Study: Hillary Clinton’s TV ads were almost entirely policy-free

Wilderb

Wilderb

Well-Known Member
tangerinegreen555 said:
No cable, wireless phone? They all offer internet around here. Several wireless companies.
Click to expand...
Up until VERY recently, 1 phone company that sold "DSL". Upload speeds less than 1. A small, local company started offering Antenna based internet about a year ago. This is what I use. While Dish, Direct, and Hughsnet claim they provide internet, it is not available in my area. But yes, only one phone company.
Most other countries have laws that create competition by sharing infrastructure. Which is why we are soooo far behind when it comes to internet service.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The number one priority of the Democratic party is to beat progressives, not Republicans

If a progressive wins, the Democratic party loses its ability to fund their campaigns through corporate finance, this is the ultimate disaster for establishment Democrats who are currently in office. They know their record of kowtowing to corporate interests over the years will very quickly come to light and they will be voted out of office in favor of the progressive alternative.

If a Republican wins, they know they won't do anything about campaign finance reform because the GOP benefits the most from it.
Click to expand...
THIS.

The money is more important than representing their constituents.

Follow the money at all costs.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
You say that but who will we get to replace them?

A load of politically green kids?

The Republicans would just wipe the floor with them.

The grassroots movement needs to take over from the inside incrementally to gain the political experience required and because this country doesn't like to change too much too fast.
Click to expand...
I disagree on both counts. Support from the base and numbers is what moves policy.

If the American people don't like change, then why did they vote for the Chump?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Wilderb said:
Up until VERY recently, 1 phone company that sold "DSL". Upload speeds less than 1. A small, local company started offering Antenna based internet about a year ago. This is what I use. While Dish, Direct, and Hughsnet claim they provide internet, it is not available in my area. But yes, only one phone company.
Most other countries have laws that create competition by sharing infrastructure. Which is why we are soooo far behind when it comes to internet service.
Click to expand...
Rural areas in the US benefited greatly under the Rural Electrification Act of the 1930s. It's time for the same approach to data access.

Corporations are in charge and will be until We the People shut off the money tap to politics.
 
thenotsoesoteric

thenotsoesoteric

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
well thank god we didn't elect the corporate campaign cash cock sucker. now schizophrenic people can buy guns and goldman sachs is in charge of the treasury, just as pada would have wanted.
Click to expand...
See that's what I don't get either. How the fuck is Hillary's bribery worse than Trump's. We all knew what kind of shit bag Trump was for fucking 40 years. I mean nobody liked him because he was a shit bag. Fucking millions of people tuned in to watch his retarded ass on TV simply because he was a drama queen but somehow that is more legit than Hillary?

Like Trump isn't lining his pockets with bribe money.
Like Trump has American's best interest at heart.

I totally understand the frustration people felt when Bernie was dismissed even though he clearly had a better chance at beating Trump but I don't see how Hillary was a more corrupt candidate than Trump. Shit baffles me.

I even had a facebook "friend" post about how is was so relieved that Obama was finally out of office and that he didn't really agree with all Trump's policies but at least Trump loves America more? And this was out of an intelligent person's mouth. I asked him 'how exactly does the equate?" Obama spent 6 years educating himself on Constitutional law and Trump blew coke off hooker's asses will dodging both the draft and taxes, but yeah Trump's a patriot... The dude's answer was, "Where is the proof that Obama even went to college?" Needless to say I ended the conversation there. lol
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I disagree on both counts. Support from the base and numbers is what moves policy.

If the American people don't like change, then why did they vote for the Chump?
Click to expand...
That's completely the wrong type of change though.

Trust me, people will be begging for Obama to come back soon, Republicans included.

I think that incremental change with a left leaning Hillary this time and then a Bernie Sanders next time.

