US Politics: I Say a Little Prayer for You!

[Gaston de Foix]

12 minutes ago, maarsen said:

Whichever Democrat wins the nomination, I fear that winning the Presidency without having a majority in the Senate is winning a wormy apple as a prize. Senate races are where one should focus attention and money. 

This is the question that really interests me.  What can a majority of senators actually achieve in the face of the filibuster? Judicial appointments sure, and it's definitely time to thank Breyer and RBG for their service and send them on their way.  Maybe budget changes/tax increases through reconciliation?  But isn't that it, even in the best case scenario for a Dem President with a Dem Senate? There's no majority to abolish the legislative filibuster, that's for sure even if the Dems take back the Senate...

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Maybe budget changes/tax increases through reconciliation?  But isn't that it even in the best case scenario for a Dem President with a Dem Senate?

Yes.  In the best case scenario, they could maybe get do major reconciliation bills through before the midterms.  That'd still be very very hard, and require a lot of competence and coordination between the administration, House, and Senate, but it would be possible if they took back the Senate.

[Raja]

29 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

They are going to have jobs like plumber, nurse, home health aid, teacher, electrician, or janitor. The impact of Warren’s proposals will be quite limited.

There are proposals for this to on the website. Again, you can evaluate these proposals and find that they don't hold up to analysis, and that is fair, but it's not like they do not exist and Warren has only sought to address discrimination only among entrepreneurs. Though, I totally agree that economic plans have to work in conjunction with rules, EOs and laws that are race conscious.

[OldGimletEye]

4 minutes ago, Raja said:

There are proposals for this to on the website. Again, you can evaluate these proposals and find that they don't hold up to analysis, and that is fair, but it's not like they do not exist and Warren has only sought to address discrimination only among entrepreneurs.

Which one of those aren't just anti-discrimination laws. See the thing is I don't think those are race conscious laws, not in the way that certain theorist actually mean.

[Larry of the Lawn]

There's only one candidate calling for prisoners and former prisoners to maintain their voting rights without cessation.  And that's an issue that affects certain demographics more than others 

[OldGimletEye]

Here, let me give an example. Warren's website says:

Quote

Employers tilt the playing field against women of color at every stage of employment. During the hiring process, employers use salary history to make new offers — creating a cycle where women of color are locked into lower wages. 

Now asking people's salary history is one of corporate america's dirtiest tricks. In a nutshell, corporations are trying to gain an informational advantage. And it's good policy to ban corporations from doing it. And less you make your living from stock ownership, it's good for everyone. It may help out minority women more than any one else and you, know that is good to go. Good. I'm happy that will be the case. But, it is not a race conscious law.

[DMC]

42 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

There's only one candidate calling for prisoners and former prisoners to maintain their voting rights without cessation.  And that's an issue that affects certain demographics more than others 

It's also an incredibly unpopular position to advocate for current prisoners' voting rights, which is part and parcel of Carville's qualms.  Doesn't mean the policy is wrong, just that it's really stupid to emphasize in a presidential (general) election.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

Sanders is showing how he'll handle the socialist label provided by Trump.

A quote: 

“In many respects, we are a socialist society today,” Sanders responded, noting the tax breaks and subsidies Trump received from the government as a businessman.

“The difference between my socialism and Trump’s socialism is I believe the government should help working families, not billionaires,” he added.

[Kalbear]

Honestly at this point part of me wants it to be Sanders because if he wins, yay, and if he loses maybe that will shut up the "we need a revolution and I will not support anyone else" people up some. 

[Freshwater Spartan]

Risky election for that sentiment but I get your meaning. I wonder about the possibility of Sanders winning followed by a severe economic downturn. Combine that with Sanders old age and general inability to work with others and the left may regret taking such a hard line stance in support of this guy. What happens when the dog catches the car?

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

I wonder about the possibility of Sanders winning followed by a severe economic downturn.

Obviously, this is exactly what's going to happen.  The long-forecasted economic downturn will stay until Sanders squeaks out a victory over Trump, and then the Sanders administration will make Carter's look quaint in "general malaise."  Because God hates the left.

[OldGimletEye]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Obviously, this is exactly what's going to happen.  The long-forecasted economic downturn will stay until Sanders squeaks out a victory over Trump, and then the Sanders administration will make Carter's look quaint in "general malaise."  Because God hates the left.

And Stephen Moore, with other certain sorts of people, will go back to being a monetary hawks, and no one will notice.

[Rippounet]

15 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

I wonder about the possibility of Sanders winning followed by a severe economic downturn. Combine that with Sanders old age and general inability to work with others and the left may regret taking such a hard line stance in support of this guy. What happens when the dog catches the car?

Sanders would either have to take a leaf out of Obama's book to "save" the economy as it is (or parts of it), mayhaps with a lot of bipartisanship (and he probably can do that, his inability to work with others may be overblown) or stick to his ideological line and go full socialist, taking advantage of the economic crisis to rein in the US financial sector through the use of executive powers, perhaps even attempt to regulate the worst excesses of capitalism itself.
If one takes his declarations at face value, an economic crisis may embolden Sanders enough for him to try to be a new FDR. Whether that would be good or not is an open question. Without Congress on his side it would be chaotic to say the least.

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

And Stephen Moore, with other certain sorts of people, will go back to being a monetary hawks, and no one will notice.

Of course!  That's how economic cycles work.  Deficits did not matter from 1980 to 1992, but were a huge problem from 92 to 2000.  Then, we didn't need to worry about it from 2000-2008, but from 2008 to 2016, deficits were an existential threat not only to this country but the world.  Now, they're back to not mattering.  That may change soon though, it's not clear yet.

