Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

There seems to be a "you must be this old to participate" requirement baked into the rules someplace. Not sure where, but there must be some reason why this keeps happening.

[PTTG??]

I'm wondering who, at this point, thinks that Democratic voters actually like their (*establishment) candidates. It's pretty clear that a radioactive dead rat would be preferable to Donald Trump, and democratic voters are prepared to vote one in if necessary.

There's a lot of up-and-comers that I think voters are really excited about, it's just going to take some time to get rid of the dead wood.

[wierd]

I dunno. I rather like Bernie, despite his being past expiration pork.  (You know, the other white meat.)

Our country has voted against social safety nets for a good 4 decades or more now, and the results are pretty damn stark.  These days, you could have somebody that just wants people to be able to afford food, and the mainstream political chorus would call them the red menace.

That's kinda how I view Sanders.  He gets called a raging communist, but he's really not.  He just advocates for social services that, in all honesty, are kinda essential to a large industrial nation. Especially one transitioning to a large technological nation. (Since automation will continually and systemically remove huge swaths of employment, replacing low skill jobs with high skill ones, and rapidly obsoleting high skill ones faster than people can retrain. The need for social safety nets will only INCREASE.)

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The opposition to Bernie's social policies don't come from any place of ignorance either. Everybody, particularly the ruling class, are aware that they're going to need more social systems.

And their intention is to make damn well sure those systems are used to weaken and suppress the workers rather than empower them.

[Dunamisdeos]

I think we went sort of overboard on the last one, insofar as we gave him a Nobel peace prize for his profound achievement in the field of [etc.].

It's become sort of a trope that young Democratic voters go for a candidate based on a romanticized idea of them. Mind you this is how the vast majority of everyone from any party has always voted for anyone. After all the current President is a shambling Frankenstien formed of lies, racism, and raw unbridled materialism that was voted in based on his integrity, principles, and religious piety.

But it's those young, liberal people vote based on feelings instead of reality, sure. /sarcastic

[Magistrum]

Can I have a post it note drawing of a peace Nobel?

[wierd]

I look more at how often a candidate does a stark 180 degree turn on their rhetoric, vis-a-vis their prior political track record. 

Just to pick on Mrs Clinton a little-- She went on national television and asserted that a marriage is only between a man and a woman, but then later recanted, despite years of politics that suppressed gay people-- because supporting gay marriage became politically fashionable.

The less a candidate does that, the more I consider them to have integrity, and to have genuine views on a given subject matter. 

Sanders has warts, sure. Every politician does. However, his prior voting history and session minutes history reveal he has always been stalwart in seeking protections for common Americans, and warned against the egregious actions of private interests meddling in politics.

Given the current political climate of powerful multinational corporations basically dictating domestic policy, and an ever eroding set of civil protections from said multinationals and their policies, I would say we need somebody like Sanders more than ever.

However, without the many years of service in the legislature, you have no means of qualifying the candidate's actual position or platform, which means if you are serious about your pick, and not voting with rose colored goggles on, you end up voting for old people that may be less adaptable and capable in changing or turbulent circumstances (and may well come with a raft of age related illnesses that could complicate their leadership capacities.)

Short of everyone developing true telepathy, I dont see a solution to this problem.

It's why I am willing to overlook Sanders' age.  I would rather have his strident resolve for restoration of social protections and his commitment to restoring oversight against large actors than have somebody young and attractive.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It's not like all these greasy ghouls have a lifespan comparable to Sanders' whether they're older or younger than him. The age "point" is pure distraction. If Sanders sits in office for one week and dies he'll still have done better than four years of Trump or a corporate Dem.

[Doomblade187]

It's not like all these greasy ghouls have a lifespan comparable to Sanders' whether they're older or younger than him. The age "point" is pure distraction. If Sanders sits in office for one week and dies he'll still have done better than four years of Trump or a corporate Dem.

The issue with age is, I need him to pick a good VP. Don't want a Trump situation where if he dies, things get worse.

[Dunamisdeos]

Can I have a post it note drawing of a peace Nobel?

100% against my better judgement I shall happily provide a (edit: badly smudged) post-it note art based on nobel peace prizes with a theme based on my political opinions.

Spoiler: Nothing could go wrong (click to show/hide)

[Baffler]

There seems to be a "you must be this old to participate" requirement baked into the rules someplace. Not sure where, but there must be some reason why this keeps happening.

