Support NeoGAF

[ivysaur12]

@TVMoJoe: #DemDebate on CNN averaged a massive 15.3M viewers and 4.8M A25-54. It was the most-watched cable news Dem primary debate ever, per CNN.

@TVMoJoe: The previous most-watched Dem debate on a cable news channel: 2008's LA showdown between HRC + Obama, which drew 8.3M viewers

Nothing compared to The Trump Show, but much bigger numbers than I expected. I imagine this will help Hill and Bernie, given their performance.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Love the Esquire write up.

Looked and behaved like the other guy who's staying at the bed & breakfast you thought you had to yourself for the weekend.

That's the perfect description of Chafee.

 

[Abounder]

Nothing compared to The Trump Show, but much bigger numbers than I expected. I imagine this will help Hill and Bernie, given their performance.

Trump also gained the most twitter followers out of the candidates (more than all of them combined?) because he live-tweeted. Makes me think the ratings are because of the Don lmao

 

[Blader]

I'm absolutely not saying it wasn't an improvement for people who needed coverage. That Barry had the Senate *and* the House and couldn't do better was a failure. That even members of the democratic party were so against it is a failure. I'm not actually so sure that a single payer system is any more feasible than it was given how against it even dems were.

And to sound spiteful, maybe eight years of full on crazy GOP control is exactly what this country needs to wake up. Awful tasting medicne? Maybe.

Didn't that just end 7 years ago?

Your proposal is to make millions of people suffer just so they can come around to your way of thinking eventually. How the hell do you pass that off as progressive? It's sadistic.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Nothing compared to The Trump Show, but much bigger numbers than I expected. I imagine this will help Hill and Bernie, given their performance.

Does this include people streaming online?

 

[CharminUltra]

Those two Fuck-a-bee tweets are amazing. You can't make this shit up.

 

[Arkeband]

Didn't that just end 7 years ago?

Your proposal is to make millions of people suffer just so they can come around to your way of thinking eventually. How the hell do you pass that off as progressive? It's sadistic.

It also falls apart when you apply the logic to the other side. According to them we've been living under King Mohammad Obama and yet "the liberals" largely have not budged in their opinion of the purported hellscape in which we currently live.

So it stands to reason 4-8 years of going to hell in a hand basket under God-King Trump won't shock people the way you think it will.

Skip the games and just vote properly.

 

[ivysaur12]

I'm absolutely not saying it wasn't an improvement for people who needed coverage. That Barry had the Senate *and* the House and couldn't do better was a failure. That even members of the democratic party were so against it is a failure. I'm not actually so sure that a single payer system is any more feasible than it was given how against it even dems were.

And to sound spiteful, maybe eight years of full on crazy GOP control is exactly what this country needs to wake up. Awful tasting medicne? Maybe.

No. The electorate has a terrible memory and you're condemning the poor to 8 years under a conservative majority.

Let me put the ACA vote in context. There are 25 blue or blue leaning states. It takes 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate. In order to get those 10 extra votes, you're going to have to start dipping into Red leaning states. The ACA was the biggest reform anyone could've chewed off and has set the stage for incremental change going forward.

These things are slow. That's the nature of our system of government. Expecting them to move faster will not make it so.

 

[benjipwns]

That Barry had the Senate *and* the House and couldn't do better was a failure.

You can't blame him for that, he needed a 2/3rds majority in both chambers before he could be a real progressive or the Republicans would say bad things about him.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Nothing compared to The Trump Show, but much bigger numbers than I expected. I imagine this will help Hill and Bernie, given their performance.

Holy shit at those numbers

 

[ErasureAcer]

With the cable ratings being the highest ever, that might mean a larger interest in this election nomination fight. So who does GAF think a larger Dem Primary turnout favors? Hillary or Bernie?

 

[params7]

Nothing compared to The Trump Show, but much bigger numbers than I expected. I imagine this will help Hill and Bernie, given their performance.

Its an effect of Trump drumming up interest in national politics. He also gained more twitter followers during the debate than all democratic candidates combined.

