General US Politics

[Snowy_One]

why do we have to make this so difficult? if you would just read what i say, not project what you feel i think, this would be much easier.

If you would bother to read, or even try to understand, what I'm saying this wouldn't be an issue.

i haven't made any claims!

The moment you stated he was wrong you made the claim to oppose him. In this case claiming that he is wrong and that his view is inaccurate is just as much a claim as his own. It doesn't matter who is right, not backing up your claim while accusing him of not backing up his is hypocritical.

do you have any reason to believe these claims?

No. Because I am of Irish decent as well and refuse to drink alcohol in any form outside of communion (even then I prefer non-wine). Not to mention that this is a 'no true scotsman' fallacy as well.

when it comes down to it, ain't that all it really is?

No. It isn't. There is a huge difference between people who immigrated legally and haven't had the time for the paperwork to go through and/or are struggling with legal proceedings/loopholes and people whom have snuck across the borders against the will and desire of the U.S. government and operate in hiding while actively refusing to become citizens. It's akin to saying that a walrus and a dolphin are the same as they are sea-dwelling mammals.

Heck, I'm not even sure an 'undocumented immigrant' even exists that isn't an illegal immigrant. Not to mention that the mere act of being undocumented while immigrating to another nation is, indeed, illegal even with the 'legal loophole' slack BS.

i don't feel that way about them. aren't i allowed to express that with words?

You are allowed to feel how you want, but playing word-games gets you nowhere and only makes you look like a whiner. Forcing someone to call a dog a 'canine' instead of a 'dog' because you prefer the latin wording just frustrates people and it doesn't change that a pitbull is gnawing on your arm.

i never did. i never claimed it made me right. you wanna know what claim i made? that klok is wrong. i'm not claiming anything about hispanics. klok has yet to back up his claims, and i doubt he ever will.

So then your claims of being right are, like-wise, unsubstantiated then. Sorry. Don't see how you're more credible than him at this point.

no it isn't. saying trump might be greedy doesn't need to extend to the rest of the presidential candidates to be meaningful. klok said trump couldn't be bought--i disagreed and said that his greed may allow him to be bought. we're speaking specifically about trumparooney.

So if I claimed you were greedy enough to be bought I'd be right then?

you don't think you can actually learn from people over the internet.

When the internet is full of people who believe air conditioning is sexist, that the Iraqi Dinar will re-evaluate to be worth astronomical amounts of money, and youtube commenters, it's hard to believe that there is much intelligence at all online.

[Phoenix Wright]

The moment you stated he was wrong you made the claim to oppose him. In this case claiming that he is wrong and that his view is inaccurate is just as much a claim as his own. It doesn't matter who is right, not backing up your claim while accusing him of not backing up his is hypocritical.

let's first ask, what is a claim?

a quick google search can net us a working definition, one to base the rest of whatever this is on. claim (v.) -- state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof. additionally: claim (n.) -- an assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt.

we now know what a claim is, and how one makes a claim.

klok made numerous claims, which i'll kindly outline below:

on hispanics, klok says: Not only do they have the bombest food in the world (1), not only are they all hardworking and nice (2), but they're so much fun (3) and they live a great lifestyle focused on family (4). They have kids (5), they raise their kids into fine upstanding adults (6). Americans could stand to learn a thing or two from the Hispanic-Americans (7).

i count...7 claims. we can throw out (1) because it's both subjective and just groups together all hispanic food. (which, country to country actually does change, so it's already too vague. this is akin to saying mediterranean food is the best--the mediterranean covers many geographic locations and hosts a plethora of cultures, each with different definitions on what "mediterranean" food is.) we'll also throw out (5) because i don't think that really needs to be backed up rigorously.

note: one thing i'm not going to do here is disprove rigorously klok's claims. i'm doing this to make an extremely important point.

(2) -- okay--all hispanics are hardworking and nice. you accept this claim because he interacts with, oh i dunno, probably 20-50 hispanic people daily in his neighborhood? there's 54 million hispanics in the united states. is 20-50 a sufficient sample size, just based off of intuition? regardless, no proof is given to back this up.

this claim is unsubstantiated, we therefore have no reason to believe it.

(3) -- what does this even mean? all of them are so much fun? we'll find that many of these claims are similar to (2), luckily for me. this particular thing isn't even reliably measurable.

this claim is unsubstantiated, we therefore have no reason to believe it.

(4) -- again, grouping together all hispanic cultures into one. this is like saying the united states, australia, the united kingdom, germany, and so on, don't care for their children's education. this is simply not the case. it's nonsensical to group together these cultures in the first place, it's made worse by the fact that...

this claim is unsubstantiated, we therefore have no reason to believe it.

