Election season is ramping up as we speak for the 2016 elections. Debates are happening, and candidates are dropping in and out of the race like crazy. With that being said; who is your 2016 election pick currently? Mine (as you could probably tell by my old avatar) is Ben Carson. I like what he stands for on most major issues surrounding America at the moment, and he isn't afraid to tell the truth when it's needed. However, I don't think he's got nearly the shot of someone like Trump or Rubio (both of whom I'd support). What about you? Who's your 2016 presidential pick? Why do you think they could help improve America?
The 2016 Presidential Elections
- Thread starter John
- Start date
I never have been a fan of politics in general. Eventually it turns into a case of "he said/she said" and the actual truth is watered down so much that after a while, it's hard to know who to believe or what to believe or if anything being said is really true or just some jerks playing games or something... it seems like nine times out of ten the latter is proved in the end. I was only excited to vote once, and that was the year I became a legal adult (18). After that, my interest went downhill in a hurry. I also see tons of arguments on other forums about issues like this, and it's really crazy.
Dark Takua
Paragon
Presently the Republicans are too out of touch with the American people, only tending to the rich class because of money influence. The majority of their decisions are only of detriment to the citizens while benefiting the rich. I know that this is their ideology, but the companies simply can't be trusted with subsidies or deregulation because of instances such as oil companies, food industries, and telecom corporations.
Personally, I would go with the Democratic Socialist, Bernie Sanders. Not only does he present the facts of how they are, but he also makes decisions for the benefit of the people. In addition, I agree with his ideas; for example, universal healthcare, climate control, free college, higher minimum wage, and respect (for other candidates). Democracy and socialism goes hand in hand because in return for paying our taxes, we should be able to receive essential life necessities.
Personally, I would go with the Democratic Socialist, Bernie Sanders. Not only does he present the facts of how they are, but he also makes decisions for the benefit of the people. In addition, I agree with his ideas; for example, universal healthcare, climate control, free college, higher minimum wage, and respect (for other candidates). Democracy and socialism goes hand in hand because in return for paying our taxes, we should be able to receive essential life necessities.
I don't agree with the statement that Republicans are out of touch with the American people. Here are the facts: the three poorest states in the US are Mississippi, West Virginia and Arkansas. Of those three states, none of them had a Democrat who won the electoral college votes for their state. On the other side; the three richest states in the US are Maryland, New Jersey and Alaska. Of those states, only Alaska was a majority Republican state in the 2012 election. If the Republicans are out of touch with the poor people; shouldn't the poor people vote for the Democrats? Statistics clearly say they don't. In fact, it's proven to be the opposite. America's richest and poorest states and map of the 2012 Electoral College votes.Dark Takua said:
In addition, why do you believe we should have a single payer healthcare system? While it has been successful in some other countries, we have the government that cannot make a website to last a day. Do you honestly trust them to provide you with decent healthcare? In addition, our tax dollars go to things we need such as the military, roads, and police. In addition, free college is not something that should be handed out. If someone choses not to go to college, why should they have to pay for someone else to go to college instead? It's a dumb idea. There's no such thing as "Free" college. You, or someone else will pay it back sooner or later in time.
Education is payed for at every other level, and with the way society's going, you have to get a college education to get a decent job. In the past, a highschool education would probably have been sufficient. If the government pays for highschool, I don't see why it's such a major leap to pay for the next level of education as well.John said:
It is true though that republican policies are generally oriented in favor of big business (I think most republicans would agree with that statement). You could argue that the establishment of either party is "out of touch" I think, but the republican party brands itself as the party of business, opportunity, and economic freedom, while the democratic party brands itself as the party of fairness, equality, and personal freedom.John said:
John said:
It's been successful in every major country other than the US. Right now you are paying twice as much money, and getting half the amount of care.
Have you ever wondered why the only country having this debate is the US? No one wants to switch to the American system, because it's horrible. 😛
Anyway, I'm not in the US, but I'd support Bernie Sanders for president. I like what he stands for. 🙂
Agreed there. 🙂Hissae2 said:
The US government can really tackle a problem if it sets its mind to it. I know some really competent people who work for the government, who would never let a mistake like the healthcare.gov site happen. It's just a matter of putting the right people on it. The ACA seems to have been an act that no one liked from the very start, as it makes too many compromises on too many levels. I think the B team got assigned to implement it instead of the A team. If this country could get seriously behind a single payer law, I think we have it in us to make it a success. America is a great country. If Europe can do it, we can too. 😛
Matt said:
It would cost over 62.6 Billion dollars if implemented today. Per the government's calculations here. The major problem with doing this (aside the cost), is these two things.