 

[Cheebo]

The idea that we should hurt the lives of the public at large, especially the poorer citizens because the democrats don't nominate Bernie by willfully letting the GOP win is maddening. The fact this has been legitimately raised as a possible tactic is sad.

If Bernie doesn't win we should let the GOP gut Obamacare, destroy planned parenthood and pack the Supreme Court with conservatives?

 

[benjipwns]

With the cable ratings being the highest ever, that might mean a larger interest in this election nomination fight. So who does GAF think a larger Dem Primary turnout favors? Hillary or Bernie?

Hillary obviously.

 

[PeskyToaster]

Recent politicians seem to have forgotten how to use compromise and diplomacy as a weapon to get what you really want. Only the best statesmen understand this.

 

[ErasureAcer]

The idea that we should hurt the lives of the public at large, especially the poorer citizens because the democrats don't nominate Bernie by willfully letting the GOP win is maddening.

If Bernie doesn't win we should let the GOP gut Obamacare, destroy planned parenthood and pack the Supreme Court with conservatives?

Aren't you hurting the citizens by subjecting them to Clinton instead of Sanders? Your logic makes no sense.

 

[shoplifter]

I guess I'm just not progressive enough to hold my nose.


\/\/ yeah, we should have just expanded medicaid/care to everyone and called it a day.

 

[Butts-a-plenty]

I'm absolutely not saying it wasn't an improvement for people who needed coverage. That Barry had the Senate *and* the House and couldn't do better was a failure. That even members of the democratic party were so against it is a failure. I'm not actually so sure that a single payer system is any more feasible than it was given how against it even dems were.

And to sound spiteful, maybe eight years of full on crazy GOP control is exactly what this country needs to wake up. Awful tasting medicne? Maybe.

You are aware that the single payer is the only route to universal healthcare right? Germany and Switzerland have two of the best healthcare systems in the world and neither is single payer. You also are aware that the US is pretty close to what could be considered universal coverage at this point anyway right? If the medicaid expansion hadn't been stopped by the courts we'd be even farther.

 

[Cheebo]

Aren't you hurting the citizens by subjecting them to Clinton instead of Sanders? Your logic makes no sense.

When the option is Clinton vs A Republican the idea to sit out the election or vote third party as a tactic in hopes of punishing the public into voting like Bernie is what is absurd. It is putting the candidate above the actual issues. Things like protecting Obamacare and Planned Parenthood do matter and the GOP wants to gut these day one.

 

[Soulscribe]

Did anyone's opinion shift after the debate to where they'd want to switch votes? I've been Team Hillary for a while and her performance solidified my support even more. She was the most prepared, knowledgeable, cited concrete plans under her belt, and exuded total confidence. All key ingredients for the job.

Plus, she really wants this job you guys. She should give it a whirl tbh.

 

[NullPointer]

Let's not jump the gun here. People have been saying the republican party has been falling apart for years. We've been shown time and again that this isn't actually the case.

This right here. Don't think of em as animals or they'll cut the power after killing your dropship pilot and leaving you stranded on some desolate chunk of rock. Game over, man. Game over.

 

[Trey]

If you're asking if it's enough, some of the proposals literally aren't enough. The ACA is still an inferior system to every developed nation on the healthcare front, and Hillary's college plans have the same hindrances. By comparing us to other nations, that becomes clearer and clearer. How can it be enough when we're absolutely behind, even with what's on offer and what's being proposed? It will have to be worked on, yes, but that requires us to see where this shit works, first. We have to do that by looking at the countries who do it better, and that starts by acknowledging that they do it better. Otherwise people will settle for mediocrity, like the proposed college solution. It solves some of the problems, but not all of them, and is still primitive to most developed nations. People in this very thread like the idea of working X hours to "pay off" a busted loan system, when much of the developed world pays its citizens to go to, and focus on, college. Some have even spun the "you can work AND go to college" which, again, shows how backwards we are even with this very fucking approach when we look at the rest of the first world.

