Author Topic: Why the frenzy?  (Read 1799 times)

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Why the frenzy?
« on: May 16, 2019, 12:50:31 PM »
What on earth is going on with the Democratic Party primary race? There are now 24 candidates. I hope Iowa and NH check the memory specifications on their voting machines, its going to be interesting to page through three or more screens of candidates.

Looking around, I was even more astonished to find that 716 candidates have actually registered with the FEC, including strange ones.

Alan Augustson just won the TDS Gold Star.

Quote
After much deliberation I have decided that, if elected, I will seek the death penalty for the current President of the United States.

Quote
Trump is guilty of war crimes, unprovoked international aggression, crimes against humanity and other charges. If tried by the International Criminal Court (of which I am an advocate), Trump would die.

I'm speechless. I simply don't know where to begin. I'm not going to research the whole list of lunatics, but I'll bet there's even more illucid people in there.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2019, 12:59:44 PM »
There's huge appetite for change. So the left wing of the DNC is thinking they've got a solid chance. Biden doesn't look unassailable so centrists are jockeying for the role of not-Biden. Trump's victory shows that aptitude and qualifications are irrelevant so every yahoo is taking a stab at it.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2019, 01:03:45 PM »
Lol, it's about the window.  They are convinced that whichever Ham sandwich gets nominated is automatically going to be President, and that means for a Dem it's either 2020 or 2028 to run as the candidate.  8 more years is a long time for some of them, and for the youngers it's the best way to get into the national conversation.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2019, 01:13:25 PM »
Biden is literally the anti-candidate. His Obama prestige aside, he rings literally none of the bells. Too old and white and male for SJWs. Too many votes on the wrong side of history for the socialists/racial advocates.  (Bankruptcy bill, crime bill.)

The DNC is pushing really, really hard for another centrist career politician that has taken money from the banks, has made money off speeches, etc etc. They honestly think that's their best shot. And it's obviously Biden. Have you even *looked * at the coverage for him?

So it gets to be 2016 all over again, except Biden doesn't have a vagina so he won't even get the extra votes that bought Clinton.

Trump came out of nowhere and nabbed the populist vote in 2016 when he lied about clearing the swamp, but I honestly believe that things like socialist health care and university funding are fundamentally populist beliefs that a whole lot of people believe in.

A Democratic candidate who is really behind that type of thing will find a whole lot of new votes. Young ones, especially.

A Biden will be offering someone who has been head deep in the same corrupt system for 40 years. Just like Clinton was. Who would really get excited about that?

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2019, 01:30:08 PM »
For anyone curious, I was a Sanders guy back in 2016, and I'm a Sanders guy now.

This is a guy who got arrested for participating in civil rights marches in the 60's. This is a guy who stood up to real estate developers who were trying to turn public housing into private condos when he was just a mayor because he was worried about where the poor people put out of their homes would live.

As a Senator of decades there are so many video clips of the Senate voting for an idiot decision that hurt the US and he's standing there, lecturing them all on how this is an idiot decision that will hurt the US.

We will of course need to forgive him for not being black, gay, or female, but I'm personally willing to get past that for the sake of several decades of sound advice to our nation.

Man, here I am having to defend him against not the other party but my own. You Repubs must be having a field day lol.

In before Venezuela : Sanders endorses European style, especially Scandinavian, socialism, which has given really nice dividends to their populations by any poasible metric.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2019, 01:32:19 PM by DJQuag »

JoshuaD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2019, 01:40:07 PM »
We will of course need to forgive him for not being black, gay, or female, but I'm personally willing to get past that for the sake of several decades of sound advice to our nation.

The racism and sexism of that far wing of the left is, to me, a clear shibboleth that they can't be trusted to think or act responsibly. 

I'm sympathetic to a lot of their criticisms of the right and even to some of their goals.  But racism is bad, and they need to stop. I've heard (and can articulate) all of the arguments why it's not really racism, but those arguments are failed.  I continue to hope that the double-think that results in them hey have embraced on this topic goes away soon, because if it gets a strong root in our culture, it will do real harm.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2019, 01:54:18 PM »
We will of course need to forgive him for not being black, gay, or female, but I'm personally willing to get past that for the sake of several decades of sound advice to our nation.

The racism and sexism of that far wing of the left is, to me, a clear shibboleth that they can't be trusted to think or act responsibly. 

I'm sympathetic to a lot of their criticisms of the right and even to some of their goals.  But racism is bad, and they need to stop. I've heard (and can articulate) all of the arguments why it's not really racism, but those arguments are failed.  I continue to hope that the double-think that results in them hey have embraced on this topic goes away soon, because if it gets a strong root in our culture, it will do real harm.

