The tripe!

[cyberswede]

...I know...this post is offal.

So let's make it about the issues:



*happily, I think Clinton has come out against the Keystone pipeline, which is good.

[DanTex]

1. This is hilarious. Talking about tripe, and then posting misleading/false smears against Hillary.

Bernistas win the irony championship, that's for sure.

[cyberswede]

2. What issues would you like to talk about, in my thread about issues?

I mentioned that I'm happy about Clinton's recent position on Keystone - what are your thoughts?

[DanTex]

5. On all major issues Clinton and Bernie have similar positions.

Unions, climate change, minimum wage, etc. The chart, in addition to containing outright lies, cherry picks things in order to make Hillary look bad and also tries to make things black-and-white that aren't. For example, neither Hillary nor Bernie are either "for" or "against" military intervention. Etc.

This chart has nothing to do with an intelligent discussion of issues. It's childish Hillary-bashing.

[cyberswede]

8. The chart is to stimulate discussion.

You have the opportunity to specifically correct any wrong information on that graphic.

I agree that HC and BS have similar positions on many issues, as do all the candidates for the D nomination. In my view, BS's positions align more closely to my own. For instance, I lprefer his idea about free college tuition to HC's position on that issue.

[DanTex]

10. Hmm, "stimulate" discussion with misleading and false information. An interesting strategy.

In my opinion a better way to start a discussion would be with some kind of balanced overall assessment of their positions on major issues, rather than a chart that contains some outright falsehoods and is specifically crafted in order to make Hillary look as bad as possible.

But that presumes that the goal is to have an honest conversation.

[cyberswede]

17. What are your feelings on college tuition?

Or the death penalty?

How does your candidate's position on those issues align with your own?

[DanTex]

19. How do you feel about legal immunity for gun manufacturers?

See how easy that was?

[Ed Suspicious]

23. For it when the gun manufacturer made a working product and sold it to a licensed distributor.

I do not find the distributor faultless, however, when they fail to do their job.

Your turn.

[DanTex]

25. Yeah, Bernie gets the NRA vote for sure.

[Ed Suspicious]

27. Yeah, I'm sure. In the same way Hillary gets the private prison industry vote.

You want to settle down and talk like grownups or will you just keep slinging shit?

[DanTex]

38. Here's the problem with the gun industry immunity bill.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/12629325

[beam me up scottie]

29. Except he's pro gun control and is rated D- by the NRA.

So no, he doesn't get the NRA vote.

[DanTex]

32. He voted for the NRA's top legislative priority, which was legal immunity for the gun industry.

And for some reason, people calling themselves "progressives" are defending that vote. I guess giveaways to corporations are OK as long as those corporations manufacture products that kill 30,000 Americans every year. Or maybe it's just that whatever Bernie does is good by definition.

[beam me up scottie]

40. Bernie is the progressive in the race, Hillary even calls herself moderate.

You can keep beating this dead horse but that won't change the facts.

The chart is correct.

[DanTex]

41. Not when it comes to guns.

[beam me up scottie]

42. He is pro gun control and that's good enough for me.

Why would a progressive vote for the moderate?

[DanTex]

45. Fair enough. And I'm with you, both Hillary and Bernie have great platforms,

even though neither of them are perfect on all issues, they're both "good enough" across the board.

[NealK]

65. You didn't answer any of the questions.

Is it because you don't know or you're embarrassed by the answers?

[cyberswede]

26. I strongly disagree with legal immunity for gun manufacturers.

If I had my way, every handgun in this country would be confiscated, melted down, and used for something productive. Short of that, I think holding gun manufacturers responsible for the criminal (or negligent) fatalities caused by their products would be a good thing. It might spur them to agree to more stringent safety measures with their devices (like recognizing a thumbprint or something before firearms can be used). Sorry, I'm pretty naive about this issue.

This is an issue about which BS and I disagree. On the whole, though, I align with his positions more closely than other candidates, O'Malley is probably second.

What are your thoughts on the issue? Or the issues I asked about upthread?

[DanTex]

30. I agree with you there.

I am against the death penalty. College I think should be affordable for everyone, I'm undecided on whether tuition should be free for everyone, or whether a combination of financial support and low-rate loans would be sufficient. But I'm leaning towards Bernie's free tuition idea.

