This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Alternative Facts
Pages: 1 ... 686970 7172 ... 306
2071
« on: January 18, 2016, 09:38:33 AM »
I'm slightly torn on whether to agree with this or not.
2072
« on: January 17, 2016, 09:08:29 PM »
Man, having a job really puts shit like this into perspective.
Bernie's a nice guy and all, but I can't. I just can't.
Told you.
2074
« on: January 17, 2016, 08:16:33 PM »
its nice to hear o'malley saying he wants to improve our city planning but i cant imagine how nightmarish it would be to try and improve infrastructure in america's highly populated urban areas, especially in older cities.
Agreed. Sanders needs to start giving more concrete plans.
2075
« on: January 17, 2016, 08:05:10 PM »
Democrats are apparently hosting a debate tonight. Watch it on NBC, NBC.com, and Youtube if you wish.
Discuss here if you'd like.
2076
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:59:58 PM »
"If you're not a conservative by adulthood, you have no head, hurr durr"
It's true though
Partially.
2077
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:50:25 PM »
I'd support a NFL megathread.
2078
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:49:54 PM »
Did you even smash that fat 18 year old?
No, she's always doing something when I ask,,
2079
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:44:00 PM »
StoryCHARLESTON, S.C. (Reuters) - U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders released details on Sunday evening about his "Medicare-for-all" universal healthcare funding plan and how he would pay for it.
The plan was released hours before Sanders was to square off in a Democratic presidential debate in Charleston, South Carolina, against Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and front-runner for the Democratic nomination, and former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley.
Clinton's campaign had taken aim at Sanders in recent days, saying the U.S. senator from Vermont had not said how he plans to pay for his healthcare plan and that he needed to before the first party-nominating contest in Iowa on Feb. 1.
Sanders said that expanding Medicare, a government-run program that insures the elderly, would save $6 trillion over the next 10 years when compared with the current system, which was established by President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law, the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
Individuals would pay a 2.2 percent "premium" and employers would pay a 6.2 percent payroll tax to fund the healthcare plan. Individuals making $250,000 to $500,000 a year would pay a tax rate of 37 percent and those making more than $10 million would pay a 52 percent tax rate, according to details provided about the plan.
The average annual healthcare costs for a working U.S. family are nearly $5,000 in insurance premiums and another $1,300 on deductibles for care that is not covered, Sanders' campaign said.
Under Sanders' plan, a family of four earning $50,000 would pay $466 to the Medicare program, saving roughly $6,000 per year, the campaign said.
Clinton favors building on the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, and has said Sanders' state-administered plan would jeopardize the healthcare of those with Republican governors. Sanders has said the federal government would intervene in such a scenario.
"It would be a mistake to really thrust our country into another contentious national debate about how we're going to provide quality, affordable healthcare to everybody," Clinton told CNN's "State of the Union" program on Sunday.
Sanders defended his forthcoming proposal on the same CNN program.
"I believe healthcare is a right for all people; it will be politically difficult to achieve, but I will maintain that vision and fight for it," Sanders said.
Sanders last week tweeted a 1993 photo of himself and Clinton signed by the then-first lady, who was waging her own fight for universal healthcare, which thanked him for his commitment to "real access to healthcare for all Americans."
Aaaand the young will eat this up without understanding the mechanics.
2080
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:41:27 PM »
Israel should really just be allowed to annex Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and the Suez canal. The world would seriously be a much better place.
No.
Yes.
Actually, let's just give them everything from Chad to Iraq.
Lets give it to China.
2081
« on: January 17, 2016, 07:36:58 PM »
Israel should really just be allowed to annex Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and the Suez canal. The world would seriously be a much better place.
No.
2082
« on: January 17, 2016, 01:12:58 PM »
He says the 18-25 year old base are idiots.
And, let's be perfectly honest, a lot of 18-25 year olds don't have especially tenable ideas on government and policy.
Rude
2083
« on: January 16, 2016, 07:33:43 PM »
Neither is in the right, and Western nations were in the wrong in the 1940's when they simply plopped Israel down on an established country without working to integrate it.
2084
« on: January 16, 2016, 06:24:56 AM »
Aaaaand still no real game type update.
2085
« on: January 15, 2016, 10:07:17 PM »
Good thread. So quick question. For the Caucuses, does each state get a ballot and vote for who they want to represent the party, and then they win the nomination? I never understood that or how the caucuses work. A short version is okay if you want.
Caucuses are a much older method of voting for your candidate of choice, and is often more public. Voters gather in a set precinct and, either by raising hands or maybe going to differing corners of the room, show their support for a particular candidate. Unlike a primary or the general election voting, caucuses are a public announcement of your vote.
Quickest and easiest way to explain, I suppose.
Ohhh
that sounds hard to tally though. My mother told me it's like representatives in a room who raise their hands when asked for support or something, not just normal people.
Kind of. Each precinct in, let's say Iowa, has a designated meeting location - a high school gym. Registered members of the Republican party who are going to be voting meet at the gym at a designated time, where there are representatives from the campaigns there - usually a staffer who's been giving talking points to try and convince last minute undecided voters. The voting takes place, after which each precinct names the candidate that received the most votes. It's an extremely long and complicated ordeal afterwards, but like I said, this is the most basic definition I can get. This article gets more indepth.