We're really close, but some more conservative Democrats need a few stepping stones to loosen them up first.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
cool2burn said:
Pandering to the middle class with worthless speech will not work anymore. The DNC has been in charge of our inter cities for decades. They are not doing to well. DNC loves huge trade deals them make them rich and cast out the middle class. No change there. The DNC keeps re-electing the same old leadership that failed them. Unless you are an Illegal or a special interest honestly the DNC does not have much to offer these days.
Click to expand...
you voted republican and now they are gonna kill the medicaid that your family relies on, brokedick.

LULZ
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I think the country, people in general, tend to be conservative and resist change.
Click to expand...
That's exactly right, you think people are conservative. That would be your opinion. Here are the facts;

-The majority of Americans support replacing the ACA with universal healthcare
  • Americans express considerable support for the idea of replacing the ACA with a federally run national healthcare system, which is similar to the proposal championed by presidential candidate Sanders. To be sure, many Americans, primarily Democrats, also favor the idea of just keeping the ACA in place. But given a choice, those who favor both proposals come down on the side of the Sanders-type proposal. Four in 10 Republicans also favor the idea of a federally funded system.
-The majority of Americans support universal college
  • Sixty-two percent of Americans said that they support making public college tuition free for anyone who wants to attend
-The majority of Americans support ending the war on drugs
  • A national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 67% of Americans say that the government should focus more on providing treatment for those who use illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Just 26% think the government’s focus should be on prosecuting users of such hard drugs.
-Criminal justice reform
  • 69% of voters say it is important for the country to reduce its prison populations, including 81% of Democrats, 71% of Independents and 54% of Republicans.
-Campaign finance reform
-Raising the minimum wage
-Abortion
-Rebuilding our infrastructure
-Regulating the financial industry
-A green 'New Deal' style investment into renewable energy
-Protecting the environment and taking aggressive action against climate change
-Strengthening unions
-Investment into job training programs that help workers transition into new careers
-A higher corporate tax rate and a more progressive income tax rate
-An end to nation building
-Investments into scientific and medical research
-Protecting the wall between the church and the state

Do you see any establishment Democrats advocating any of these things? Because I don't. I see people like Cory Booker oppose an idea that would make prescription drugs cheaper for Americans while purportedly representing constituents in Jew Jersey, a state that has not voted for a Republican for president since Reagan. That would also seem to contradict your belief that they are just representing their constituents interests who you believe are generally conservative. Booker accepts large amounts of political contributions from the pharmaceutical and health industries and there just so happens to be quite a few pharmaceutical companies based in NJ. Those are the people politicians like Booker represent.

I also see people like former DNC Treasurer, Andrew Tobias explain the real reason he supports Bill Darrough as his successor;
Fogdog said:
This idea that Clinton lost because she wasn't liberal enough flies in the face of who won enough states to become president and at the same time swept in a republican congress.
Click to expand...
So, as we just went through some of the numbers, polling shows Americans are in fact progressive when it comes to the actual issues, with a couple exceptions. The problem is that establishment politicians don't represent progressive interests, they represent corporate interests. Actual progressives feel like they have no representation in government outside of a handful of politicians, so they're not enthusiastic about voting for them.

In 2008, Barack Obama created a political atmosphere built on "Hope & Change" from the previous administration, that's what got people excited to vote, dramatic change from the way we were doing things before. Bernie Sanders began his campaign as a relatively unknown senator from a small state and ended it by filling stadiums with his policy driven message of dramatic change. He won 22 states in the Democratic primary with some of the most conservative populations in the nation like West Virginia and Utah because his message resonated with working-class voters.
Fogdog said:
I think you were wrong about Hillary Clinton. I don't think she is corrupt but you won't hear that... ...It all comes down to opinions based on belief, not facts.
Click to expand...
Do you believe it is corruption for a corporation like Exxon Mobil to lobby politicians so they will relax regulations on the fossil fuel industry?
Fogdog said:
What I'm advocating is not a litmus test of who should be a Democrat.
Click to expand...
Is the Democratic party supposed to represent workers and the poor and middle-class? How can anyone believe they will represent the interests of the voters if the only thing that matters is representing the interests of the donors funding their campaign? Demanding fair representation in government is not a litmus test.
Fogdog said:
I'm advocating that Democrats learn how to work with each other.
Click to expand...
There is only one way I'm willing to work with the Democratic party; stop accepting corporate bribes to fund your campaigns. If they can't do that, I have no interest in them. We will replace them with someone who will.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
That's exactly right, you think people are conservative. That would be your opinion. Here are the facts;