[cyberswede]

44. One thing I like about free college tuition

is something Sanders talked about in the interview with the Des Moinses Register editorial board.

He talked about how free tuition isn't just an issue for college/high school students. He talked about how the knowledge that they can go to college regardless of affordability would provide hope for elementary-age students who otherwise may not think of higher education as even an option for them.

I volunteered briefly with a mentoring organization for low-income kids, and learned that kids as young as 5th grade can lose interest in school if they have the impression that college is not an option their family can afford (this group would provide mentors for kids starting in 3rd grade, in the hope of catching them before the ennui set in).

[DanTex]

52. That is a good point.

Things like that are why I'm leaning towards free college.

One thing I disagree with Bernie about is how to pay for it. He's proposing paying for it with a financial transaction tax, and I think his proposal their is not the right way to go about it. I do believe we need an FTT, but what he's proposing is a very large tax (0.5%) with a bunch of exemptions so that ordinary investors, pension funds, etc. don't get hurt by it. I think there should be a very small tax (like 0.02%) but with no exemptions at all. One problem with exemptions is that banks and hedge funds get their lawyers to work figuring out how they can claim them. Also, if the tax is large, then traders will start getting around it by trading some kind of derivatives instead. A small tax will raise money without significantly affect the way markets function, and also get rid of most of the destabilizing high-frequency trading -- high frequency traders can't afford to even pay 0.02% per trade.

[cyberswede]

55. Good points about the tax.

I can totally see speculators engaging lawyers to try any means they can to get around the tax - and contorting themsleves to fit into any exemptions they can claim.

[DanTex]

57. In the UK they have the Stamp Tax which is a 0.5% tax on stock trades.

But they have an exemption for intermediaries -- brokers, dealers, etc. The purpose of this is too keep bid/ask spreads small. If market makers have to pay 0.5% per trade, they can't for example, offer to buy a stock at $50.00 and sell at $50.01, the spread would have to be enough to cover the tax, and that in turn makes transaction costs higher for everyone.

The UK tax is pretty successful, they collect a reasonable amount of revenue. But sophisticated traders find ways around it. One way would be to do whatever the requirements are to qualify as an intermediary. Another is to trade derivatives called "contracts for difference" (CFD), which is basically a synthetic version of the stock: the value of the CFD is exactly the amount of money you would have made or lost if you owned the stock, but you don't actually own it so you don't pay the tax. As far as I can tell, the main reason that CFDs exist at all is for tax avoidance. There's even an industry term for this kind of thing: "regulatory arbitrage".

When I looked at Bernie's proposal, it didn't have an intermediary exemption, so that door might not be open. However, without the intermediary exemption, I'm not sure how they can prevent bid-ask spreads from widening a lot, and if that happens, it increases transaction costs to ordinary investors, even if they don't actually have to pay the tax.

[R. P. McMurphy]

48. Thanks for sharing your position on these issues.

I agree with you on them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. How can a lawmaker support the use of drones and oppose military intervention?

Thank you in advance.

And in that vein how can a lawmaker oppose foreign intervention and continue to vote for appropriation bills that fund foreign wars?


Thank you in advance.

[cyberswede]

66. I can't speak for Sanders, but

it seems that voting against going to war is good, while voting to fund the troops once they are there is also good, so they can have the equipment and support they need.


As for drones:

SANDERS: I think what you — Martha, what you can argue is that there are times and places where drone attacks have been effective, there are times and places where they have been absolutely countereffective and have caused more problems when they have solved. When you kill innocent people, what the end result is that people in the region become anti-American who otherwise would not have been.

So, I think we have to use drones very, very selectively and effectively. That has not always been the case.

The context of this statement was a discussion of the use of force. Sanders had just told Raddatz that “I get very nervous about my Republican friends who keep implying that the only way we could do that is through another war. War is the last resort, not the first resort.” Sanders did admit, “yeah, there are times when you have to use force, no question about it.”

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/09/01/sanders-drones-foreign-policy.html

If I had my way, drones wouldn't even exist. Alas, I'm not in charge.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. The Vietnam War ended when Congress refused to continue funding it.

I happen to believe there are instances where military intervention is appropriate. I also believe we shouldn't credit lawmakers with opposing military intervention when they don't.

[cyberswede]

69. Sanders position is that war should be a last resort. I agree.

Simple as that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. Any reasonable person believes violence (war) should be a last resort.