(6) -- unless you find murderers, child rapists, thieves, etc. "upstanding adults," that all hispanic parents raise all children into upstanding adults is far worse than simply unsubstantiated.

this claim is false. to believe it is silly.

(7) -- since all earlier claims are not to be believed, what ever could sir klok be talking about?

this claim is unsubstantiated, we therefore have no reason to believe it.

i hope by the second one you saw a pattern. i'm not claiming anything. the burden of proof does not lie on me, it lies on klok. the entire purpose of my post was to show that klok is talking out his asshole--pretty loudly. what he's saying is bullshit. come on snowy, he thinks slavery ended around the world 2 years ago, except in the us when in ended in 1863. you don't seriously believe that, do you?

i'm not saying, "klok, it is not the way you describe, it is actually this way," i'm saying, "klok, you have no proof in claiming it is the way you describe."

klok had quite a few other claims, but i don't think it's necessary to go through all of them when the answer's the same for each one.

No. Because I am of Irish decent as well and refuse to drink alcohol in any form outside of communion (even then I prefer non-wine). Not to mention that this is a 'no true scotsman' fallacy as well.

ah, but you agree with what i say about arabs, though? what if you run into a person who's arab and thinks all arabs have sex with each other constantly? and you run into another that says they're all abstinent? and another comes along and says all arabs love pork?

your unwillingness to believe what i said, thankfully, highlights the very same issue with klok i'm trying to convey to you. your experiences, my experiences, eclipse's experiences, jyosua's experiences, obama's experiences, trump's experiences, it doesn't matter--no one's personal experience counts as proper evidence to support a claim. no one's.

No. It isn't. There is a huge difference between people who immigrated legally and haven't had the time for the paperwork to go through and/or are struggling with legal proceedings/loopholes and people whom have snuck across the borders against the will and desire of the U.S. government and operate in hiding while actively refusing to become citizens. It's akin to saying that a walrus and a dolphin are the same as they are sea-dwelling mammals.

i want to express that "undocumented" implies illegal. i have my documents--license, birth certificate, address of permanent residency, social security--and i'm guessing you do too. undocumented immigrants do not have these documents (you see?), and are therefore legally not allowed to live permanently and work in this country. "illegal immigrant" is the same as "undocumented immigrant." a term like "illegal invader" is far too hostile to use for the actual situation.

applying for permanent residency requires only some paperwork, so those are other "documents" (or, another way one is "undocumented"). unfortunately for many, this can take years to go through. then, you need to live in a state for at least 5 years before you can apply for citizenship. is this not outrageous to you? it could potentially take you 5.5 years (usually more) just to become a citizen here. for people that live in the particularly dangerous states in mexico, i'm not so sure 5 and a half years is time that they have.

You are allowed to feel how you want, but playing word-games gets you nowhere and only makes you look like a whiner. Forcing someone to call a dog a 'canine' instead of a 'dog' because you prefer the latin wording just frustrates people and it doesn't change that a pitbull is gnawing on your arm.

i'm not forcing anyone to do anything. klok says, "can we please call them 'invaders,'" and i said, "i like 'undocumented immigrants myself.'" this is not forcing how i feel at all.

So then your claims of being right are, like-wise, unsubstantiated then. Sorry. Don't see how you're more credible than him at this point.

as above,

i'm not saying, "klok, it is not the way you describe, it is actually this way," i'm saying, "klok, you have no proof in claiming it is the way you describe."

So if I claimed you were greedy enough to be bought I'd be right then?

pay more attention to word choice.

trump might be greedy. his possible greed could allow for his political power to be bought. i am not claiming trump is greedy and will be bought. in fact, i made an effort to say that though i think it's likely that he would be bought, and i do think he's greedy, i said it was "just a hunch," and admitted that the claim was unsubstantiated. (let me be clear, i'm sure if i took 10 minutes to find out, i could come to the same conclusion, but i don't care enough because i already dislike trump.)

When the internet is full of people who believe air conditioning is sexist, that the Iraqi Dinar will re-evaluate to be worth astronomical amounts of money, and youtube commenters, it's hard to believe that there is much intelligence at all online.

so? take me for example--at one point you thought time dilation couldn't be explained and was a spooky phenomenon that occurs in the exosphere and earth-orbiting satellites (low-earth orbit, geosynchronous orbit, high-earth orbit), when in fact time dilation is a well-understood effect of both special relativity (relative velocity time dilation) and general relativity (gravitational time dilation). that's at least one quite important thing you learned from some random jagoff on the internet.

imagine what you could learn from watching actual educational programs on youtube and such. pbs crash course is so wonderful. you have access to countless resources to learn pretty much anything you want, even how to make bombs. you can even steal textbooks online (torrents--some profs actually just give away their texts though, which is cool) and teach yourself things. all because of the internet.

what you're doing is going to the twitch chat on an attractive lady's twitch channel and asking yourself, "is this all the internet really is?" of course it isn't--you just need to leave the places whose aim isn't to educate you.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Phoenix Wright

[Ansem]

weeeeeeeeeeeeeell lets try to steer it away from trump, he's not the only candidate.