- A college degree would become a highschool degree. It's fairly simple. If we make a college education close to as affordable as a highschool degree; obviously more people would go to college, and rightfully so. The major downside to that is a college degree over time would become less in demand and more available; which would make a college degree less high paying and over time it wouldn't be of much more value than a highschool degree.
- It would increase people wasting time in college. Quite a few degrees are fairly useless (Communications, Physiology and Liberal Arts are statistically proven bad degrees), and it will just suck-up more and more of the government's dollars to do little to nothing for the citizens.
I do agree with that. However, the Republican Party is not out of touch with the low income American public. That's a false statement when the Republicans are the ones winning the low income American's votes.Matt said:
I don't trust our government to make a successful healthcare system. I don't know how much you follow politics, but when we launched the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obama Care), we had a signup website set up that couldn't stay online for a day before it was closed down. In addition, the American Government already runs a Healthcare system: it's called the Veteran's Affairs. Again, I don't know how much you follow American Politics, but it's failing horribly and has been deemed incompetent to care for American Veterans. I don't know about you, but I don't want to be subject to a Healthcare system from a government that cannot run a simple healthcare system for not even half of the American population. 😛Hissae2 said:
This is already a trend anyway I think. Many disciplines require graduate degrees to really go anywhere, which seems a little bit odd to me. When you graduate, aren't you supposed to be done? 😛John said:
To focus on the education issue a bit more, though, I think our current higher education system is flawed.
1. Cost: College is getting more expensive. Here's a chart that demonstrates the rise in tuition:
The tuition rates seem unreasonably expensive. I suspect that the reason for this may be bureaucracy.
2. Bureaucracy: There is so much overhead at modern universities. My university keeps building all of these new buildings that are meant to be new "student centers" but also have all these offices attached to them. 😛 There are so many offices and committees that are dedicated to things that seem fairly trivial, and all these annoying requirements that are being mandated by the high-level officials at the university.
I think it would be better if they focused more on academics. All of these "student life" improvements just seem to be focusing more towards making college about the experience, rather than about learning how to do things. Know what I mean? They get a bit too involved in managing the lives of their students, when they could be focusing more on actual academics.
3.Focus: There are many degrees that aren't useful for very much, and only really seem to be there so that a college can have a wide offering. My university doesn't really need a sociology program to be honest. I don't think many people actually graduate and become sociologists from my university. 😛 If you actually want to become a first rate sociologist, you'd probably go to a school that specialized in it. all of this ends up in a lack of focus for higher education.
4. Quality: Most people I know learned how to do their job outside of the education system. The classes that are taught at my university at least cover such a broad range of topics, that there is no focus at all. There's no time to learn how to do any particular thing. Your knowledge ends up very broad, but not very deep.
Based on my interactions with other students in group projects, and also recent graduates in the work environment, my perception is that most people don't learn how to do their job until they get one. A college degree doesn't really help much in that regard. If you want to learn how to code, you need to get a degree in computer science so that you can get a job, and then you need to work with experienced coders who can teach you how to actually do it. 😛 Either that, or teach yourself. College really doesn't help in that regard. Most of the stuff they teach you is either weird, outdated, or not applicable.
Realistically, I think education needs to be made a lot more specific and practical, with more subsidies from the government to make the price manageable, but also cuts to eliminate programs that aren't needed, and requirements that aren't really required.
Both parties get votes from low income and high income sources. I don't think entire parties are out of touch, although probably individual candidates. Mit Romney for example. 😛 And John Kerry, of course.John said:
The VA is getting the back burner unfortunately. I imagine their budget was probably raided by other parts of the DoD. And one of the problems, also, is that if you have both a private sector and a public sector health care system at once, the best doctors will flock to the private sector system because that's in their interest. Not much can be done about that.John said:
The healthcare.gov site I think is due to the government not being properly equipped in the information technology department. You can say the same for the OPM. The brightest engineers have little incentive to work for the boring side of the federal government unfortunately. They instead flock to Silicon Valley, private sector tech, and the DoD / DHS.
