[RD] Clinton vs. Trump - USA Presidential race.

[Timsup2nothin]

Winning the presidency is a result of embracing the center. Always has been, because despite the availability of demagogues on either side in politics the majority of voters are in the middle somewhere.

On the healthcare crisis, which was defined as "since demand is increasing exponentially prices are spiraling out of control, and as the single largest buyer in the world the US government is going to go broke trying to meet their obligations," there were two extreme solutions available. One was to nationalize the entire healthcare system, the other was to just renege on the obligations, make people who needed healthcare fend for themselves and if they were too poor let them die. Obamacare was in fact the moderate response, and despite all the noise making by the extremists on both sides most people accept it.

Balanced budget, or at least limited debt, isn't centrist, it is almost universal. The differences there are that one extreme group believes that whatever debt is generated should serve the purpose of concentrating wealth into the hands of the "smarter few" who can steward it best and shepherd the rest of us, vs the other extreme group that favors direct redistribution. The centrist plan there is some variation on public works...which is what every politician actually in office and getting things done eventually embraces.

On climate change the extremists are the crazies who agitate for a return to the Amish style...on the internet, probably texting while driving. The other side is the dingbats like Donny who pretend it isn't happening. Again, the centrists are looking for something that will actually work.

Defanging Citizens United is neither extreme nor centrist, it is just simple maintenance.

Drone strikes but no ground forces is centrist, definitely. They don't make anyone overly happy, but the extreme positions are 'democratization by invasion' or 'sing kumbaya and people with an axe to grind will lay them down and join the chorus.'

 

[mrt144]

I think non interventionist policy is a bit more nuanced than thinking that if we ignore something surely both sides will find a way. It's more like "if we don't intervene, less chances to antagonize people we aren't even aware we'd be antagonizing and take less crap from the world".

It's really hard to do the right thing in a world where there are so many knock on effects you can only see 2 or 3 layers deep.

 

[mrt144]

Similarly, there are non interventionists who basically act like an emotionally abusive parent "Oh, so you don't think you need us. Have fun sleeping outside in the wilderness kiddos, I'll be here when you're ready to fall in line"

 

[onejayhawk]

Well I guess you must hate living in hell where you're the only objective person in the world. Sure you get a lot of mileage out of it.

I had to find this for you.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

When the non-interventionists stop driving, or start donating seven dollars to international charities for every gallon of blood subsidized gasoline they buy, I'll take them seriously. Until then I consider them extremists based on their refusal to deal with reality. Same criteria I use when I call the 'democratization by invasion' crowd extremists.

 

[mrt144]

I had to find this for you.

So are you claiming you're the smartest person in the room? Cause I know I'm not.

How did you come to be so self satisfied with your opinions to the point you believe them to be objective?

 

[El_Machinae]

When the non-interventionists stop driving, or start donating seven dollars to international charities for every gallon of blood subsidized gasoline they buy, I'll take them seriously. Until then I consider them extremists based on their refusal to deal with reality. Same criteria I use when I call the 'democratization by invasion' crowd extremists.

Did you generate the 'seven dollars' by a replicable analysis?

 

[El_Machinae]

The other items are liberal causes that might appeal to a centrist about half of the time.

Defanging Citizens United isn't centrist? Both candidates are running on platforms highlighting the corruption of the SuperPac system. You're saying Trump doesn't have an actual policy on this front, because he's trying to capture the centrist wing of his party?

 

[Leoreth]

Everyone wants a balanced budget. The issue is one of priorities.

That's wrong.

For that matter, I live in a country that currently has a nominally balanced budget and I think it's the greatest mistake the administration is making.

 

[BvBPL]

I don't think any conservative (or liberal FTM) pundit would agree that bi-partisan co-operation was a character of the Obama Presidency.

I was thinking primarily of Obama maintaining Paulson's economic policies as a key example of bipartisanship. I guess a valid case could be made that it was an exception to his presidency, rather than a good example of it. Certainly Democrats became much more politically polarized during the Obama presidency, mirroring the behavior of the GOP. That doesn't mean the spirit of bipartisanship should be banished however. In local administrations across the country, Democrats and Republicans work together to keep the governments of states operating smoothly and for the benefit of their citizens. To the extent that national leadership sets the tone for the nation, it would be shame if a shift away from even the idea of bipartisanship poisoned those state house wells.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm starting to think of Trump surrogates as Ministers of Propaganda that have an impossible task. They just couldn't spin the horrifying answer Trump has regarding voter fraud and rigged elections. They try. I'll give them that. They often try to be reasonable. But when they need to bridge 'reasonable' and what Trump is saying, they just have no chance. He literally seems to not believe what his own surrogates are saying.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Did you generate the 'seven dollars' by a replicable analysis?