-The majority of Americans support replacing the ACA with universal healthcare
  • Americans express considerable support for the idea of replacing the ACA with a federally run national healthcare system, which is similar to the proposal championed by presidential candidate Sanders. To be sure, many Americans, primarily Democrats, also favor the idea of just keeping the ACA in place. But given a choice, those who favor both proposals come down on the side of the Sanders-type proposal. Four in 10 Republicans also favor the idea of a federally funded system.
-The majority of Americans support universal college
  • Sixty-two percent of Americans said that they support making public college tuition free for anyone who wants to attend
-The majority of Americans support ending the war on drugs
  • A national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 67% of Americans say that the government should focus more on providing treatment for those who use illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Just 26% think the government’s focus should be on prosecuting users of such hard drugs.
-Criminal justice reform
  • 69% of voters say it is important for the country to reduce its prison populations, including 81% of Democrats, 71% of Independents and 54% of Republicans.
-Campaign finance reform
-Raising the minimum wage
-Abortion
-Rebuilding our infrastructure
-Regulating the financial industry
-A green 'New Deal' style investment into renewable energy
-Protecting the environment and taking aggressive action against climate change
-Strengthening unions
-Investment into job training programs that help workers transition into new careers
-A higher corporate tax rate and a more progressive income tax rate
-An end to nation building
-Investments into scientific and medical research
-Protecting the wall between the church and the state

Do you see any establishment Democrats advocating any of these things? Because I don't. I see people like Cory Booker oppose an idea that would make prescription drugs cheaper for Americans while purportedly representing constituents in Jew Jersey, a state that has not voted for a Republican for president since Reagan. That would also seem to contradict your belief that they are just representing their constituents interests who you believe are generally conservative. Booker accepts large amounts of political contributions from the pharmaceutical and health industries and there just so happens to be quite a few pharmaceutical companies based in NJ. Those are the people politicians like Booker represent.

I also see people like former DNC Treasurer, Andrew Tobias explain the real reason he supports Bill Darrough as his successor;


So, as we just went through some of the numbers, polling shows Americans are in fact progressive when it comes to the actual issues, with a couple exceptions. The problem is that establishment politicians don't represent progressive interests, they represent corporate interests. Actual progressives feel like they have no representation in government outside of a handful of politicians, so they're not enthusiastic about voting for them.

In 2008, Barack Obama created a political atmosphere built on "Hope & Change" from the previous administration, that's what got people excited to vote, dramatic change from the way we were doing things before. Bernie Sanders began his campaign as a relatively unknown senator from a small state and ended it by filling stadiums with his policy driven message of dramatic change. He won 22 states in the Democratic primary with some of the most conservative populations in the nation like West Virginia and Utah because his message resonated with working-class voters.

Do you believe it is corruption for a corporation like Exxon Mobil to lobby politicians so they will relax regulations on the fossil fuel industry?

Is the Democratic party supposed to represent workers and the poor and middle-class? How can anyone believe they will represent the interests of the voters if the only thing that matters is representing the interests of the donors funding their campaign? Demanding fair representation in government is not a litmus test.

There is only one way I'm willing to work with the Democratic party; stop accepting corporate bribes to fund your campaigns. If they can't do that, I have no interest in them. We will replace them with someone who will.
Click to expand...
Where are your candidates?

Gimme a list so I can start researching them, alot of people here could be on your side next week.