[OldGimletEye]

35 minutes ago, Triskele said:

One thing that occurs to me on Sanders though should he win:  I totally share the skepticism about passing major healthcare legislation, but the idea that there is a way to strike a ton of student debt without Congress seems to have some legs.  Not every Sanders supporter has that as one of their big issues, but if a new President Sanders really did erase a lot of student debt there'd be partying in the streets, and it would soften the narrative of how he'd talked a big game but couldn't deliver.  

Since the 1970s the real cost of education have been going up. That's easy to understand since there is a significant income premium to going to college.

Critics of mass higher education, which tend to be libertarians, pretty much think the value of education is a signalling device to employers. I don't think they are quite correct, but I think some of what they are saying might be true. To the extent that it is true, that is hell of lot of money to spend to demonstrate that your competent to do a job.

Overall, I do think education does help people to improve their skills. But, we do need to figure out a way to bend the cost curve. That needs to be addressed.

[Rhom]

51 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Since the 1970s the real cost of education have been going up. That's easy to understand since there is a significant income premium to going to college.

Critics of mass higher education, which tend to be libertarians, pretty much think the value of education is a signalling device to employers. I don't think they are quite correct, but I think some of what they are saying might be true. To the extent that it is true, that is hell of lot of money to spend to demonstrate that your competent to do a job.

Overall, I do think education does help people to improve their skills. But, we do need to figure out a way to bend the cost curve. That needs to be addressed.

The problem is that higher education is paid for with Monopoly money.  None of it is real.  I’ll never forget sitting in a discussion in 1997 where an administrator from my college talked about becoming a “laptop campus.”  Every incoming student would be issued a laptop.  When asked how they would pay for that, the answer was “Financial aide will adjust your compensate.”  Me being naive and on a full academic scholarship thought this was a good idea until a fraternity brother sitting next to me who was attending on student loans pointed out that he’d be paying for an out of date laptop for thirty years.  The incredible inflation of the cost of college is directly tied to the well meaning attempt by the government to extend loans to students who realistically have no way of repaying them.  When the board of regents meets and wants to raise tuition 10%, well why the hell not?  There aren’t any students who can’t “afford” that.

(And don’t get me started on the near luxury condos that pass for dorms on state college campuses that I have toured this year with my step daughter.)

By and large, I’m against the concept of forgiveness writ large.  If you decided to take $130k to get an elementary ed degree from a private school... that’s on you.  However, the fact that I do place direct blame on government practices for getting us here does make me sympathetic to the idea that the government may need to resolve it as well.

[Jace, Extat]

31 minutes ago, Triskele said:

All of you guys are lying dog-faced pony soldiers.  And if you don't know what I'm talking about I bet you will soon.  

Don't disparage my slaves. Your privileges should not be taken for granted.

[Altherion]

1 hour ago, Triskele said:

All of you guys are lying dog-faced pony soldiers.  And if you don't know what I'm talking about I bet you will soon.  

Is this Biden subtly letting everyone know that he doesn't actually want the nomination? I mean, movie quotes are amusing and one can probably make this work in person, but he had to know it wouldn't play well when reported.

[kuenjato]

3 hours ago, Rhom said:

The problem is that higher education is paid for with Monopoly money....  The incredible inflation of the cost of college is directly tied to the well meaning attempt by the government to extend loans to students who realistically have no way of repaying them.  When the board of regents meets and wants to raise tuition 10%, well why the hell not?  There aren’t any students who can’t “afford” that.

(And don’t get me started on the near luxury condos that pass for dorms on state college campuses that I have toured this year with my step daughter.)

By and large, I’m against the concept of forgiveness writ large.  If you decided to take $130k to get an elementary ed degree from a private school... that’s on you.  However, the fact that I do place direct blame on government practices for getting us here does make me sympathetic to the idea that the government may need to resolve it as well.

Well, you have to factor in wide-spread slashed funding for public colleges/universities, which pushed the "attractive campus" narrative with admins building massive sports complexes and plush dorms to attract students, the cost of which was eaten by the students. And, of course, administration bloat, where (primarily boomers) hired their buddies to shuffle paperwork and take extensive lunches -- I saw this first hand at the small liberal arts college I went to at the end of the aughts. And the costs kept escalating from there.

I managed to get a bachelors and masters debt-free, but I was pretty lucky -- I scrimped, worked 2-3 jobs, and was one of the "star students" during my time, resulting in lots of scholarships, the excess of which went to paying off the initial 10k loan I took. I received a free masters through the Job Recovery Act, and a 2nd free masters through the school district I lived in. But again, exception to the rule.

Most importantly, the student debt bubble is eating a huge hole in overall consumption for those paying for (often unnecessarily) expensive degrees. Wiping out student debt, while triggering the ol' "you have to work for what you get" Protestant labor ethic stitched into our country's history, would also result in a lot of capital being moved to other parts of the economy. 

[Altherion]

It took a lot of effort, but it appears that the Iowa Democratic Party has succeeded at somehow making it so that Sanders gets fewer delegates than Buttigieg despite winning the popular vote and being within less than 0.1% of the delegate count:

Quote

If there are no requests to recanvass or recount, Buttigieg would be the winner of the Iowa caucuses. According to the Iowa Democratic Party, he will claim 14 delegates. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders will receive 12, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren will get eight, former Vice President Joe Biden will receive six, and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar will get one.

You have to hand it to them: they accomplished their goal... but there are strong indications that this might be their swan song as far as importance in national elections is concerned. Given the sheer incompetence in the execution of a design that is already beyond what the most corrupt dictator would dare to do, I doubt they'll be allowed to vote first next time.