Dark Takua
Paragon
John said:
If you think that Republicans are in touch with the American people, please prove:
- Why are the Republicans repeatedly trying to defund Planned Parenthood, which is used by 2.7 million men and women, and PP hasn't done anything wrong? After two months of consistent debating, they still have no evidence to prove PP did anything wrong, and they even threatened to shut down the government.
- Why are the Republicans trying to restrict voting rights? "Keith Bentele and Erin O’Brien of the University of Massachusetts Boston found that restrictions were more likely to pass “as the proportion of Republicans in the legislature increased or when a Republican governor was elected.”
- Why are the Republicans denying Medicaid expansion in their states when the government is practically funding it for free?
- Why are the Republicans spending $3.5 million in tax dollars on the Benghazi Committee when have found no evidence to prove Hillary Clinton at fault?
- Why are the Republicans denying US citizens from receiving constant and reliable internet? In June they attempted to render the FCC's regulatory power useless to please their telecom buddies.
For healthcare, despite the failure of the system in the first year, the Affordable Healthcare Act has proven successful in the next years with the rate of uninsured adults dropping 12.3%. On the other hand, do we really need military? Do we really need more funding in the police? Currently (2015), we spend $612 billion dollars on the military. The US had so many Humvees that they had to auction 4,000 of them off! In addition, in Baltimore, a $2 billion tax payer funded military blimp failed miserably; it even knocked down power lines and left thousands without power. Furthermore, if you think the police need more funding, then listen to this. In Detroit, the police bought a SWAT Bearcat which costed $700,000; even better, the city is bankrupt. Why does the local police need a SWAT vehicle? It's called a SWAT vehicle for a reason. On the other hand, for college funding: if there is no such thing as free college, then why is the booming oil industry receiving $70.2 billion dollars in free money? Why are the US corporations like Apple and GE allowed to have offshore tax havens worth almost $2.1 trillion dollars? Those tax dollars could easy pay about 3.4 million people to attend Havard, which has a tuition of $60,000. I think everybody should be entitled to an education, debt free. These days people need to apply for a job to study to get a job and even then that's not enough.
Most of what you said is correct. The education system is becoming a joke. However, if more and more people continue to enroll, it won't get any better. I don't see how any of these problems would be fixed by having the tax payers pay for college.Matt said:This is already a trend anyway I think. Many disciplines require graduate degrees to really go anywhere, which seems a little bit odd to me. When you graduate, aren't you supposed to be done? 😛John said:
To focus on the education issue a bit more, though, I think our current higher education system is flawed.
1. Cost: College is getting more expensive. Here's a chart that demonstrates the rise in tuition:
The tuition rates seem unreasonably expensive. I suspect that the reason for this may be bureaucracy.
2. Bureaucracy: There is so much overhead at modern universities. My university keeps building all of these new buildings that are meant to be new "student centers" but also have all these offices attached to them. 😛 There are so many offices and committees that are dedicated to things that seem fairly trivial, and all these annoying requirements that are being mandated by the high-level officials at the university.
I think it would be better if they focused more on academics. All of these "student life" improvements just seem to be focusing more towards making college about the experience, rather than about learning how to do things. Know what I mean? They get a bit too involved in managing the lives of their students, when they could be focusing more on actual academics.
3.Focus: There are many degrees that aren't useful for very much, and only really seem to be there so that a college can have a wide offering. My university doesn't really need a sociology program to be honest. I don't think many people actually graduate and become sociologists from my university. 😛 If you actually want to become a first rate sociologist, you'd probably go to a school that specialized in it. all of this ends up in a lack of focus for higher education.
4. Quality: Most people I know learned how to do their job outside of the education system. The classes that are taught at my university at least cover such a broad range of topics, that there is no focus at all. There's no time to learn how to do any particular thing. Your knowledge ends up very broad, but not very deep.
Based on my interactions with other students in group projects, and also recent graduates in the work environment, my perception is that most people don't learn how to do their job until they get one. A college degree doesn't really help much in that regard. If you want to learn how to code, you need to get a degree in computer science so that you can get a job, and then you need to work with experienced coders who can teach you how to actually do it. 😛 Either that, or teach yourself. College really doesn't help in that regard. Most of the stuff they teach you is either weird, outdated, or not applicable.