Yeah, I agree.

I'm a super left straight white guy and due to the circumstances of my birth I continually get lectured on how I'm part of the problem.

It's an issue. On the right hand, I'm fending off right wing arguments I disagree with. On the left hand, I'm being told that my privilege means I should shut up.

Right wing invented the US Civil War, the left wing weaponized it lol.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2019, 01:55:38 PM »
This is a guy who got arrested for participating in civil rights marches in the 60's. This is a guy who stood up to real estate developers who were trying to turn public housing into private condos when he was just a mayor because he was worried about where the poor people put out of their homes would live.

Lots of people are great with local issues and terrible with the big picture.  I loved Corey Booker as the mayor of Newark, but he's a terrible senator for example.

Quote
As a Senator of decades there are so many video clips of the Senate voting for an idiot decision that hurt the US and he's standing there, lecturing them all on how this is an idiot decision that will hurt the US.

And as I meant to say yesterday, plenty of lectures where he was completely wrong as well.

Quote
In before Venezuela : Sanders endorses European style, especially Scandinavian, socialism, which has given really nice dividends to their populations by any poasible metric.

There are tons of articles out there that debunk the idea that Scandinavia is actually socialist, and they all pretty much turn on them having very capitilistic economic systems that they don't overly regulate.  Here are a couple:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#3913d24274ad

https://fee.org/articles/the-myth-of-scandinavian-socialism/#0

I've also noted for everyone before that socialist systems require exploitable consumable resources to overcome the fatalities they inflict on incentives to generate wealth.

And it's really tough to find Bernie's old quotes on Chavez and Venezuela, thank you biased search algorythyms.   But I can say, there's no chance that Bernie's going to promote Scandivian concepts like not having a minimum wage, providing unlimited school vouchers, lowering the corporate tax rate and generally staying out of the business regulation business, the things that keep the markets free.  While he might want to point to such a model, it doesn't really match with what he'd impose.

I agree with JoshuaD on the racism point, but I think after Alabama and the rest of the South this election is going to turn more on abortion rights.  I have pointed it out before, but there is a bare majority of pro-life people in the Republican party, no where near enough to win the national elections.  If this becomes the issue, the Republicans are going to bleed support and effectively disenfranchise a huge group of people.  Like say me, who can neither support eliminating choice nor the crazy socialistic destruction of the country.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2019, 02:03:07 PM »
Why would a young person vote for someone like Clinton or Biden?

Literally, why? They are living embodiments of a system that has screwed them over. Young people don't vote because they figure the system is what it is, and it's going to screw them regardless.

You either need someone new, putting out ideas that piss off the status quo people, and/or someone similar who has been there all along and got overlooked by the media being able to control the narrative.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2019, 02:12:53 PM »
This is a guy who got arrested for participating in civil rights marches in the 60's. This is a guy who stood up to real estate developers who were trying to turn public housing into private condos when he was just a mayor because he was worried about where the poor people put out of their homes would live.

Lots of people are great with local issues and terrible with the big picture.  I loved Corey Booker as the mayor of Newark, but he's a terrible senator for example.

Quote
As a Senator of decades there are so many video clips of the Senate voting for an idiot decision that hurt the US and he's standing there, lecturing them all on how this is an idiot decision that will hurt the US.

And as I meant to say yesterday, plenty of lectures where he was completely wrong as well.

Quote
In before Venezuela : Sanders endorses European style, especially Scandinavian, socialism, which has given really nice dividends to their populations by any poasible metric.

There are tons of articles out there that debunk the idea that Scandinavia is actually socialist, and they all pretty much turn on them having very capitilistic economic systems that they don't overly regulate.  Here are a couple:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#3913d24274ad

https://fee.org/articles/the-myth-of-scandinavian-socialism/#0

I've also noted for everyone before that socialist systems require exploitable consumable resources to overcome the fatalities they inflict on incentives to generate wealth.

And it's really tough to find Bernie's old quotes on Chavez and Venezuela, thank you biased search algorythyms.   But I can say, there's no chance that Bernie's going to promote Scandivian concepts like not having a minimum wage, providing unlimited school vouchers, lowering the corporate tax rate and generally staying out of the business regulation business, the things that keep the markets free.  While he might want to point to such a model, it doesn't really match with what he'd impose.

I agree with JoshuaD on the racism point, but I think after Alabama and the rest of the South this election is going to turn more on abortion rights.  I have pointed it out before, but there is a bare majority of pro-life people in the Republican party, no where near enough to win the national elections.  If this becomes the issue, the Republicans are going to bleed support and effectively disenfranchise a huge group of people.  Like say me, who can neither support eliminating choice nor the crazy socialistic destruction of the country.