It's not pragmatic nor realistic to want to be other countries. Every one who is not kidding themselves know that. We can look at what works in other countries, set that as a goal, and try to reach that goal with reasonable steps. And we can try to make strides in helping people and being a more stable country while acknowledging that we're just not there yet.

But to handwave away any progress and cross your arms until we're like Sweden or like Denmark does no one any favors. We're not either, and we're working on it.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Aren't you hurting the citizens by subjecting them to Clinton instead of Sanders? Your logic makes no sense.

You will never get the exact candidate you want, because they have to appeal to more viewpoints than just yours. You can only vote for the one that fits you best, while making sure they're the right one to make a coalition and win overall. Anything else is detrimental to the values you claim to be fighting for.

 

[dramatis]

I guess I'm just not progressive enough to hold my nose.

No, it's that you don't have to worry about being deported, about being black, about your healthcare being taken away because where you get it does some abortions, about your identity being trampled by "religious freedom", and you're not actually poor enough to suffer from lack of government assistance.

You're progressive enough. You're just picking principle over practical, so you're simply not empathetic or selfless enough to hold your nose. You'd just rather let other people suffer so you can get what you want.

 

[shoplifter]

FWIW, the GOP holds a 65/34 advantage in the Ohio House, and a 23/10 advantage in the Ohio Senate. Death throes indeed.

edit: ultimately, you guys vote your conscience, i'll vote mine. I'd rather not participate in the process if the process is broken.

 

[benjipwns]

Plus, she really wants this job you guys.

The greatest disqualification for a candidate.

 

[Formless]

I like Sanders but would support any of the Dems over the other party at the moment. Go figure.

 

[vas_a_morir]

My problem with Sanders is he just keeps repeating idealistic populist rhetoric but is so vague about everything that it doesn't inspire confidence that he actually knows how to implement what he's talking about. He comes off as uncompromising, which might sound strong and cool, but in American politics, means that you practically can't get anything done at all. The kind of stuff that appeals to young voters, for sure, not yet jaded by repeatedly being let down by promises 'too good to be true.'

My problem with Hillary is that the clandestine corporate benefactors that actually run the country have had their claws deep in her for 30 years.

And of course, the Republican field is a circus.

sigh

 

[FiggyCal]

Recent politicians seem to have forgotten how to use compromise and diplomacy as a weapon to get what you really want. Only the best statesmen understand this.

I think people pay lip service to "reach across the aisle"; but really, who wants that? If Republicans want to not govern at all, and democrats are all about it -- a compromise of very little happening is a win for the republicans. If dems want to raise taxes by 2% on the top 1% and republicans want it to be lowered -- a tax increase of 1% on the 1% is a victory for the dems. There is usually a clear winner when the parties negotiate -- or even worse the American people lose because the parties are working together to defend something like the TPP, drone strikes, etc.

I don't want the dems to negotiate single payer with the republicans (and conservative democrats) and come up with something like the ACA. I just want single payer.

 

[Trey]

edit: ultimately, you guys vote your conscience, i'll vote mine. I'd rather not participate in the process if the process is broken.

not participating ensures it stays broken.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

My problem with Sanders is he just keeps repeating idealistic populist rhetoric but is so vague about everything that it doesn't inspire confidence that he actually knows how to implement what he's talking about.

I mean, it's vague in the sense that he's not going to go through the step-by-step process during a debate or an interview, but I think it's pretty easy:

Raise taxes, reduce military spending, end corporate subsidies, stop offshore havens, then use the money to pay for shit.

 

[Matt]

The greatest disqualification for a candidate.

Well that's a dumb thing to say.

 

[shoplifter]

not participating ensures it stays broken.

The two party system is the reason it's broken, and it will stay that way. The way things like the debates (and FPTP elections) are set up, it's 'better us than you, but better you than everyone else.'

 

[Blader]

Did anyone's opinion shift after the debate to where they'd want to switch votes? I've been Team Hillary for a while and her performance solidified my support even more. She was the most prepared, knowledgeable, cited concrete plans under her belt, and exuded total confidence. All key ingredients for the job.