I'm not being rude but you're being very unspecific.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Fucker only has one name...Bernie
Problem with these Bernie Babies. Still talking Bernie while Trump is fucking up the country
Click to expand...
he was starting threads about hillary coughing while trump was promising to deport refugees who were already here and send in the national guard to chicago.

he's one of those "i'm white so it doesn't affect me and i don't care about anyone else" types. he also seems to think that he is persecuted because of the fact that he is male. it's fucking weird.
 
tangerinegreen555

tangerinegreen555

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The number one priority of the Democratic party is to beat progressives, not Republicans

If a progressive wins, the Democratic party loses its ability to fund their campaigns through corporate finance, this is the ultimate disaster for establishment Democrats who are currently in office. They know their record of kowtowing to corporate interests over the years will very quickly come to light and they will be voted out of office in favor of the progressive alternative.

If a Republican wins, they know they won't do anything about campaign finance reform because the GOP benefits the most from it.
Click to expand...
In principle, our core beliefs are similar.

I'd love to have a progressive leadership in the party, but it's complicated.

Historically, compromise between the parties created laws, policies, etc.

Polarization has destroyed that and I don't see that changing. I vote for the guy (or girl) who comes closest to my views. It's all I can do.

The republican base doesn't care whether we run establishment or progressive Democrats, they'll never switch even if they're getting screwed and continue to pretend we're socialists, communists, whatever.

The entire targeted audience, so to speak, is the 15% - 20% in the middle, the other 80% is already committed and dug in.

I don't know what the ultimate answer is, but until we can get apolitical young people interested (if that's possible), we're going to be victimized by polarization.

Even Trump supporters don't really like him, but they love the power trip and temporary control to push through an agenda more suited to the 1950's.

The Democrats need to unite or the other side will continue to squeak by with less popular votes, and this regressive, fact ignoring regime will become the norm.

That's not good for you, for me, or for the future.

Campaign finance reform is necessary, too much money is squandered away chasing power. If 75% of the 2016 election money was put into something worthwhile, everyone would benefit.

The rich who bitch about taxes have no problem putting multimillions into elections. That is very disturbing.

Power is an ugly goal.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
That's exactly right, you think people are conservative. That would be your opinion. Here are the facts;

-The majority of Americans support replacing the ACA with universal healthcare
  • Americans express considerable support for the idea of replacing the ACA with a federally run national healthcare system, which is similar to the proposal championed by presidential candidate Sanders. To be sure, many Americans, primarily Democrats, also favor the idea of just keeping the ACA in place. But given a choice, those who favor both proposals come down on the side of the Sanders-type proposal. Four in 10 Republicans also favor the idea of a federally funded system.
-The majority of Americans support universal college
  • Sixty-two percent of Americans said that they support making public college tuition free for anyone who wants to attend
-The majority of Americans support ending the war on drugs
  • A national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 67% of Americans say that the government should focus more on providing treatment for those who use illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Just 26% think the government’s focus should be on prosecuting users of such hard drugs.
-Criminal justice reform
  • 69% of voters say it is important for the country to reduce its prison populations, including 81% of Democrats, 71% of Independents and 54% of Republicans.
-Campaign finance reform
-Raising the minimum wage
-Abortion
-Rebuilding our infrastructure
-Regulating the financial industry
-A green 'New Deal' style investment into renewable energy
-Protecting the environment and taking aggressive action against climate change
-Strengthening unions
-Investment into job training programs that help workers transition into new careers
-A higher corporate tax rate and a more progressive income tax rate
-An end to nation building
-Investments into scientific and medical research
-Protecting the wall between the church and the state

Do you see any establishment Democrats advocating any of these things? Because I don't. I see people like Cory Booker oppose an idea that would make prescription drugs cheaper for Americans while purportedly representing constituents in Jew Jersey, a state that has not voted for a Republican for president since Reagan. That would also seem to contradict your belief that they are just representing their constituents interests who you believe are generally conservative. Booker accepts large amounts of political contributions from the pharmaceutical and health industries and there just so happens to be quite a few pharmaceutical companies based in NJ. Those are the people politicians like Booker represent.