I appreciate the non-Crunchian response.  I'll research the rest, but there is one link that suggests that they didn't *need* a minimum wage because the work force had sorted itself out? I dunno.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/08/12/denmark-does-not-have-a-20-minimum-wage-try-11-70-instead/amp/

Forbes seems pretty right wing.

I do have to ask. Do you think the average Scandinavian is less happy then the average American? Their babies die less, they don't need to worry about health care, they don't need to worry about college tuition. That's quite a bit of stress right there. Why do you think it doesn't, at the very best, balance out?

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2019, 02:28:29 PM »
You either need someone new, putting out ideas that piss off the status quo people, and/or someone similar who has been there all along and got overlooked by the media being able to control the narrative.

That's pretty much how the Trump voters saw it.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2019, 02:41:25 PM »
You either need someone new, putting out ideas that piss off the status quo people, and/or someone similar who has been there all along and got overlooked by the media being able to control the narrative.

That's pretty much how the Trump voters saw it.

That is what I thought I was saying? Perhaps I was wrong.

What I'm saying is that there was another there, and hopefully a lot more in the future, that meet the same criteria.

Obviously, you disagree, I feel Trump came out embarrassingly wrong on his populist promises. I'm hoping the electorate goes a different way next time provided they are given a populist democrat. Someone like Biden? Trump couldn't be worse tbh.  Given the two as choices, I wouldn't care.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2019, 02:49:26 PM »
So...Scandinavia takes advantage of their natural resources and that's why their citizens are happier and healthier then the US.

What exactly is the argument here?

They have better natural resources then a continent so it's not fair?

It wouldn't be fair to not keep leasing all of the natural resources in public lands to private companies to invest and exploit them for 5x(minimum)- profit on what they paid?

I'm not trying to be funny here but are you seriously suggesting that the fact babies are more likely to live past infant stage in Scandinavia, that they all are aren't worrying about college loan debt, is because the "literally a continent US" has less natural resources then Scandinavia? Or, really, any one of those countries, since they all have separate budgets.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2019, 02:58:05 PM »
Quote
Do you think the average Scandinavian is less happy then the average American? Their babies die less, they don't need to worry about health care, they don't need to worry about college tuition. That's quite a bit of stress right there. Why do you think it doesn't, at the very best, balance out?

I can tell you about Denmark, I didn't spend enough time in the other Scandinavian countries to really get a feel for it.

The average Scandinavian is about as happy as the average American. First off, you have to understand a little demographics. Denmark has a population of about 5.7 million people -  that puts it on par with the Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX metropolitan area. It's just not that many people. Also, Denmark is homogenous in just about every way: roughly 90% white, over 75% identify as Christian (church of Denmark although they are not a very religious country in practice) around 85% of Danes are multi-generation citizens instead of immigrants - in fact, they are taking a very hard line on immigrants:
Quote
A recent government proposal, to be finalized by parliament in the fall, would target the country’s so-called ghetto neighborhoods with a series of sanctions and incentives. The intention is to bring immigrant communities fully into Danish society — by force if necessary.

Children living in the targeted areas would be compelled to attend day care for 25 hours a week, to ensure they learn the country’s language and values. Parents who take their kids back to their countries of origin for extended periods could face prison or deportation. Crimes committed in the neighborhoods would carry heavier sentences. Buildings would be demolished if necessary.

The last touches to the package are expected to be fully approved with a large parliamentary majority, including the enthusiastic support of the largest opposition party, the left-wing Danish Social Democrats.

So what you get is a pretty small, relatively concentrated, population that essentially has the same values and outlook on life. Everyone is very similar - humor, movies, music, food, clothes, etc it's pretty consistent. Actually, really consistent, it's part of the culture there for everyone to be the same and if you're different it's kind of frowned upon. Even having a large house is frowned upon.

True story, I know a guy that lives there and has made a lot of money. He like cars so he bought a Maserati. But, he has a second car that's very basic. He drives the second car every day to work and around town so people won't look down on him. He only takes his Maserati out on the weekends for longer drives. He essentially cannot enjoy his car because of the social stigma of being different and having some amount of wealth. Most people ride bicycles because it's all they can afford, it's one of the biking-est countries I've ever seen.

I can tell you when the Danes come to visit, they are blown away by the choices and availability of literally everything in America and how cheap everything is (especially in grocery stores). The last time a group came over, all the women brought several extra, and empty, suitcases so they could buy some clothes and get home without paying all the extra taxes to bring them back into the country. Of course, they have clothes they can buy there but they have very limited choices and it all costs a lot more.