Goddamn it! Every time I see someone use liberal unironically, they get absolutely fucking destroyed. Just once, I want to meet a conservative that Isn't made to be a complete a joke... On topic, I want to give the GOP a chance, but everywhere I look just reinforces just how stupidly inadequate the candidates are and how the party is on the road to self destruction. They are pitiful at this point. It a shame really, as hiliary isn't that great herself from what I hear.

jeb is alright! he's the smart bush from what i have read, and though I dont agree with him on a few policies, i think he is the republican parties best shot at the hispanic vote. i personally find it so amusing when he tries to validate himself with his spanish and how he is using his wife and kids for political advancement, but its the game of politics i guess. i see a bush/rubio, cruz, paul, either one of the three ticket since i know bush is a moderate and he will likely need support from the conservative wing of the party.

@sanders: like many have mentions i think he is the best candidate, but you have to take a look at other things. all of us that have voiced our support for him are relatively young and probably have a college education if not in the process of getting a bachelors, but that is not all of america. i think clinton is better rounded than sanders since she is appealing to the conservative democrat wing as well. sanders seems to have the force of the extreme left on his side, but i think the two need each other. i predict that clinton will offer sanders the running mate position when she gets the nomination. its not what i want to happen, id like for the opposite to occur, but its realistic. this way the democratic party would be unified, and conservatives would be satisfied with clinton silencing sanders since we all know how much power the vice president has.

elizabeth warren seems to be supporting sanders quite a great deal, and its very funny when you consider the difference in their net worth. last time i checked warren was at 9 million while sanders is at three hundred thousand. i know a lot of people that would love a sanders/warren ticket, but that is not the goal of a ticket. its to unify and if possible, steal votes from the other party.

[Phoenix Wright]

george w. and bush sr. said some pretty good stuff from time to time. i don't think any of the bush family is/was unintelligent. perusing this, i must say that his positions on the environment and education are unacceptable. to deny the role of humans in our changing climate is madness at this point; education is a right, not a privilege--his views on public schooling show he believes the latter. his views on healthcare are equally atrocious for the same reasons. he thinks net neutrality is "stupid." i feel i disagree mostly with jeb, but do agree sometimes.

one presidential candidate i really don't want gaining traction (and it doesn't look like he is) is graham. i pretty much hate that man.

so, in your situation, what is sanders actually doing?

[Ansem]

i was referring to george w and his "bushisms", i thought sr was alright, probably should have specified. i dont remember too much about w since i was fairly young back then, but i should get around to reading up on w. jeb's educational policy is the thing that irks me the most about him. i was in the public school system when common core took over, and it is a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy. i also dont understand why a republican would vy for government interference in classrooms. i personally wouldnt support him, and though i'm not too fond of clinton i'd take her over him any day. i just wanted to point out that he may be the best candidate for the republican nomination. i think the others are too extreme.

im not sure i understand your question. are you asking what i see sanders doing right now or what i think he is doing that is good? i know he's going around and rousing crowds in various states, but it does not feel like he is appealing to minorities, and i feel that is a crucial vote for him to miss out on. he's charismatic i can see that much, but i think he could do a better job to reach out to other groups that are not white middle class.

[I.M. Gei]

i don't think you'll have to worry about graham, he has no shot at the nomination and he knows it; he entered to be the "bomb, bomb, bomb iran!" candidate and throw bombs at rand paul where he could, although that doesn't seem like it's as necessary what with paul's sagging campaign.

it's similar to late 2013 or so, when christie looked like he'd be the frontrunner and peter king (republican from long island) mused on a run; he would have been one of the many candidates garnering maybe 1% of the vote, but you could tell he was in it to be a surrogate for christie

Edited July 30, 2015 by I.M. Gei

[Snowy_One]

*sigh* Not gonna bother with most of this for various reasons. Just a few things I want to point out.

ah, but you agree with what i say about arabs, though? what if you run into a person who's arab and thinks all arabs have sex with each other constantly? and you run into another that says they're all abstinent? and another comes along and says all arabs love pork?

