talked to a lot of people with Alpo's worldview. Certain themes reappear again and again. I have some ex-teacher friends who adore the free college idea. When you mention sustainability, their response is as follows:

"This nation has plenty of money....we can always find the money to fight wars when we want to...so, I think we can find money for free college for everyone."

They do not care about the wasteful system; they care about equal distribution of the proceeds of that flawed system. "Republicans got _their_ way for decades, building up the military...now it's time for us to get ours...cost was not an object for them...so neither should it be for us."

It's like a family where the wife says, "Ok, honey, if you get a new bassboat - then _I'm_ getting a new kitchen." They can't afford either - they just care about getting "theirs." (Incidentally, I would not consider this a very "adult" way of approaching things).

The free college idea, and specifically the experience in California, is a very relevant issue at this time in America. The middle class is in crisis. The aerospace industry and education establishment existed side-by-side in California for decades, and both reached undreamed-of heights of opulence. Once the aerospace jobs started to dwindle, and education budgets were hit, it plunged everyone into an existential crisis. The opulence wasn't sustainable anymore. The educators didn't care where the money came from...they just knew it wasn't coming anymore, and they felt they'd been gipped off. Big Education in California had to convince everybody those jobs would come back, "if" we just educate our people, "if" we spend the necessary amount on education. If, if, if. Funding, funding, funding.

My fascination with this issue is that I see the middle class being under distress, no matter who controls the budget process. Free College is just the Democrats' way of covering up their role in it. It's their way of paying lip service to the "disappearing middle class" pathos, and turning the conversation away from the fact that their policies have had a hand in this, same as anybody else's. They know if they offer people enough candy - they can just make the issue go away. After helping burn the village down - they're going to help us all make a big pot of "Stone Soup."

Free College is just the $50 Billion dollar stone.

 

[5.56'aholic]

You're kidding right? Look at it from a non biased position and you're really going to tell me the republican debate was more substantive? "I'll negotiate so hard"- Donald trump

apparently you are unable to go back and reread what I was agreeing with, so I will spell it out. This debate was intentionally controlled to make it look as though they were acting like adults. While on the other hand, CNN intentionally prodded and provoked the republican candidates into going after one another. If you looked at it without a biased opinion you would have seen that........

 

[pudly]

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Again, look at who is in charge of the colleges and who is in charge of guaranteeing loans for college tuition.... hand in hand.

Right. Can you imagine the democrats going after "big education" like they do "big business"? Maybe, if they did college education, like they've done Medicare, they'll start dictating what colleges can charge per class/credit hour...the wailing and gnashing of teeth...oh my!

 

[5.56'aholic]

Right. Can you imagine the democrats going after "big education" like they do "big business"? Maybe, if they did college education, like they've done Medicare, they'll start dictating what colleges can charge per class/credit hour...the wailing and gnashing of teeth...oh my!

Or what they have done to healthcare in general? The left's mantra is to create an oligarchy they control, while simultaneously creating walls to keep any one from challenging them out of their "inner circle". Reeks of communism, no?

 

[jamil]

Again, look at who is in charge of the colleges and who is in charge of guaranteeing loans for college tuition.... hand in hand.

Right. Can you imagine the democrats going after "big education" like they do "big business"? Maybe, if they did college education, like they've done Medicare, they'll start dictating what colleges can charge per class/credit hour...the wailing and gnashing of teeth...oh my!

You guys have nailed it.

 

[jamil]

People don't care about sustainability, they care about "evening the score." They're fine with a massive, rippling, muscular government, as long as it enforces what they hold to be important. They want their "fair share." I've talked to a lot of people with Alpo's worldview. Certain themes reappear again and again. I have some ex-teacher friends who adore the free college idea. When you mention sustainability, their response is as follows:

"This nation has plenty of money....we can always find the money to fight wars when we want to...so, I think we can find money for free college for everyone."

They do not care about the wasteful system; they care about equal distribution of the proceeds of that flawed system. "Republicans got _their_ way for decades, building up the military...now it's time for us to get ours...cost was not an object for them...so neither should it be for us."

It's like a family where the wife says, "Ok, honey, if you get a new bassboat - then _I'm_ getting a new kitchen." They can't afford either - they just care about getting "theirs." (Incidentally, I would not consider this a very "adult" way of approaching things).