Any reasonable person believes violence (war) should be a last resort. However that is fundamentally different then suggesting one lawmaker supports military intervention and the other doesn't when they both do.

[Android3.14]

60. Correction. "On all major issues Clinton and Bernie have similar positions" for the moment

She keeps following Bernie's leadership because she sees how popular his message is.

She'll "evolve" to the right of all those issues as soon as the election is done.

As far as "military intervention", she voted for the Iraq War. Any ethical observer would call that being "for" foreign US military intervention.

[NealK]

64. On all major issues Clinton and Bernie have similar positions?

Where are the links to back up your assertion?

[sabrina 1]

96. Actually they don't and the chart shows that. Hillary and Bernie were miles apart on issues such as

the Neocon Invasion of Iraq eg.

Miles apart over the years on Welfare Reform. We know where he stands on that particularly awful women and children and minority destroying piece of Heritage Foundation legislation signed into law by Bill Clinton and pushed as Hillary has proudly boasted by her, 'I really worked to get the votes for that bill'.

We don't know where she stands on this draconian legislation NOW because she hasn't said.

On the Environment, who knows? We KNOW Bernie is 100% for switching as fast as possible away from fossil fuels.

On Gay Rights, for decades Bernie was out there fighting for Marriage Equality, 40 years ago when the very concept wasn't even considered by either party. Hillary was still touting 'the sanctity of marriage' as late as 2013 then finally, after it was safe to do, 'evolved' on an issues she helped delay.

So no, they are not even close on so many, many issues and where Hillary has changed her mind having to admit, too late for those who suffered from policies she supported, for being wrong, time and time again, Sanders has been CONSISTENTLY right and fought for them even when it was not politically 'safe' to do so.

Which is why I support him. THAT is the kind of leader this country needs. Someone who has the good judgement and foresight to see what needs to be done AND sees the consequences of not doing so, and is willing to FIGHT against the odds for what is right.

[kenfrequed]

21. Platitudes?

Platitudes are usually generalized, vague, and said for effect and typically things said that have been drained of content. I think Bernie has been fairly specific about what he wants to support and why. Hillary's support for an increase in minimum wage without giving a number is actually more of a platitude.

Words have meanings.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. The things on the list are issues.

[senz]

12. 'cept they don't know "issue" from tissue...

[HooptieWagon]

36. LOL! Just look at their cesspool website.

The issues Forum is <crickets>, not a single post. The Whiner Forum is the most popular....that must be where all the anti-semites hang out.

[rock]

15. DanTex, Please keep up the excellent critiques

This one is exceptional (including your replies below/above)!

[kenfrequed]

22. Uhm...

He may as well have said "liar, liar, pants on fire."

There was almost no actual, factual challenge to the meme. The meme is a bit oversimplified, but it is fairly accurate and he did nothing to really "critique" it.

[Fawke Em]

76. Politifact thinks it's mostly true.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/sep/02/11-examples-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-hol/

But somehow, I doubt DanTex has read their assessment.

[rock]

91. It is garbage

Or if you prefer, swill. One cannot waste time on debating it.

[kenfrequed]

98. Which basically means...

You don't seem to care that it is fairly accurate or true. You just like his dismissal of factual information which isn't at all a good critique. A good critique would employ counter argumentation or look for places where the above chart is wrong or inaccurate.

Denying factual information is more in the vein of Fox News than anything out and I am not giving the person you lauded praise on anymore credit than I give Fox.

[cyberswede]

31. I welcome a discussion of issues. I welcome corrections of the graphic. Dan provided neither, tho.

Your criteria for "excellent" or "exceptional" critique is pretty limited.

On edit: Dan and I have been able to discuss issues in this thread; I appreciate his thoughtful posts.

[artislife]

34. Yawn.

[sabrina 1]

46. So, what do you disagree with re the issues of both candidates listed on that chart? Are there

any corrections you'd like to make, discuss maybe? The OP is about issues, not about Bernie's millions of supporters or did you wander into the wrong thread??

[Faux pas]

4. Kickin'

[beam me up scottie]

7. She's still pro-death penalty though.

That's an important distinction since the death penalty is inherently racist.

[Recursion]

9. What does "SuperPAC raised funds" mean?

Neither Clinton nor Sanders can legally coordinate with super PACs, and both have super PACs supporting them, so the number should either be zero for both or something more than zero for both.