2086
« on: January 15, 2016, 09:55:08 PM »
Good thread. So quick question. For the Caucuses, does each state get a ballot and vote for who they want to represent the party, and then they win the nomination? I never understood that or how the caucuses work. A short version is okay if you want.
Caucuses are a much older method of voting for your candidate of choice, and is often more public. Voters gather in a set precinct and, either by raising hands or maybe going to differing corners of the room, show their support for a particular candidate. Unlike a primary or the general election voting, caucuses are a public announcement of your vote. Quickest and easiest way to explain, I suppose.
2087
« on: January 15, 2016, 02:08:39 PM »
With just under three weeks until the Iowa Caucuses kick off the primary season, thought it would be a bit interesting to run down the list of 12 remaining GOP candidates and see where they currently stand in terms of Iowa, New Hampshire, and overall standing in the race for the nomination, along wth potential impact going into the future. Going to start at the bottom and work my way up the list of candidates. Each analysis will be in a spoiler so you all can just pick and choose who you read about, if you'd like. Jim Gilmore Former governor of Virginia, not that it makes any difference because Gilmore's impact in the 2016 race is the equivalent to a drop of water in the ocean. He does not register on any polls, he has to yet to appear at any of the debates (Even for the undercard table), and he has received only one endorsement, from a state senator of New Hampshire. Expect to see him quietly drop out sometime in the near future, with zero impact on the race going forward.
Rick Santorum & Mike Huckabee Lumping these two candidates together, as they are remarkably similar in their campaigns this time around. Rick Santorum, a former United States Senator from Pennsylvania, and Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, are both return candidates. Santorum ran in 2012 and actually put up a moderate challenge to Romney, winning in Iowa and numerous other states - Huckabee, meanwhile, ran back in 2008, when he also won Iowa and was second in total number of delegates received. This time, however, both campaigns have been lackluster and never truly received traction. Santorum has been relegated to the undercard debate since the beginning, and Huckabee has dwindled there the past two times. Neither man has a shot at winning the nomination, with Huckabee downright announcing that he'll drop out if he's not in the Top 3 of Iowa. As of now, most polls put him in the bottom three. However, both candidates are staunch social conservatives, which may be important down the road - their supporters will look to them as to who to support in a crowded race, with bold conservative options from Cruz to Trump to Rubio. Expect Santorum and Huckabee to have a minor presence going forward, as their endorsements could impact the final outcome of this race. Carly Fiornina Oh Carly. Following her showing at the first GOP debate, where she actually did remarkably well for a candidate with zero political experience, Fiornia saw a spike in polling and enjoyed a bump to the main stage debate in September. She was viewed as articulate, intelligent, and a possible beacon of light in a party often dubbed "the old white men's club".
Since then, however, Fiorina has generally been on a downward trend. Comments made about a fake Planned Parenthood video, and subsequent lackluster debate performances have sent Fiorina towards the middle-bottom tier of the polls once again, hovering around 2-3% alongside Kasich and Rand Paul in Iowa. I fully expect Fiorina to be out of the running for the candidacy by Nevada - if she does choose to stay in any longer, it's going to end up downright embarrassing. However, Fiornina's ties to Silicon Valley and her general non-establishment persona could put her in line to play a moderate role in where her supporters finally end up. John Kasich Kasich is a late comer to the GOP Primary, announcing his candidacy in late-July, after some of the campaigns had been working donors and the crowds for weeks already. Many predicted such a late entry would hurt any chance he had at the nomination, and generally, Kasich has done quite poorly. Most recent polls show him at 3% in Iowa and nationally with New Hampshire being his one beacon of hope at 14% (Behind Trump and Cruz, ahead of Rubio by 2%).
Chances of Kasich winning the nomination are extremely low, however expect him to play a crucial role in the nomination and general election - Kasich is the current governor of Ohio, which is a crucial state in the general election, and is considered the jewel needed for a candidate to win. Kasich's choice of endorsement will play a role going forward in the campaign season, and no matter the eventual nominee, expect to see him on the stage in his home state, campaigning for him. Rand Paul Oh Rand, you started with big dreams and a solid chance to shake the ground of this campaign season...and then Trump showed up.
Since his campaign launch in the spring of last year, Paul has been dogged by low polling numbers and lousy debate performances, due in part to the rise of showy outsider candidates in Carson, Trump, and Fiorina. As early as August, Republican insiders have prodded Paul to drop out of the presidential race to focus on his upcoming reelection bid for the Senate, which many believe could prove consequential for the GOP as they fight to keep control of Congress. Paul, however, has refused to take their advice, leading to his situation now - polling in 7th (or lower) in nearly all major polls, demoted to the undercard debate stage, and watching funding dry up.