The free college idea, and specifically the experience in California, is a very relevant issue at this time in America. The middle class is in crisis. The aerospace industry and education establishment existed side-by-side in California for decades, and both reached undreamed-of heights of opulence. Once the aerospace jobs started to dwindle, and education budgets were hit, it plunged everyone into an existential crisis. The opulence wasn't sustainable anymore. The educators didn't care where the money came from...they just knew it wasn't coming anymore, and they felt they'd been gipped off. Big Education in California had to convince everybody those jobs would come back, "if" we just educate our people, "if" we spend the necessary amount on education. If, if, if. Funding, funding, funding.

My fascination with this issue is that I see the middle class being under distress, no matter who controls the budget process. Free College is just the Democrats' way of covering up their role in it. It's their way of paying lip service to the "disappearing middle class" pathos, and turning the conversation away from the fact that their policies have had a hand in this, same as anybody else's. They know if they offer people enough candy - they can just make the issue go away. After helping burn the village down - they're going to help us all make a big pot of "Stone Soup."

Free College is just the $50 Billion dollar stone.

Didn't someone try to argue that the sentiment of wanting to keep what you've earned is somehow "I've got mine?" And then they say, tax the rich. That's how we pay for the free **** we want. They got theirs, I want mine. So raise taxes on them to take away theirs and give to me. How is that any different from an "I've got mine" sentiment.

Speaking of raising taxes to pay for free ****, people complain about how little rich people pay in taxes. Yet some of us won't ever make as much in our lifetime as some rich people pay in taxes in a year. I want a fair system where I have an equal right to make my own opportunities, according to my own abilities. Some people have greater abilities and better opportunities than me. So what? That doesn't give me the right to require someone else to pay more tax than I'm willing to pay, regardless of the disparity between our incomes.

 

[OutdoorDad]

apparently you are unable to go back and reread what I was agreeing with, so I will spell it out. This debate was intentionally controlled to make it look as though they were acting like adults. While on the other hand, CNN intentionally prodded and provoked the republican candidates into going after one another. If you looked at it without a biased opinion you would have seen that........

You mean fair and balanced FOX?

 

[jamil]

You mean fair and balanced FOX?

The debate that Fox produced was not ideal but was at least professional. The CNN Republican debate intentionally pitted candidates against each other for the obvious purpose of creating a spectacle. And after, the media reported it as a bigger spectacle than the Republicans' behavior actually made. And of course Wasssssssserman-Schultz already had her canned response ready.

 

[printcraft]

CNN debates are above board................... just ask our debate moderators.........

Fairly Biased I believe is the slogan...... I'm not sure that's right....

 

[Twangbanger]

Didn't someone try to argue that the sentiment of wanting to keep what you've earned is somehow "I've got mine?" And then they say, tax the rich. That's how we pay for the free **** we want. They got theirs, I want mine. So raise taxes on them to take away theirs and give to me. How is that not any better than an "I've got mine" sentiment...

Was it this fellow?

...All I remember is what they offered me to teach a course or two was laughable, so the money is going to something other than what is put in front of students...

Apparently, when you think "society" needs to give everyone a free college education...then balk at the instructor salary required to provide it...that's not considered an example of "I've got mine" hypocrisy.

(Damn those immigrants...don't they realize they're supposed to bring along enough money to ensure the comfortable retirements of their teachers?).

 

[jamil]

Webb: CNN ?rigged? Dem debate for Clinton, Sanders | TheHill

Probably. It's been alleged also that Wasssssssserman-Schultz pretty much banned candidates from attacking Clinton in the debate.

Probably Web should change parties. His ideologies, for the most part, seem to be a bit more Republican than Democrat. He's not very far to the right overall, but he'd certainly make a better Republican than guys like Boehner or McConnell.

 

[KG1]

Webb: CNN ?rigged? Dem debate for Clinton, Sanders | TheHill

Probably. It's been alleged also that Wasssssssserman-Schultz pretty much banned candidates from attacking Clinton in the debate.

Probably Web should change parties. His ideologies, for the most part, seem to be a bit more Republican than Democrat. He's not very far to the right overall, but he'd certainly make a better Republican than guys like Boehner or McConnell.