So are they happy? Yes, in a way they are. However, in other ways, they are not. I think they're actually a little bored most of the time.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2019, 03:20:05 PM »
I appreciate the non-Crunchian response.  I'll research the rest, but there is one link that suggests that they didn't *need* a minimum wage because the work force had sorted itself out? I dunno.

What makes you think we needed one?  The original intent of the minimum wage was racist, it was designed to prevent black laborers from undercutting white and  union wages.  That's a situation that would have resolved itself if we'd never passed the minimum wages.  Specifically, black laborers would have either taken all the business and eventually demanded higher wages, or been unionized and incorporated into the system, again at higher wages.  The minimums were designed to force unemployement on the black laborers in favor of the white laborers.

It would still work itself out today, and without the collateral damage of putting small businesses in expensive areas into bankruptcy.

Quote
I do have to ask. Do you think the average Scandinavian is less happy then the average American?

There are any number of reasons for happiness, and any number of reasons for self reporting on it.  I don't think the "average" American is really unhappy.

Quote
Their babies die less....

This one is misleading, we've talked about it before.  There's a lot of reasons for why the statistics reported appear the way they do, almost none of which have to do with quality of care (US quality of care is as high or higher on most metrics).  There's differences in how the statistics are compiled, there's differences inherent in a mono-racial culture versus a diverse culture, there's differences in the impact of drug use, there's differences in the risks taken on extraordinary measures (the US has one of the most aggressive systems for trying to save pre-mature births, and counts everyone in its statistics - some countries discard from the count those born below certain weights, or certain points in the pregnancy).   It's really complex, not saying we can't do better or that they aren't, only that the common measures don't show it in the way they appear.

Quote
..they don't need to worry about health care,...

It's not terrible, but they do have to worry about wait times and availability of expensive treatments, like every other socialist medical system.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-09-swedes-world-class-healthcarewhen.html

Quote
...they don't need to worry about college tuition.

True, but their graduation rates are not much higher than ours, and a large part of why the costs are so high in the US is the pseudo socialist interferences that we inserted to try and make it so everyone could go.  Federal loans and loan guarantees, for example, which were intended to support the student with reasonable loans to cover their education, instead supported the greed of the schools as they rapidly increased tuitions to swallow those guarantees (and then some).  Why did college tuitions rise so fast, with so many subsidies, at the same time their "endowments" became the largest investors in the world?   Lol, bad socialist policies, which now prompt calls for more socialism to fix the problems the earlier policies caused.

Same way we went from house calls and being able to afford medical care out of pocket, to the most expensive system on the planet as more and more government protection was added.

Quote
That's quite a bit of stress right there. Why do you think it doesn't, at the very best, balance out?

I've said before that socialist medicine isn't what's driving medical innovation and advancement.  If you think we've solved enough of our medical issues to slow down advancement by say a factor of 10 (20 years for a drug rather than 2), then we can go socialist too.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2019, 03:35:12 PM »
People who fly on airplanes have a different perspective on American "choice".

This map shows how many Americans don't have access to fresh fruits, vegetables, and other basic foods. Many rely on whatever a couple of small bodegas have to offer.

We certainly have plenty of candidates to choose from, probably too many. This leads us to the Paradox of Choice - by Barry Schwartz. He writes about the psychological impact of choice. We not only don't need 75 nearly equivalent breakfast cereals to choose from, it actually can cause anxiety and decrease well being. Anybody who looks for something basic on Amazon has experienced this, there are over 10,000 listings for men's socks.

There are 6 stages of choice, by his theory.

1. Figure out your goal. Do you want a candidate who can best beat Trump, or the candidate who supports your preferred policies?
2. Evaluate the importance of each goal. If its policy, what policy is most important to you? Education, Health care?
3. Array the options. Is candidate A better than candidate B?
4. Evaluate how likely each option will meet your goals. Do you trust that the politician will do what they say? Be able to do it?
5. Pick the winning option.
6. Modify goals. This is interesting. One considers the consequences of their choice to modify goals, weights, and applies to the future.

People who picked "safe" option hillary may decide that is no longer a good strategy, since their goals (put a woman in office, defeat trump) didn't get satisfied. They might go for "more exciting" "more trustworthy". Such a thing would play into Sanders hands.

They are already making the first debate a two night affair, picking 10 candidates at random for each night, which still isn't enough.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2019, 03:41:22 PM »
I've got a night shift and am walking into work but, Seriati,

"And as I meant to say yesterday, plenty of lectures where he was completely wrong as well."

I'm not one of *those* Leftists. If you really have ammunition here, please share it. I might not agree with you in the end, on non objective principles, but I'm eager to hear it.

I've literally never seen coverage of Sanders that I didn't agree on, and I as a lefty have been put upon by the DNC.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2019, 03:50:25 PM »
People who fly on airplanes have a different perspective on American "choice".