It's a combination of the natural evolution of the spoils system in an environment where the actual mechanics of the spoils system have been legislated away but the institutional culture survives, machine politics, and the same reason the Pope is always an old man. To get the nomination you have to climb the ladder, get the experience, play the patronage game, and impress the bigwigs, and unless you're a Legendary Rung-stepper it takes a lot of time to get the people who actually run the party to get behind you enough to get you the position. They have their own ideas about the future of the party and the country too, and since they bring the money they get a pretty big say in both who gets in and what makes up the party line. Both parties do this, though the Republican establishment seems to have lost the reins somewhat and the Dems seem to be high-key panicking about the possibility of the same happening to them. It's also why

will never stop on its own. The parties are just calcified as only a large organization with lots of money and influence can be, and always will be sooner or later, and they've become extremely effective at using the organization's resources to pursue their own ends while cutting their ostensible constituents (who are, ironically, the ultimate source of all their power and influence) out of the decision-making algorithm as much as possible. It's why, even though I do think Sanders is a raging Communist whose plans are both foolish in their own right and most likely an insurmountable obstacle to at least one of his other plans, I will give serious thought to supporting him over whoever the Democrat's Company Man ends up being if I absolutely have to choose between the two.

[smjjames]

There seems to be a "you must be this old to participate" requirement baked into the rules someplace. Not sure where, but there must be some reason why this keeps happening.

The Democratic bench did get hollowed out during Obamas term, in part due to the Republican wave and in part due to Obama neglecting it since Presidents usually help with building the bench in some way. As a result, there's something of a generational jump.

There seems to be a "you must be this old to participate" requirement baked into the rules someplace. Not sure where, but there must be some reason why this keeps happening.

It's a combination of the natural evolution of the spoils system in an environment where the actual mechanics of the spoils system have been legislated away but the institutional culture survives, machine politics, and the same reason the Pope is always an old man. To get the nomination you have to climb the ladder, get the experience, play the patronage game, and impress the bigwigs, and unless you're a Legendary Rung-stepper it takes a lot of time to get the people who actually run the party to get behind you enough to get you the position. They have their own ideas about the future of the party and the country too, and since they bring the money they get a pretty big say in both who gets in and what makes up the party line. Both parties do this, though the Republican establishment seems to have lost the reins somewhat and the Dems seem to be high-key panicking about the possibility of the same happening to them. It's also why

will never stop on its own. The parties are just calcified as only a large organization with lots of money and influence can be, and always will be sooner or later, and they've become extremely effective at using the organization's resources to pursue their own ends while cutting their ostensible constituents (who are, ironically, the ultimate source of all their power and influence) out of the decision-making algorithm as much as possible. It's why, even though I do think Sanders is a raging Communist whose plans are both foolish in their own right and most likely an insurmountable obstacle to at least one of his other plans, I will give serious thought to supporting him over whoever the Democrat's Company Man ends up being if I absolutely have to choose between the two.

re old pope: The church has had bad experiences with young popes, which is probably part of it.

Also, I think you meant to quote wierd in your post, his post makes sense in the middle of that sentence where PTTGs doesn't.

[Frumple]

Sanders is like a lukewarm socialist at most, though? For all my problems with the guy, policy wise he's generally barely off point with Generic Democrat Y and mostly just a European style... whatever it is. Democratic socialist or somethin' like that. He's definitely no raging commie, sadly enough.

In any case, age wise a history check is kinda' telling. Most of our presidents started under sixty, a good few under 50. I'd wager what's been more of a thing lately with the age is the outsized influence our growing elderly demographic has on the political process.

All I can say is I hope to hell if I'm alive long enough to slide into the demographic myself I still have the goddamn sense to not want someone my age trying to run the country. Shit's rough enough when you don't have to worry about pissing yourself or something.

[Magistrum]

100% against my better judgement I shall happily provide a (edit: badly smudged) post-it note art based on nobel peace prizes with a theme based on my political opinions.

Spoiler: Nothing could go wrong (click to show/hide)

Beautiful. Much like a nobel prize, I don't deserve receiving a Post-It note art, but receiving one might induce me to take actions deserving of a Post-It note art.

[bloop_bleep]

There is the first page in the entire history of this thread which matches the year in which it was created.

It will probably also be the second last, as most likely more than 1 page will be added per year, until either the forum framework or community lapse, and the year is allowed to catch up.