Plus, she really wants this job you guys. She should give it a whirl tbh.

I was actually leaning more toward Bernie before with a begruding acknowledgement that I'd end up voting for Hilary in the general, but the last couple weeks and last night in particular have shifted me more in Hilary's direction for the primary -- or at least, have made me more comfortable with voting for her in the general.

 

[BuggyDClown]

Did anyone's opinion shift after the debate to where they'd want to switch votes? I've been Team Hillary for a while and her performance solidified my support even more. She was the most prepared, knowledgeable, cited concrete plans under her belt, and exuded total confidence. All key ingredients for the job.

Plus, she really wants this job you guys. She should give it a whirl tbh.

Nope, I couldnt be less likely to vote hillary. I do not trust her when it comes ti crime and prison reform, wall street, business, drug reform, and war.

Shes barely a democrat.

 

[Fenderputty]

The two party system is the reason it's broken, and it will stay that way. The way things like the debates (and FPTP elections) are set up, it's 'better us than you, but better you than everyone else.'

This wasn't a retort. It's your mind doing mental gymnastics.

 

[googleplex]

Didn't that just end 7 years ago?

Your proposal is to make millions of people suffer just so they can come around to your way of thinking eventually. How the hell do you pass that off as progressive? It's sadistic.

And I'll guaran-fucking-tee that he and people that say shit like that,are not the type of people that will be drastically effected by a "Out of control GOP run country" I.e Minorities, woman, Homosexuals, poor.

Seriously stop it with that Let everything burn so people will wake up nonsense.

 

[ErasureAcer]

When the option is Clinton vs A Republican the idea to sit out the election or vote third party as a tactic in hopes of punishing the public into voting like Bernie is what is absurd. It is putting the candidate above the actual issues. Things like protecting Obamacare and Planned Parenthood do matter and the GOP wants to gut these day one.

Making Hillary the nominee because you (wrongly) think she is electable(the polls say otherwise, Bernie does better) is the very definition of putting the (presumed) candidate (Hillary) above the issues(Bernie). Cheebs. I don't know how many times I have to correct you. You play the fool more than others. That's alright, because remember guys and gals....Everybody plays a fool, sometimes. There's no exception to the rule.

Go easy on Cheebs.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Being short-sided is to think they are falling apart honestly. They had a huge landslide victory just last year.

And no, they aren't going to nominate Trump or Carson. Rubio is the safe bet for the nomination. GAF's beloved Nate Silver says he is the the odds on favorite to win the GOP nomination for example. People thinking the GOP is imploding despite having major major victories just last year and thinking they are going to nominate someone like Trump or Carson are not looking at things clearly.

God, I hope you're right about Rubio.

 

[Veritigo_X]

And I'll guaran-fucking-tee that he and people that say shit like that aren't tge type of people that will be drastically effected by a "Out of control GOP run country" I.e Minorities, woman, Homosexuals, poor.

Yep, you see this all the time with third party voters. "It won't affect me either way so who cares?" Very progressive.

 

[lednerg]

Son’s Past Could Come Back to Bite Huckabee [Newsweek]

You can't write this shit, lol

 

[Blader]

The two party system is the reason it's broken, and it will stay that way. The way things like the debates (and FPTP elections) are set up, it's 'better us than you, but better you than everyone else.'

You can rationalize it however you want, it doesn't change the reality that a leftist who opts out ends up as a vote for the right.

 

[Cheebo]

And I'll guaran-fucking-tee that he and people that say shit like that aren't tge type of people that will be drastically effected by a "Out of control GOP run country" I.e Minorities, woman, Homosexuals, poor.

Yep. The idea of sitting out the election to let GOP run the show to punish democrats for not picking Bernie at the expense of harming the lives of these groups of people is honestly worse than voting Republican earnestly. Because at least they think they are doing the right thing, this is willfully wanting to watch the country get worse because they are salty their guy they agree with 100% of the time beat the other candiate they only agree with 90% of the time.

 

[B-Dubs]

The two party system is the reason it's broken, and it will stay that way. The way things like the debates (and FPTP elections) are set up, it's 'better us than you, but better you than everyone else.'