This map shows how many Americans don't have access to fresh fruits, vegetables, and other basic foods. Many rely on whatever a couple of small bodegas have to offer.

We certainly have plenty of candidates to choose from, probably too many. This leads us to the Paradox of Choice - by Barry Schwartz. He writes about the psychological impact of choice. We not only don't need 75 nearly equivalent breakfast cereals to choose from, it actually can cause anxiety and decrease well being. Anybody who looks for something basic on Amazon has experienced this, there are over 10,000 listings for men's socks.

There are 6 stages of choice, by his theory.

1. Figure out your goal. Do you want a candidate who can best beat Trump, or the candidate who supports your preferred policies?
2. Evaluate the importance of each goal. If its policy, what policy is most important to you? Education, Health care?
3. Array the options. Is candidate A better than candidate B?
4. Evaluate how likely each option will meet your goals. Do you trust that the politician will do what they say? Be able to do it?
5. Pick the winning option.
6. Modify goals. This is interesting. One considers the consequences of their choice to modify goals, weights, and applies to the future.

People who picked "safe" option hillary may decide that is no longer a good strategy, since their goals (put a woman in office, defeat trump) didn't get satisfied. They might go for "more exciting" "more trustworthy". Such a thing would play into Sanders hands.

They are already making the first debate a two night affair, picking 10 candidates at random for each night, which still isn't enough.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChapoTrapHouse/comments/bhnxhv/theyre_not_sending_their_best/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChapoTrapHouse/comments/bnen5j/*censored*_joe_biden/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChapoTrapHouse/comments/bjlm3w/is_this_a_rerun_of_2016/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Lol. And on that note, I'm out. Some peeps gotta work. Xx

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2019, 04:00:19 PM »
I don't see candidate that can beat Trump yet
The DNC needs a candidate that will inspire everyone on the left to actually vote and I don't see that happening.

I wonder if the new abortion legislation going on might fire up the left, however I suspect the response (pendulum swing) to all that is a election or two away

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2019, 04:23:48 PM »
Quote
What on earth is going on with the Democratic Party primary race? There are now 24 candidates. I hope Iowa and NH check the memory specifications on their voting machines, its going to be interesting to page through three or more screens of candidates.

The theory I heard is that the DNC rules are that if noone gets the majority, then it goes to the superdelegates.  If it is just a Biden vs Sanders or other progressive candidate - the progressive candidate likely wins a majority of the vote during the primary elections.  So to prevent that the DNC is trying to encourage as many people to run to divide the vote and not leave a clear winner - so they can then choose Biden with Superdelegates - and reward the 'also rans' with plum positions.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #20 on: May 16, 2019, 04:39:53 PM »
The theory I heard is that the DNC rules are that if noone gets the majority, then it goes to the superdelegates.  If it is just a Biden vs Sanders or other progressive candidate - the progressive candidate likely wins a majority of the vote during the primary elections.  So to prevent that the DNC is trying to encourage as many people to run to divide the vote and not leave a clear winner - so they can then choose Biden with Superdelegates - and reward the 'also rans' with plum positions.

If you're right (and it sounds plausible) then they are digging themselves a grave. The entire DNC was nearly kaput during the last election and Hillary had to personally bail them out in exchange for literally taking over the place and making it her personal campaign headquarters. If they try that stupid stunt again, of propping up a 'party person' who can be controlled by the special interests, and who make the people lose even more faith in reality. I could easily foresee the actual end of the party if they persist with this kind of nonsense. Either the GOP will clean up and begin a new ascension into supremacy (which is like what happens in Canada every 10-15 years), or else maybe a new party will form to take them on, like what happened when the GOP originally formed. Either way it will be their own funeral if they persist down this idiodic path that put Trump into power.

And yes, the DNC does have candidates that can win, which include Sanders or maybe Gabbard. Warren is trying to make a splash but I don't think she has what it takes. But in order to win the party has to shift directions and adopt these newer style candidates wholesale. They will need to rethink how the special interests relate to them, because Bernie isn't about to champion some of the 'causes' that Hillary would have served. But that doesn't mean that no relationship whatsoever beween them would be possible, it would just have to be negotiated. But until such time as the movers and shakers on the left are prepared to restructure their idea of who they want to prop up, they will have the popular candidates on the one hand completely at odds with the party desires on the other, and Trump will win out of that quagmire. A fully committed campaign with the entire party and its forces behind someone popular like Bernie *could* win. I'm not saying they would for sure, but I'm pretty confident they will lose handily if they do anything else. Biden is box office poison and will never be President.


TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2019, 05:39:40 PM »
In before Venezuela : Sanders endorses European style, especially Scandinavian, socialism, which has given really nice dividends to their populations by any poasible metric.

I guess it's a good thing Bernie never had anything good to say about the socialist government in Venezuela or how we should try to follow their example. Oh wait.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2019, 05:47:22 PM »
I do have to ask. Do you think the average Scandinavian is less happy then the average American? Their babies die less, they don't need to worry about health care, they don't need to worry about college tuition. That's quite a bit of stress right there. Why do you think it doesn't, at the very best, balance out?

Could you cite the study regarding infant mortality rates there? This has been a discussion item on here previously, regarding the common practice of many Western European Nations to be oddly selective about what they count as a "live birth" such as not counting infantsfetuses who don't survive the first 24 hours.

Meanwhile the United States tracks any infant who the doctor declares to be living at time of birth.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2019, 06:22:05 PM »
Quote
Looking around, I was even more astonished to find that 716 candidates have actually registered with the FEC, including strange ones.

Just to give some perspective, there have always been hundreds of candidates who have registered with the FEC to run for President.

You can find the list for 2016 here.  Just find the black box labelled "Federal Election Commission filed candidates" under Full list of declared candidates, and click [show].  I didn't count how many there were, because it took 54 "page-downs" to get to the bottom of the list, and I ain't nearly that patient.  ;D

It is amazing how no one reports on how many people run for President every election.  OTOH, who really cares about a vast majority of them?  :)

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2019, 06:24:50 PM »
This map shows how many Americans don't have access to fresh fruits, vegetables, and other basic foods. Many rely on whatever a couple of small bodegas have to offer.

I'm really suspicious of these "maps," I've lived in some of those deserts (like WV) and it couldn't be further from the truth that fresh food isn't accessible.  The metrics are messed up (no car, no supermarket in a mile), for any area of low population density (where things are spread, but the communities have solutions) or that has a farming culture (why do you need a grocer if you grow your own?).  And the idea that there are bodegas everywhere is really a ultra urban event (where there are also frequently grocery stores available on mass transit).

People do eat junk food, but it's far more often because they choose to or because its cheaper or more convenient than because there's no other option.  These maps are trying to eliminate agency.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #25 on: May 16, 2019, 08:04:58 PM »
If you can't afford it, or can't conveniently access it, do you really have a lot of choice? The maps may be off, and there are differing standards though yours is the most common. The larger point is that all this wonderful choice isn't worth crap if all your social security money is being reserved for insulin.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #26 on: May 17, 2019, 10:02:14 AM »
You skipped over the point to make the argument (something about forest and trees).  Food deserts are really an urban phenomena, a map of the entire US makes is a silly way to try and show a real point.

Look at out West, there are not supermarkets every mile, period, there are also no bodegas or fast food restaurants either.  If people live there and have no car its for a specific reason and it's quite literally not because the "only place they can afford" is miles away from the next human.  They have solutions in place.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #27 on: May 17, 2019, 10:32:12 AM »
Fine, throw out the map. It's garbage, stipulated. I think you can agree that such issues do exist, and they are not negligible?

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2019, 10:39:25 AM »
Absolutely, I've also lived in urban climates, like Brooklyn, where certain neighborhoods (read ethnically white) are filled with grocery stores and farmers markets, and others (read black and hispanic) don't have any real access to fresh foods.  Sure there are programs designed to reduce that burden, like community gardens, but it's a real disparity.

I haven't seen a good way to fix that you can easily spend a small fortune on vegetables at a farmers market for a few days and still need to buy meat/protein and other components for meals, or spend the same for processed foods that will feed the family for more than a week. 

My parents have complained more than once about how we "waste" money on organic foods, and they've never done so and turned out just fine.  They seem to conveniently forget that their childhood's included large gardens, home canning of vegetables, and super markets where all the produce was effectively organic because that was all that was available locally at the time.

Our world is messed up when healthy components of a meal cost grossly more than unhealthy fully compiled meals.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2019, 10:44:41 AM »
CDC says roughly 66% of Americans are overweight with 40% of Americans classified as obese.

Sounds like access to a source of food is not a problem for at least two-thirds of the nation. In fact, they have quite a bit more available to them than they need. I’m sure there are people having a tough time getting fed but I’d say they’re definitely in a minority.

The issue is the power that is inherent in promoting the idea that people are starving. Fat Americans just love to take a position of moral superiority over the hungry.

 

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #30 on: May 17, 2019, 10:53:56 AM »
That argument is either dumb or lazy. I never said people didn't have access to calories but that they have access to lots of options.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #31 on: May 17, 2019, 11:03:10 AM »
CDC says roughly 66% of Americans are overweight with 40% of Americans classified as obese.