Yeah. Webb is wasting his time. It's a shame because I find him to be the most palatable of the bunch.

 

[actaeon277]

Bernie?s Socialist Dreamland is BS - The Daily Beast

 

[Libertarian01]

This ^^^ makes me wonder if the democratic party is having a similar problem to the republican party, where the party machine is getting out of sync with the party base.

We saw this starting about 7 - 8 years ago with the tea party movement within the republican party, where a segment of the republican base began to successfully revolt against the republican party machine. We saw a slight shift within the democratic party with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement in 2011 - 2012 that fizzled out. However, I am left wondering now whether that was a precursor to the Bernie Sanders support that the democratic party machine is trying to ignore.

If they ignore it as the republican party machine ignored the tea party it may well cause them significant problems in the coming years. The republican party first ignored then attempted to placate the tea partiers with rhetoric lacking substance and it bit them in the butt. The democratic party is likely to suffer the same internal strife if they fail to come to grips with their internal dynamics as the republicans did much to their detriment.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Twangbanger]

This ^^^ makes me wonder if the democratic party is having a similar problem to the republican party, where the party machine is getting out of sync with the party base.

We saw this starting about 7 - 8 years ago with the tea party movement within the republican party, where a segment of the republican base began to successfully revolt against the republican party machine. We saw a slight shift within the democratic party with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement in 2011 - 2012 that fizzled out. However, I am left wondering now whether that was a precursor to the Bernie Sanders support that the democratic party machine is trying to ignore.

If they ignore it as the republican party machine ignored the tea party it may well cause them significant problems in the coming years. The republican party first ignored then attempted to placate the tea partiers with rhetoric lacking substance and it bit them in the butt. The democratic party is likely to suffer the same internal strife if they fail to come to grips with their internal dynamics as the republicans did much to their detriment.

Regards,

Doug

I'm tempted to say you're right, except for a couple significant things. One is that the Democratic party seems to be making some significant efforts to placate their "fringe" elements. Hillary doubled down on Obama's immigration policies, flipflopped on TPP, and now comes out in favor of Free College. I do not recall any mainstream GOP candidate (John McCain? Mitt Romney?) having been willing to carry water for the Right Wing on issues of similar importance.

That willingness to bend, of course, does not mean the mainstream Democratic party will be successful, by itself. But there's another factor, and it's that the Far Left is neither as principled nor as effective as the Far Right in advancing their goals. They have a "fire in the belly" problem. It's not surprising Occupy has petered out. They're spoiled. They're soft and lazy, and are easily swayed by the trickle of treats Democrats can so easily give. Democrats have no compunction against achieving their political goals by resorting to the "Public Treasury Goodie Bag," which contains most of the stuff the Left really wants.

The Far Left? Pfft. To a man, they will stick their tails between their legs, scrunch their scrotums up into the esophaguses, and take what handouts Hillary tosses them. And vote for her anyway. (Even the ones who say they never will).

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

H

I'm tempted to say you're right, except for a couple significant things. One is that the Democratic party seems to be making some significant efforts to placate their "fringe" elements. Hillary doubled down on Obama's immigration policies, flipflopped on TPP, and now comes out in favor of Free College. I do not recall any mainstream GOP candidate (John McCain? Mitt Romney?) having been willing to carry water for the Right Wing on issues of similar importance.

That willingness to bend, of course, does not mean the mainstream Democratic party will be successful, by itself. But there's another factor, and it's that the Far Left is neither as principled nor as effective as the Far Right in advancing their goals. They have a "fire in the belly" problem. It's not surprising Occupy has petered out. They're spoiled wimps. They're soft and lazy, and are easily swayed by the trickle of treats Democrats can so easily give. Democrats have no compunction against achieving their political goals by resorting to the "Public Treasury Goodie Bag," which contains most of the stuff the Left really wants.

The Far Left? Pfft. To a man, they will stick their tails between their legs, scrunch their scrotums up into the esophaguses, and take what handouts Hillary tosses them. And vote for her anyway. (Even the ones who say they never will).

Let's not forget about ObamaCare and that Heller and McDonald were 5-4 decisions. They never "move on" and "accept it" as they demand their political enemies do. We're 1 SCOTUS justice change out away from having either of those cases reversed or severely curtailed.