No, I ballparked it based on the cost of gas in countries that aren't capable of exporting violence in sufficient quantities to subsidize the price of gas.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I'm starting to think of Trump surrogates as Ministers of Propaganda that have an impossible task. They just couldn't spin the horrifying answer Trump has regarding voter fraud and rigged elections. They try. I'll give them that. They often try to be reasonable. But when they need to bridge 'reasonable' and what Trump is saying, they just have no chance. He literally seems to not believe what his own surrogates are saying.

I suspect that he has derived from his run a sick pleasure from watching them twist themselves into pretzels on his behalf. The "Obama is literally the founder of ISIS" was particularly grim. For two days he said, "No, I mean it literally." And all his surrogates had to find ways to convey that Obama was literally the founder of ISIS. Then he said he was kidding; can't you morons understand humor. And his surrogates had to go on and chide all of us morons for not realizing he had been joking--how dense can you all be, trying to take a comment like that literally?

I think he enjoys humiliating people.

I suspect you'll think I'm uncharitable in my assessment, but there you have it.

 

[onejayhawk]

So are you claiming you're the smartest person in the room? Cause I know I'm not.

How did you come to be so self satisfied with your opinions to the point you believe them to be objective?

It's not about me. The other role is that one that is dead on.

That's wrong. For that matter, I live in a country that currently has a nominally balanced budget and I think it's the greatest mistake the administration is making.

I suppose every rule has exceptions. They are few and far between in USA.

Defanging Citizens United isn't centrist? Both candidates are running on platforms highlighting the corruption of the SuperPac system. You're saying Trump doesn't have an actual policy on this front, because he's trying to capture the centrist wing of his party?

I am saying that Citizens United is not a priority for the center. That said, you have to be a dittohead to support it.

J

 

[El_Machinae]

Oh, I see. It really boggles that it's not a priority. Have Americans internalized that politicians 'should' be beholden to monied interests? I was honestly stunned the (R)s didn't scoop Sanders

 

[El_Machinae]

I suspect that he has derived from his run a sick pleasure from watching them twist themselves into pretzels on his behalf. The "Obama is literally the founder of ISIS" was particularly grim. For two days he said, "No, I mean it literally." And all his surrogates had to find ways to convey that Obama was literally the founder of ISIS. Then he said he was kidding; can't you morons understand humor. And his surrogates had to go on and chide all of us morons for not realizing he had been joking--how dense can you all be, trying to take a comment like that literally?

I think he enjoys humiliating people.

I suspect you'll think I'm uncharitable in my assessment, but there you have it.

It's more charitable than what I assume!

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It's more charitable than what I assume!

Me too.

 

[Lexicus]

Everyone wants a balanced budget
J

Well, everyone who doesn't understand accounting first principles, maybe.

Balanced budgets are right-wing, not centrist. Balanced budgets also happen to be incredibly stupid. It's actually (modest) deficit spending that is the 'centrist' position because that is just what tends to be the best move for most contemporary governments.

 

[BvBPL]

And, boy oh boy, was that Bill Clinton really stupid for creating a surplus. I mean, man, that guy was a real right-winger, let me tell you.

 

[Takhisis]

Which Clinton policies aren't centrist?

Depends on your definition of centrist, given that a centrist is roughly in the middle of two other positions. For example, over the years the NRA has pulled the gun debate so far towards the free-ownership end that background checks are considered unreasonable, even if they're performed on terrorism subjects. Does it make sense?

Well, everyone who doesn't understand accounting first principles, maybe.

Balanced budgets are right-wing, not centrist. Balanced budgets also happen to be incredibly stupid. It's actually (modest) deficit spending that is the 'centrist' position because that is just what tends to be the best move for most contemporary governments.

Hmmmm, yes and no. Leftists don't set out to bankrupt the state on purpose. It sometimes happens, yes, but only in robber-states (Venezuela, Kirchnerist Argentina, Zimbabwe, etc.) do they actually set out to create chaos because they profit from it.