Crunch, I suggest you read on this, this is not responsive.  In fact, obesity is one of the flags and consequences of the food desert problem.  People are stuck in areas where there are plenty of calories, but they are available through unhealthy options. 

Quote
Sounds like access to a source of food is not a problem for at least two-thirds of the nation. In fact, they have quite a bit more available to them than they need. I’m sure there are people having a tough time getting fed but I’d say they’re definitely in a minority.

Again, the problem is not lack of food, it's lack of healthy options.  Spend 6 months eating fast food and convenience stores only, and you'll get a sense.  Never cook a meal.

Compare that to cooking at home for 6 months and think about how your health varies.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #32 on: May 17, 2019, 12:45:32 PM »
I had assumed the flood of runners was because they saw how Sanders was able to drive the discussion (and party) while running even though Hillary got the party nomination.  Seeing LetterRip's theory though is quite disheartening.  :(

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2019, 09:24:01 AM »
The not “starving” starving argument, right. People having more than enough to eat but just not enough options is the epitome of a first world problem. Next, you guys are gonna tell me how people in these areas only get 250 channels on TV so they’re really suffering unimaginable privation.

Every fast food restaurant has healthy options. It’s trivial to see the caloric content of their menus so it’s a choice when someone drinks that 1500 calorie milkshake with their supersized 1400 calorie meal instead of the salad and water (or diet soda).

Try it for 6 months? I did it for 2 years. I was in college and worked a night shift to make ends meet. Between class loads and work, I had very little time so I ate at a fast food restaurant pretty much every single day, multiple times per day. There were healthy choices then and there are so many more now.

Two thirds of Americans are overweight because they have so much easily available food and don’t take responsibility for their diet and/or refuse to exercise. Everything else is just excuses and rationalizations.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #34 on: May 18, 2019, 07:28:51 PM »
Crunch, didn't you just say how glorious all our choices are? I offered a counterpoint that you can't or choose not to comprehend. I'd like to say I'm surprised, but you are sadly predictable, like most trolls. I only wish I had the chance to make a contract with you in real life so I could take your lunch money.

TheDrake: Please see your email. -OrneryMod
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 05:10:15 AM by OrneryMod »

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #35 on: May 19, 2019, 11:42:16 AM »
Again, the problem is not lack of food, it's lack of healthy options.  Spend 6 months eating fast food and convenience stores only, and you'll get a sense.  Never cook a meal.

IIRC, there was somebody who did a counterpoint to Super Size Me by also living entirely off of McDonald's for 6 months, only he went with their healthy menu options. He was in very good health 6 months later.

The choices are available, people just often choose not to exercise them.

And going back to free market activities, people sell things for which there is demand. If there is no demand, they don't sell it. So a large part of the problem regarding "food desserts" as it relates to urban areas specifically falls back on the people living in those areas. If there is a market for fresh fruits and salads, somebody is going to start selling them, and continue doing so. Otherwise, they might try it from time to time, discover it's a loser, and stop.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #36 on: May 19, 2019, 12:16:30 PM »
The original super size me also included a healthy guy who ate there all the time. If you think the McDonald's salad options are healthy, I think we have a different definition of healthy. It is true that you might avoid obesity.

With regard to the argument about the root causes, the point is exactly that people in poverty are unlikely to shop at whole foods. This means that those choices are not available to them in practice.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2019, 01:41:35 PM »
McDonalds has lots of healthy options. Bt healthy, I mean what most people mean. Not sure what you mean.

Morgan Spurlock created the film Super Size Me during which heate roughly 5000 calories a day without exercising. You are meant to be shocked that this was unhealthy. Others have duplicated the McDonalds only diet and lost weight and improved other heath metrics like cholesterol levels. Of course, they ate reasonably and some exercised.

The point is, people are making choices. That so many make so many bad ones and get unhealthy is hardly a “food desert”. It’s just a lack of self discipline and personal responsibility.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2019, 02:49:21 PM »
"Crunch, I suggest you read on this, this is not responsive. "

Lol. Good luck. Maybe throw something into his Facebook feed, he's more  likely to pass it on then.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2019, 05:01:19 PM »
Google food desert myth. Read some of the studies. I did, it wasn’t difficult.

The facts tell us access to food options is not much of an issue. Certain classes of people make choices, just as I’ve been sayin. You guys wanna ignore reality and remain uninformed of the facts and engage ad hominem attacks, that’s fine. It’s weird, but not unusual

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #40 on: May 20, 2019, 12:22:33 PM »
The original super size me also included a healthy guy who ate there all the time. If you think the McDonald's salad options are healthy, I think we have a different definition of healthy. It is true that you might avoid obesity.

