or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Daily CE Musings of Piob
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Daily CE Musings of Piob - Page 296

post #4426 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

What is ironic is that he is the one most concerned about his net worth.

He's almost certainly a narcissist in the clinical sense of the word, so his outward appearance and status is enormous to him. Just look at how often he mentions people "laughing at us"; he's obviously deeply concerned about how people view him.

Quote:
I suppose I'm trending toward not voting at all versus voting for Trump. I absolutely would not vote for Hillary. Nor would I waste my time with a 3rd party or write in vote.

I'd have considered voting for any Republican other than Trump or Cruz. I probably wouldn't have, but I would have been a lot more likely to just stay home.



Then again, my state is 100% going to go blue so it doesn't matter anyway.
post #4427 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Look up Laureate U, and Bill Clinton's $16,000,000 in compensation. Trump may well be a 100% lieing crook but. he doesn't compare so badly to the Clintons.

Candidate 1: spouse received funds for some years from a for-profit university that swindled folks. Nothing illegal about this though.
Candidate 2: Incorporated a for-profit university under his name, swindling who knows how much from people and only ceased operations after a bunch of lawsuits, then brought into question the presiding judge's ethnicity and how it is a conflict of interest due to this stupid wall idea.

i'm not sure how trump doesn't compare? I don't expect to ever change the opinion of anyone voting for trump -- you seem intelligent enough to pull yourself out of that unfortunate decision so best of luck to you.
Edited by the shah - 6/3/16 at 6:37pm
post #4428 of 5129
I wish campaigns were about issues, about how people would govern, and the principles they stood for.

Instead we just get scandals and identity politics. Vote for me I'm a woman. Vote for me I'll protect all you white people from immigrants. Even things like immigration aren't actually policy or philosophy of the issue. It is just demagogued ad nauseum.
post #4429 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I wish campaigns were about issues, about how people would govern, and the principles they stood for.

Instead we just get scandals and identity politics. Vote for me I'm a woman. Vote for me I'll protect all you white people from immigrants. Even things like immigration aren't actually policy or philosophy of the issue. It is just demagogued ad nauseum.
It's kind of funny because this is why Hillary is so out of her element at this point. She's a technocratic issues person, not a natural campaigner.
post #4430 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post


It's kind of funny because this is why Hillary is so out of her element at this point. She's a technocratic issues person, not a natural campaigner.

 

Serious question.  Is there a single recorded speech by her that is a substantive policy discussion?  I've never heard her do anything but emotional pleas about gun control or minimum wage or other populist ideas.

post #4431 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Serious question.  Is there a single recorded speech by her that is a substantive policy discussion?  I've never heard her do anything but emotional pleas about gun control or minimum wage or other populist ideas.

Speeches? Not sure. There are obviously politics at work, she (and her team) has to know that policy doesn't sell. You can see her shift into "wonk" mode in some of the town hall format discussions, but she's obviously work on sticking to the platitude script.

You can find statements from people who worked with her at State and they all say how she's incredibly obsessive about policy details.


I thought this piece was pretty nuanced about Hillary, had some good discussion about her personality behind the mask.
post #4432 of 5129
Quote:
When Clinton rolled out a progressive set of policies for families at her May events in Lexington and Louisville, her explanation went something like this: We need a national system of paid family leave because too many women don’t even get a paid day off to give birth; workers don’t have a federal requirement for paid sick days; meanwhile, many dads and parents of adopted children don’t get any time off at all, and sons and daughters don’t get time to take care of aging parents. We also need to establish voluntary home-visiting programs, where new parents, especially those facing economic adversity, can get assistance in learning how to care for their children and prepare them to succeed in school, thus taking aim at unequal outcomes in the earliest years. Relatedly, we need to raise wages, because two-thirds of minimum-wage workers are women, which has an impact on single-parent and dual-earning homes and, when combined with high child-care costs, inhibits women’s ability to earn equal benefits, save for college, and put away for retirement. Minimum-wage workers currently spend between 20 and 40 percent of their income on child care; Clinton has a plan whereby no family would pay more than 10 percent on child care, but she also believes we need to increase pay for child-care providers and early educators, who in some places are paid less than dog trainers and who have their own families to take care of. All of this is tied to the need to strengthen unions and make health care more affordable through revisions to the Affordable Care Act as well.

 

She doesn't actually ever go into details about the plans.  She just throws out populist red meat.  "We have too many poor people.  We have too little mandatory paid time off.  I'll change that.  I'll force companies to give time off, and you'll get cheap child care."  How is that implemented?  How does it not have unintended consequences such as less poor people being hired, etc?

 

This is progressive/statist version of libertarians falling back on "we need more freedom that will solve everything."

post #4433 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

She doesn't actually ever go into details about the plans.  She just throws out populist red meat.  "We have too many poor people.  We have too little mandatory paid time off.  I'll change that.  I'll force companies to give time off, and you'll get cheap child care."  How is that implemented?  How does it not have unintended consequences such as less poor people being hired, etc?