[cyberswede]

33. Fair point.

Do you know where the actual amounts might be found?

I do have a concern about David Brock's Correct the Record PAC exploiting a loophole to actually coordinate with the HC campaign, though.

[Recursion]

47. I don't think they've reported yet

I'm not sure what the FEC schedule is but I'm pretty sure the reporting period hasn't started yet. And one big downside of super PACs is that the last minute spending doesn't get reported until way after the election because of the delay in the process.

[cyberswede]

51. I favor publicly funded elections - get the big $ out of politics.

Pie in the sky, I know.

[Recursion]

53. You and me both. The problem is it's difficult to find a legal argument against the speaknow case

Even with public funding of elections, under Citizens United and Speaknow the law is that any non-profit group can spend their money to give any message they want that isn't directly coordinated with a campaign. While we can all see the problems this causes (not to mention the fact that this could be much more transparent even with that same principle), it's hard for me to say when exactly the government should be able to step in and say that expressing a political opinion is illegal.

Even the Citizens United case gets complex when you look at it. It's about a filmmaker who had made a biopic on Hillary Clinton. Yes, it was a hack smear job, but it's a little weird for me to say that the FEC gets to decide that a filmmaker can't screen a film he's made.

[hootinholler]

11. We need to keep chitlin away at it! n/t

[cyberswede]

35. that's a lot to chew on...I'll have to digest it for a while before I can reply. nt

[hootinholler]

43. Haggis you'll be busy for a while then. n/t

[aidbo]

94. You got guts kid!

[valerief]

13. K&R

[sibelian]

14. She's changed her mind about Keystone, hasn't she?

... maybe she saw this chart...

[cyberswede]

18. Yes, I mentioned that in my OP. I think that's a good thing.

If posters don't like the information on the graphic, they should share information that adds more detail or refutes the info, or whatever.

[sibelian]

37. H'okay

Sorry, didn't spot it

[sabrina 1]

49. So long she doesn't change it again, after the election. I like candidates who have a record of

consistency on issues as important as this. Which is why I support Bernie Sanders.

[Recursion]

50. Has she?

It seems like she could have shoved it through at State rather than been so lukewarm if it was something she liked.

[sibelian]

56. There was a thread on GD saying so, I'm sure.

I think the main objection against her with that issue is that she doesn't seem to find it awfully significant, that's the impression I've ben given, anyway.

[Recursion]

58. I guess. I never saw the policy as that important; it was more about organizing

I mean, there's a pipeline now, and they want it to be in a different place. There's pros and cons but this always struck me as being more about getting people to care about the environment than it was about the particulars of the policy.

[cantbeserious]

16. Riddle Me This - Why Did She Sit On the Keystone Fence For So Long

eom

[kenfrequed]

24. Which fence?

She called it a "distraction" and she really doesn't want it as part of the debate any longer. If she was really opposed she could have said it boldly, the way she referred to it is was as though she was sending signals to both industry and environmentalists at the same time in hopes to maintain both.

If she wins, she will trade off the Keystone opposition for... practically anything.

[cantbeserious]

28. Yes - The Cynicism Is Telling

eom

[HereSince1628]

20. That Bernie is a damned obstructionist! That's what's WRONG with Congress!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Scootaloo]

39. You had to catch me before breakfast. Now I want some sopa de mondongo

[NealK]

67. Mmm, that looks yummy.

[sabrina 1]

54. Thanks for getting the tripe out of the way and getting down to the issues. Bernie's record is so

impressive it's easy to see why despite his lack of name recognition, he has in just few months narrowed the gap NATIONALLY now to just 10 points between him and Hillary.

And he ignores the smear mongers, just keeps talking about issues, and continues his upward trend as more and more people get to know him.

[sabrina 1]

59. I was so happy when Bernie opposed the Wall St Criminals getting a tax funded bailout after they

destroyed the lives of so many people all over the world. Too bad our own party didn't take the opportunity to start the prosecutions and to break up those corrupt institutions.

[Enthusiast]

61. Kicked and recommended for maximum exposure!

[dae]

62. K & R

[PosterChild]

70. Sorry, but your characterization is misleading . ...

.... Clinton does not and did not support either keystone or the TPP. Her position has been* more nuanced and deliberative than a simple yes or no. She voted against fast track privilege for w.