I anticipate Rand to drop out quickly following Iowa and New Hampshire, however it is possible that he will follow his father's path and remain in the race as a protest candidate. Whether or not this will hurt his senate campaign is still up for debate Dr. Ben Carson In the months and years since Obama's reelection in 2012, former neurosurgeon Ben Carson has made a name for himself in the conservative media for his staunch criticism of the President, denouncing his policies and claiming that he does not represent the needs of the African-American population (For those who don't know, Carson is also black). Hosts and Pundits latched onto Carson - a ethnically different, devoutly religious, far-right Republican? We may have found our guy! For a while, it looked like Carson may actually stand a chance in this primary - he had solid support from evangelical voters, who are key to winning in Iowa, gave decent debate performances, and saw a surge in polling in the late fall, putting him in a neck and neck race with Trump. Since then, however, Carson's support has dwindled - controversial statements on issues from gun control to immigration have severed support from him, while Cruz has slowly but surely leeched the evangelicals from Carson in Iowa - leaving him in the middle of the pack. In New Hampshire, he does even worse. I fully expect to see Carson remain relevant in the conservative media's inner circle, however the chance of him taking his surgical skills to the Oval Office? None. Chris Christie The current governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie was once described as a traitor when photographs of him hugging President Obama following Hurricane Sandy were displayed one week ahead of the 2012 election.
Suffice to say, there's no love remaining between the two anymore.
As a candidate, Christie has suffered to break away from the other establishment candidates in Bush, Rubio, and Kasich, and his murky record as the governor of what is, generally, a liberal state doesn't give him any help. To his credit, however, Christie has given remarkably emotional and strong debate performances, which has helped buoy his standing in the New Hampshire polls - one of the few states where he actually has a chance of doing quite well for himself.
Ultimately, Christie has put up a strong run, but at some point, he's going to realize this his luck has run out. He's far from the most popular candidate, and his campaign is unviable moving forwards into more conservative states. Coming up next: Bush, Cruz, Rubio, Trump
2088
« on: January 14, 2016, 09:25:05 PM »
Rand had a periscope going and it just ended
tbh he should be on the stage
No, he shouldn't. He shouldn't have been on the stage last time either.
2089
« on: January 14, 2016, 09:20:23 PM »
i think ben carson took a few too many xanax before tonight's outing
Rubio took some adderall.
2090
« on: January 14, 2016, 09:17:43 PM »
Icy, why don't you like Dancina?
?
2091
« on: January 14, 2016, 08:12:01 PM »
Why do they keep bringing up these sailors?
They're being let go christ.
Cause Iran is Satan. Also, Clinton was mentioned by Christie. Take a shot.
2092
« on: January 14, 2016, 05:33:01 PM »
Boycott the debate?
What for, exactly?
He didn't qualify for the main stage debate based on polling averages (he didn't for the last debate either, but CNN let him in anyway), so now he's trying to say it's redundant and stupid
2093
« on: January 14, 2016, 04:05:29 PM »
Second to last debate before the Iowa Caucuses on tonight, hosted by Fox Business once again (Streaming can be done on their website).
Undercard begins at 6PM and features Santorum, Huckabee, and Fiorina. Rand Paul was demoted to the Undercard debate as well, however currently it is believed that he will boycott the debate entirely.
Main stage debate features Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson (Who's campaign is collapsing, in other news), Bush, Christie, and Kasich.
2094
« on: January 14, 2016, 03:29:37 PM »
Huh.
I'm actually mildly impressed.
2095
« on: January 14, 2016, 02:43:38 PM »
Why is it the Republican base has seemed to be much more radical than the establishment for so long?
Bush, McCain and Romney were basically moderates installed by the moderate-neocon wing of the establishment. And look at the people of the base: Trump and Cruz, two decidedly anti-establishment candidates.
Will respond later
2096
« on: January 13, 2016, 08:58:31 PM »
The NFL is one of the biggest businesses in American History.
Which is why they should pay for their stadiums without taking tax money that should be used in better ways, i.e. fixing roads and whatnot. A stadium would be a minor asset to a multi-billion dollar industry.
Why shouldn't the city pay if they get all those benefits?
That would be the trade off? The city allows the NFL to build a stadium, and the city gets benefited by the revenue the stadium brings through tourism, taxes, etc. Making the city pay is backwards as shit, the NFL doesn't need help with money.
Cities don't "allow" the NFL to build stadiums and teams in their area. They beg on their knees for the NFL to come.
I highly doubt Los Angeles is begging on their knees for the NFL.
2097
« on: January 13, 2016, 07:05:54 PM »
I should ban him for his avatar.
2098
« on: January 13, 2016, 03:12:00 PM »
Wish they would do that here in America. Instead we give in and give the protesters whatever they like.
To be honest - for the amount that is paid in tuition, room and board, etc for a typical 4 year public school, I'm surprised there aren't more protests.
2099
« on: January 12, 2016, 09:10:47 PM »
I just started wacthing it.
Can someone give me a recap?
It was a lot of his legacy defense.
2100
« on: January 12, 2016, 07:07:49 PM »
Speech is in one hour.
Nikki Haley is giving the GOP response.
Pages: 1 ... 686970 7172 ... 306
|
Show Posts