This is progressive/statist version of libertarians falling back on "we need more freedom that will solve everything."

I don't know what level of detail you're looking for but have you checked http://www.hillaryclinton.com ? You probably won't agree with quite a bit, I don't know, but there are more specifics there...
post #4434 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by the shah View Post


I don't know what level of detail you're looking for but have you checked http://www.hillaryclinton.com ? You probably won't agree with quite a bit, I don't know, but there are more specifics there...

 

I want things like policy white papers.  If she's a wonk, let's see it.  I obviously don't agree with her positions.  I am willing to bet even if I did agree with her on some policy position, it would for completely different reasons.

Here's an example on her website under the issues tabs. It is three bullets with one or two sentences each.  That's an executive summary at best. 

Quote:
 

Hillary is calling for aggressive campaign finance reform to end the stranglehold that wealthy interests have over our political system and restore a government of, by, and for the people—not just the wealthy and well-connected. Her proposals will curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics, shine a light on secret spending, and institute real reforms to raise the voices of regular voters.

Hillary will:

  • Overturn Citizens United. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who value the right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections. She’ll push for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United in order to restore the role of everyday voters in elections.

  • End secret, unaccountable money in politics. Hillary will push for legislation to require outside groups to publicly disclose significant political spending. And until Congress acts, she'll sign an executive order requiring federal government contractors to do the same. Hillary will also promote an SEC rule requiring publicly traded companies to disclose political spending to shareholders.

  • Amplify the voices of everyday Americans. Hillary will establish a small-donor matching system for presidential and congressional elections to incentivize small donors to participate in elections, and encourage candidates to spend more time engaging a representative cross-section of voters.

post #4435 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I want things like policy white papers. 
Nerd.

post #4436 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post


Nerd.

 

Look, I'm just saying these things don't exist in this campaign.  Gib said Hillary is actually very much an issues person, but I haven't seen evidence.

I can write bullet points on Citizens United:

  • Freedom of Speech.  I will nominate Justices that recognize and support people's inalienable right to freedom of speech, and as President I will veto any law that attempts to curtail that right.
  • Money in Politics.  I support people's right to spend money however they want.  Whether it is buying ads, producing movies, or publishing books, I will push legislation to allow people to freely spend money to support their right to free speech.
  • Giving everyday Americans a say in government.  I won't spend your tax dollars on political campaigns forcing you to monetarily support ideas and candidates you don't want to.  I will shrink the size of government, so the rich and powerful have no reason to lobby the government for special favors, loopholes, or protectionist polices.

 

If I wrote that, many people here would accuse me of being rigid in my libertarian ideology not some kind of brilliant legal or policy mind. 
 

post #4437 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Look, I'm just saying these things don't exist in this campaign.  Gib said Hillary is actually very much an issues person, but I haven't seen evidence.

Did you read that article I linked to? The "issues person" thing isn't a statement on how she's run the race, but what people who know her and have worked with her say.


The fact that you can't find those things in this campaign is kind of the point I was making. Politicians make this calculation to not discuss details, but if you're an "issues person", that kind of leaves you without a natural stance to campaign.
post #4438 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

Did you read that article I linked to? The "issues person" thing isn't a statement on how she's run the race, but what people who know her and have worked with her say.


The fact that you can't find those things in this campaign is kind of the point I was making. Politicians make this calculation to not discuss details, but if you're an "issues person", that kind of leaves you without a natural stance to campaign.

And what I'm saying is a bunch of political insiders who have worked with her and for her aren't exactly trustworthy sources. I am unaware of any times where she has put forth substantive legislation or given lengthy in-depth talks on a complex policy topic.
post #4439 of 5129
People who know her and worked for her, you mean?
post #4440 of 5129
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Look, I'm just saying these things don't exist in this campaign.  Gib said Hillary is actually very much an issues person, but I haven't seen evidence.


I can write bullet points on Citizens United:
  • Freedom of Speech.  I will nominate Justices that recognize and support people's inalienable right to freedom of speech, and as President I will veto any law that attempts to curtail that right.
  • Money in Politics.  I support people's right to spend money however they want.  Whether it is buying ads, producing movies, or publishing books, I will push legislation to allow people to freely spend money to support their right to free speech.
  • Giving everyday Americans a say in government.  I won't spend your tax dollars on political campaigns forcing you to monetarily support ideas and candidates you don't want to.  I will shrink the size of government, so the rich and powerful have no reason to lobby the government for special favors, loopholes, or protectionist polices.

If I wrote that, many people here would accuse me of being rigid in my libertarian ideology not some kind of brilliant legal or policy mind. 

 
No, that's totally legit.
The fact that I was mocking you doesn't mean I disagree with anything you said.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Daily CE Musings of Piob