I also see people like former DNC Treasurer, Andrew Tobias explain the real reason he supports Bill Darrough as his successor;
So, as we just went through some of the numbers, polling shows Americans are in fact progressive when it comes to the actual issues, with a couple exceptions. The problem is that establishment politicians don't represent progressive interests, they represent corporate interests. Actual progressives feel like they have no representation in government outside of a handful of politicians, so they're not enthusiastic about voting for them.

In 2008, Barack Obama created a political atmosphere built on "Hope & Change" from the previous administration, that's what got people excited to vote, dramatic change from the way we were doing things before. Bernie Sanders began his campaign as a relatively unknown senator from a small state and ended it by filling stadiums with his policy driven message of dramatic change. He won 22 states in the Democratic primary with some of the most conservative populations in the nation like West Virginia and Utah because his message resonated with working-class voters.

Do you believe it is corruption for a corporation like Exxon Mobil to lobby politicians so they will relax regulations on the fossil fuel industry?

Is the Democratic party supposed to represent workers and the poor and middle-class? How can anyone believe they will represent the interests of the voters if the only thing that matters is representing the interests of the donors funding their campaign? Demanding fair representation in government is not a litmus test.

There is only one way I'm willing to work with the Democratic party; stop accepting corporate bribes to fund your campaigns. If they can't do that, I have no interest in them. We will replace them with someone who will.
Click to expand...
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

STANDING OVATION!

@Fogdog I just don't think your opinion explains the facts, the mood of actual voters or their preferences as well as @Padawanbater2's assertions here.

Call me a leftie or a socialist all you want, but that's your bias talking. I'm A CENTRIST, and the country is falling off the the right wing authoritarian fascist cliff. Why? Because corrosive and their major shareholders want it this way and they'll do whatever it takes to hold back the progressive tsunami, one they know is coming.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
tangerinegreen555 said:
In principle, our core beliefs are similar.

I'd love to have a progressive leadership in the party, but it's complicated.

Historically, compromise between the parties created laws, policies, etc.

Polarization has destroyed that and I don't see that changing. I vote for the guy (or girl) who comes closest to my views. It's all I can do.

The republican base doesn't care whether we run establishment or progressive Democrats, they'll never switch even if they're getting screwed and continue to pretend we're socialists, communists, whatever.

The entire targeted audience, so to speak, is the 15% - 20% in the middle, the other 80% is already committed and dug in.

I don't know what the ultimate answer is, but until we can get apolitical young people interested (if that's possible), we're going to be victimized by polarization.

Even Trump supporters don't really like him, but they love the power trip and temporary control to push through an agenda more suited to the 1950's.

The Democrats need to unite or the other side will continue to squeak by with less popular votes, and this regressive, fact ignoring regime will become the norm.

That's not good for you, for me, or for the future.

Campaign finance reform is necessary, too much money is squandered away chasing power. If 75% of the 2016 election money was put into something worthwhile, everyone would benefit.

The rich who bitch about taxes have no problem putting multimillions into elections. That is very disturbing.

Power is an ugly goal.
Click to expand...
In my opinion, the only way to break the deadlock is to build a progressive wing of the Democratic party and drag the establishment shills to the left, kicking and screaming if necessary.

No pig wants their trough taken away, but if we are too save our country from becoming a modern aristocracy that's exactly what has to happen.

I think it's going to be a tall order, one I'm not sure our country is up to the challenge of doing.

That said, I'm as sure I'm correct as I'm sure the sun will rise in the East tomorrow. I don't even like being this right sometimes, but this is the political struggle of our times. I'm on the side of the People. Win or get buried with campaign cash forever. That's our choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top