That's not why it's broken, people not voting is why it's broken. Apathy is why it's broken. Thinking all that matters is the presidency is why it's broken. If the general election electorate would come out and vote every year we'd be a lot further along than we actually are. The midterms are just as important, if not more so, than the presidential election and yet no one votes in them, which gives the small minority of people that do vote more power than they should have. The best way to fight special interests, short of banning all political contributions, is to actually vote. The fewer people vote, the more power money has.

 

[vas_a_morir]

I mean, it's vague in the sense that he's not going to go through the step-by-step process during a debate or an interview, but I think it's pretty easy:

Raise taxes, reduce military spending, end corporate subsidies, stop offshore havens, then use the money to pay for shit.

That... is not "easy." In fact, that's the hardest thing anyone's ever going to try to do in politics ever. And, not to mention, that is still EXTREMELY vague. "Raise taxes to pay for shit" okay

 

[shoplifter]

This wasn't a retort. It's your mind doing mental gymnastics.

Am I wrong? If I'm not then why do both parties mutually agree on who gets excluded? Why is the arbitrary number of participants in presidential debates limited to 2? Granted, there needs to be a limit, but two candidates (hahah from the same two groups they're always from), excluding everyone else seems like collusion to me.

You can rationalize it however you want, it doesn't change the reality that a leftist who opts out ends up as a vote for the right.

I'm not opting out, I'm voting for an actual leftist.

That's not why it's broken, people not voting is why it's broken. Apathy is why it's broken. Thinking all that matters is the presidency is why it's broken. If the general election electorate would come out and vote every year we'd be a lot further along than we actually are. The midterms are just as important, if not more so, than the presidential election and yet no one votes in them, which gives the small minority of people that do vote more power than they should have. The best way to fight special interests, short of banning all political contributions, is to actually vote. The fewer people vote, the more power money has.

You're preaching to the choir. FPTP in general is why shit is broken, not just in the presidential elections. I say this as someone who votes even when there's one thing on the ballot locally. I've not missed a single election (midterm, local, etc) ever.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Did anyone's opinion shift after the debate to where they'd want to switch votes? I've been Team Hillary for a while and her performance solidified my support even more. She was the most prepared, knowledgeable, cited concrete plans under her belt, and exuded total confidence. All key ingredients for the job.

Plus, she really wants this job you guys. She should give it a whirl tbh.

Please explain how her college plan is better than Bernie's, please. Or to make things easier for you, how her college plan makes any sense whatsoever?

 

[Davey Cakes]

Did anyone's opinion shift after the debate to where they'd want to switch votes? I've been Team Hillary for a while and her performance solidified my support even more. She was the most prepared, knowledgeable, cited concrete plans under her belt, and exuded total confidence. All key ingredients for the job.

Plus, she really wants this job you guys. She should give it a whirl tbh.

I don't want to "switch" votes as I'm still in the Bernie camp. Though, all along I've always aligned pretty much right with Bernie and Hillary so it's been a tossup and that hasn't changed because of this debate. I mean, Bernie seemed a bit unprepared here and there and started out a bit too much like an angry old man, but was very passionate. Hillary was kind of dodge-y with her answers but at least had a lot of clear confidence.

I will say that O'Malley is legitimately on my radar now. He's an easy third choice if something happened to the others. In 15 minutes he kept a nice and consistent presence and I think that will elevate him a bit.

 

[Blader]

Making Hillary the nominee because you (wrongly) think she is electable(the polls say otherwise, Bernie does better) is the very definition of putting the (presumed) candidate (Hillary) above the issues(Bernie). Cheebs. I don't know how many times I have to correct you. You play the fool more than others. That's alright, because remember guys and gals....Everybody plays a fool, sometimes. There's no exception to the rule.

Go easy on Cheebs.

You've been doing it this entire thread.

 

[The Sum of Zero]

Would we all be happy if the nominee took the other for their VP candidate? I know I'd love to see that.

Clinton/Sanders or vice versa.