Clinton isn't a locked in ideologue with simple fixed answers to issues that are complex and situational in nature - which is a virtue and a strength .

* She now has taken a definitive stance on keystone - and it was opposed, not supported.

[cyberswede]

73. None of our candidates have simple fixed answers to complex issues.

I noted in my OP that she has come out against the Keystone pipeline (which is good).

I wish she would come out decisively against the TPP; she seemed to support it in her book.

Clinton has very good positions on a lot of issues; Sanders just aligns more with my own views.

[PosterChild]

75. It is in the nature of a summary chart...

.... to simplify stances. However, juxtaposed with the tripe photo the impression is less than fair and balanced. You might consider removing it so the summary chart can be judged on its merits without a divisive distraction .

[sabrina 1]

74. Bernie is so good on the issues. Offshore drilling, we are now in a world that so clearly needs to

move away from fossil fuels to alternative energy, that anyone still supporting these old policies seems almost like a dinosaur at this point.

[NCTraveler]

77. Support for a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people?

Sander: Strongly Opposed

Clinton: Supports

Why didn't that one make the list?

[sabrina 1]

81. Bernie SUPPORTS a pathway to citizinship. Did you mis-type that?

[NCTraveler]

78. Foreign US military intervention.

Sanders has vote aftervote after vote where he supported giving financial aid to foreign armies. Your chart is blatantly false.

[NCTraveler]

79. Keystone is also highly suspect being on there.

Two dishonest things on your chart and the omission of Sanders fighting to stop over ten million people from a path to citizenship. Blocking that bill is one of Sanders greatest legislative victories and it didn't make the list. So we have his greatest legislative victory being omitted and multiple blatant falsehoods.

I see. This is also a coverup for him. He fought relentlessly against a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people while Hillary, Obama, Ted Kennedy and Biden supported it and you are spinning it as Sanders being opposed to a fence. No. He was opposed to a pathway to citizenship for economic reasons. This chart isn't just dishonest, it is purposefully deceptive in a manner to make the left look bad. There is a name for that.

Back in the day if anyone brought a lie here it would be immediately fact checked. Here we have multiple lies in one op and it is being cheered.

[cyberswede]

85. Several liberals voted agains that bill

like Sherrod Brown and Tom Harkin (my own senator at the time).
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/28/immigration.vote.rollcall/

Liberals criticized the points-based system and provisions limiting family reunification visas available to only nuclear family members of US citizens as unfair. Labor unions, human rights, and some Hispanic organizations attacked the guest workers program, claiming that it would create a group of underclass workers with no benefits.[15] Another criticism of the guest workers program was that because each guest worker is required to return home for a year before renewing his or her visa, these workers would instead overstay their visa, becoming illegal immigrants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007

Sanders was clearly in the labor camp on that vote.

“Sanders was basically one of our only allies … especially for low-skilled workers” in 2007, said Ana Avendano, a former top immigration official at the AFL-CIO. “He adamantly put his foot down and said these kinds of programs [allow] employers to bring in more and more vulnerable workers.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-and-immigration-its-complicated-119190#ixzz3mt3wL3mF

(and my OP clearly pointed out Clinton's change on Keystone, which is good).

[beam me up scottie]

88. So he doesn't hate immigrants???

Well I'll be damned, another meme bites the dust.

What's up next?

Is it time for the Gun Nut one to be recycled?

[questionseverything]

80. the chart should include positions on mj and medical mj

hc wants to continue the failed war on drugs even when it comes to medical mj

[Warren DeMontague]

82. The Stipe!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/r-e-m-song-trump/

[hifiguy]

83. Kickety rec

for TRUTH.

[beam me up scottie]

84. The wipe!

[TwilightGardener]

86. You mean, like with a cloth?

[beam me up scottie]

87. I couldn't resist!

[mak3cats]

89. You never disappoint!! Wish I could rec this! (eom)

[beam me up scottie]

90. I forgot the STANDARD DISCLAIMER:

I do not buy the right wing spin on the email scandal.

I just liked how wipe! rhymes with tripe!

ymmv

[mak3cats]

92. I don't buy it either, but it was funny! (eom)

[beam me up scottie]

93. Thanks!

You funny too!

Everybody funny!

[Doctor_J]

95. Sanders has declared support for expanding social security. Clinton has not

The list is much longer than this

[LWolf]

97. K & R