Realistically, I think education needs to be made a lot more specific and practical, with more subsidies from the government to make the price manageable, but also cuts to eliminate programs that aren't needed, and requirements that aren't really required.
Top doctors and engineers don't want to deal with the bureaucracy of the government. 😛 However, how is that an excuse to make a single payer system? Private healthcare will still exist for certain things; and that's still where top doctors will want to work. This would only result in the government getting more second-rate employees who become useless bureaucrats over time.Matt said:
I don't agree with this myself. However, it's mainly people who have no shot at being a successful politician (Carly Fiorina, mainly). Also, I don't defend the acts of the GOP or Establishment Republicans. Those are (if any) the Republicans who're out of touch with the Americans, and they do some very bone-headed things.Dark Takua said:
They're requiring photo ID to vote, something that should be required to vote anyway. This is something that prevents dead people and illegal immigrants from voting in elections: illegally.Dark Takua said:
They're only funding it for free for the first three years. However, why are Republicans like Rick Santorum doing it? It's to stop our government's joke healthcare system. The Republicans oppose the Affordable Care Act. It's like the Democrats supporting it. It's now a fundamental belief of the parties.Dark Takua said:
They have found no evidence to find Hillary at fault. If they didn't look for evidence, how would they ever find it?Dark Takua said:
I don't agree with this. However, do you agree with everything your party says? 😛Dark Takua said:
Yes, more Americans have health. This is amazing! Oh, wait the health insurance prices are going up.Dark Takua said:
Nah, we should just get rid of the military. 😛 I don't agree with some of the Republicans that say you cannot spend enough on the military. The military spending is becoming a joke nowdays. We're spending way too much on stuff we don't need. Also, Detroit buying the SWAT vehicle was a decision by the city police who probably get their funding from the city (maybe with some from the state, but little to none is from the Federal Government).
Why is the government spending money testing drunk monkeys? The government wastes money. And on the oil: the government does that so people like you and me don't complain about 4 dollar a gallon gas prices. That's just a way they can control it. I also strongly disagree with you when you say you're "entitled" to an education. You should be entitled to nothing. 😛 If you're entitled to college and healthcare, what else are you entitled to? A car? Gas money monthly? I personally think a car and gas money would be just as beneficial as a college degree under some circumstances.Dark Takua said:
Dark Takua: I would like to ask you one thing. If the Republicans are "out of touch" with the poor American public, why are they getting voted into the House, Senate and getting the votes for presidency in the poor states and districts? If what you're saying is true, it should be the exact opposite.
To be honest, I think he's the Dems only shot of getting someone into the White House. Hillary is looking worse and worse to the American public, Biden ain't running, and I haven't heard anything about Warren for a little while. I know it's early, but that's how it looks currently, at least from what I'm seeing.Ernst Stavro Blofeld said:Bernie 2016
John said:To be honest, I think he's the Dems only shot of getting someone into the White House. Hillary is looking worse and worse to the American public, Biden ain't running, and I haven't heard anything about Warren for a little while. I know it's early, but that's how it looks currently, at least from what I'm seeing.Ernst Stavro Blofeld said:Bernie 2016
Hillary is raising far more and winning too many polls. I don't think Bernie appeals to too many Democrats honestly. I mean he tries to align himself with the Democrats, but he's far more liberal than any moderate Democrat. I still think Hillary has a chance. Doesn't mean I will vote for her though.
New polls on real clear politics show Trump beating Hillary overall. I think this upcoming election is going to be the worst... Two bad choices just going at it. I hope Trump wins out though, Hillary seems to shady. I think Bernie will end up being Hillary's running mate, that might actually help her beat Trump.
Watch Me Sink
Madly Diligent
That is factually incorrect.Excalibur said:
While I agree with the latter part of your statement, I highly doubt he will be her running mate.Excalibur said:
At the time of him posting it, Trump was beating Hillary in some of the Real Clear Politics polls. See: http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-conten ... nTrump.pdf http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05 ... rumps.htmlWatch Me Sink said:
Affiliates