With regard to the argument about the root causes, the point is exactly that people in poverty are unlikely to shop at whole foods. This means that those choices are not available to them in practice.

Well yeah, just because you ordered a salad isn't going to save you from all the calories you're gaining when you throw a lot of salad dressing on top of it, chug down a super sized Coca-Cola, and eat a pastry as well as a side of french fries along with it.

It is possible to eat healthy on McDonald's Menu, you just have to make smart choices about what you get. This may mean not taking the bundled options. Instead of a soda, get water(it's even free, IIRC). Don't add hundreds of calories to your salad by soaking it in dressing. Don't get the french fries, so on and so forth.

While McDonalds could do more to promote healthy meal combos, it isn't their fault if people decide to order unhealthy things alongside the healthy menu options. 

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #41 on: May 20, 2019, 01:55:12 PM »
McDonalds has lots of healthy options.

Not really, it has a couple, and unless you want to eat the same 3-4 things everyday (which creates it's own kinds of health problems) it'd quickly lead to healthy eating fatigue, especially in a restaurant that has dozens of tasty things that are terrible for you. Limited ingredient salads are the primary "health" dinner/lunch.

Quote
The point is, people are making choices. That so many make so many bad ones and get unhealthy is hardly a “food desert”. It’s just a lack of self discipline and personal responsibility.

I've read a bunch of research on that as well.  And you are correct, that people who are given more choices, or even more money to make choices, frequently still choose the unhealthy options. 

None of that makes a "food desert" a myth.  None of that changes that healthy foods in some places are harder to get (if available at all) and far more expensive in some places. 

When people in parts of the country have easy access to fresh fruits and vegetables, pointing out that McDonald's has 2 salads to serve for those that don't have access and patting your self on the back for a job well done seems silly.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #42 on: May 20, 2019, 02:19:49 PM »
And let's pay attention to what is in those McDonald's salads. We're talking about factory farmed chicken, iceberg lettuce (no nutrients), etc. You'll also have to be carefully knowledgeable about exactly what you're doing - the Kale salad there isn't better than the big mac. So McDonald's is saturating the individual with advertising that frames this as healthy (that's why they included Kale in their salad mix). Meanwhile...

McDonald's isn't the whole story of course. There's 7/11 (tacquitos, kolaches, lunchables). Compared to Whole Foods and making a fresh salad from their salad bar, which honestly isn't terribly expensive if you don't run up too much weight. That simply isn't an option for anyone in that area, because the income levels and demographics aren't going to support a store as the best use of Amazon's capital.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #43 on: May 20, 2019, 06:24:49 PM »
Quote
Not really, it has a couple, and unless you want to eat the same 3-4 things everyday (which creates it's own kinds of health problems) it'd quickly lead to healthy eating fatigue, especially in a restaurant that has dozens of tasty things that are terrible for you. Limited ingredient salads are the primary "health" dinner/lunch

Who’s forcing them to eat at McDonalds every single day? How is it that there is a whole class of people that are denied anything to eat unless it comes from McDonalds?

It’s so weird to have this idea that they can only eat at one place.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #44 on: May 20, 2019, 06:26:23 PM »
And let's pay attention to what is in those McDonald's salads. We're talking about factory farmed chicken, iceberg lettuce (no nutrients), etc. You'll also have to be carefully knowledgeable about exactly what you're doing - the Kale salad there isn't better than the big mac. So McDonald's is saturating the individual with advertising that frames this as healthy (that's why they included Kale in their salad mix). Meanwhile...

McDonald's isn't the whole story of course. There's 7/11 (tacquitos, kolaches, lunchables). Compared to Whole Foods and making a fresh salad from their salad bar, which honestly isn't terribly expensive if you don't run up too much weight. That simply isn't an option for anyone in that area, because the income levels and demographics aren't going to support a store as the best use of Amazon's capital.

You should google food desert myth. Read up on this. You’re terribly uninformed

Pete at Home

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Why the frenzy?
« Reply #45 on: May 20, 2019, 06:57:16 PM »
 :( :(
Quote
Not really, it has a couple, and unless you want to eat the same 3-4 things everyday (which creates it's own kinds of health problems) it'd quickly lead to healthy eating fatigue, especially in a restaurant that has dozens of tasty things that are terrible for you. Limited ingredient salads are the primary "health" dinner/lunch

Who’s forcing them to eat at McDonalds every single day? How is it that there is a whole class of people that are denied anything to eat unless it comes from McDonalds?

It’s so weird to have this idea that they can only eat at one place.

That's the power of advertising.  Same force that makes fast food of Democracy.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2019, 07:01:19 PM by Pete at Home »