I'd give them a bit of a weird look as those actions (except for the last one, but I'll get to that) don't share any relation to being arabic in the slightest. The closest you might get is that Muslims are allowed multiple wives under the Koran but today most muslims (especially abroad) elect to have just one... As for the pork both Jews and Muslims refuse to eat the ambrosia that is bacon and both make up a huge portion of the arabic community. While saying that all arabs refuse to eat pork would be a blanket description, if one were to go to the middle east and pull someone off the street to ask their opinion on pork, they would very likely say they do not eat it.

your unwillingness to believe what i said, thankfully, highlights the very same issue with klok i'm trying to convey to you. your experiences, my experiences, eclipse's experiences, jyosua's experiences, obama's experiences, trump's experiences, it doesn't matter--no one's personal experience counts as proper evidence to support a claim. no one's.

Of course, though, that means your own experiences with hispanics can't be used to say that they are invalid. This is the flaw with relying on PE and saying it means nothing. It works in a sterile environment of numbers but not in reality and, frankly, it's insulting to tell a person who HAS had horrible experiences with them that their experiences mean nothing because your experiences have shown otherwise. The best option is a middle ground where we acknowledge that each other may have a point and that the truth may lie somewhere between the middle. Illegal immigrants may be more prone to violence and criminal activities (ignoring that they are criminals to begin with), but there are also Illegals who aren't like that and punishing them because of the actions of the few is wrong as is ignoring those who are more prone.

I'm not saying that illegal immigrants are more prone to violence. Just that the truth won't come about by claiming the other person is wrong because you're experiences invalidate theirs.

applying for permanent residency requires only some paperwork

Yet many opt to not do so; which is the problem and why your term doesn't hold water. As I said before a sizable chunk come to America via slipping through their borders, hide out within the nation, don't bother registering with the local government or putting in effort to become actual citizens, act as if wherever they are is still Mexico even when it isn't, and so-forth. That's a HUGE difference from someone who is working through the paperwork and waiting for it to all get filed.

what you're doing is going to the twitch chat on an attractive lady's twitch channel and asking yourself, "is this all the internet really is?" of course it isn't--you just need to leave the places whose aim isn't to educate you.

Knowing how many stupid theories are out there that thrive on the internet, such as the theory that white people stole the ability to cook food from the blacks (and yes, that is a real theory), I can't say I disagree with you. But then again remaining confined to educational sites on the internet is near-impossible especially when political agendas and false information is getting pushed through real-life educational systems. DOUBLY so since most of the internet is NOT educational sites. Should I refuse to listen to you here because SF is a gaming site but be fine with it on wikipedia?

Like it or not the internets intelligence is not something that can be handled so easily. It is easy to avoid a bastion of stupidity like Twitter, but people on twitter are not confined to twitter in any way, shape, or form and the only thing preventing them from invading an official education site is, effectively, their own laziness.

Anyways, I've decided to withdraw all support for Trump over his recent remarks about South Korea. It's pretty ignorant of the actual situation there and is basically mafia-style blackmailing. I'm not going to question if South Korea could handle the North on their own because, even if they could (and I'm not going to question that), America does hold its treaties and should always do its best to be their for its friends and allies. That's not to mention that North Korea has made it abundantly clear that they will do everything in their power to destroy America and, should such an action happen, South Korea and Japan will be the front lines even if America withdrew completely. So, yea... No support at all from me now.

[Blaze The Great]

Wow. I can't believe he would say that. I know Trump is a blunt man, and having a plain-speaking politician would be nice for a change, but he's just totally overstepping his boundaries. I really hope he drops out of the GOP race before he does some serious damage.

[Phoenix Wright]

im not sure i understand your question. are you asking what i see sanders doing right now or what i think he is doing that is good?

i mean the situation where bernie is the vp.

i don't think you'll have to worry about graham, he has no shot at the nomination and he knows it; he entered to be the "bomb, bomb, bomb iran!" candidate and throw bombs at rand paul where he could, although that doesn't seem like it's as necessary what with paul's sagging campaign.

it's similar to late 2013 or so, when christie looked like he'd be the frontrunner and peter king (republican from long island) mused on a run; he would have been one of the many candidates garnering maybe 1% of the vote, but you could tell he was in it to be a surrogate for christie

yeah, you're right. great article btw

[Ansem]

i mean the situation where bernie is the vp.

well, not much other than getting those on the far left on clinton's side by going on a speaking tour. basically what hes doing right now.

[Phoenix Wright]

i see. though you do have a point, that bernie's support is chiefly amongst young voters, young voters also have historically tiny voter turnout. if bernie can get those people to vote, he may have a better chance than people think.

[spoiler=bs]

I'd give them a bit of a weird look as those actions (except for the last one, but I'll get to that) don't share any relation to being arabic in the slightest. The closest you might get is that Muslims are allowed multiple wives under the Koran but today most muslims (especially abroad) elect to have just one... As for the pork both Jews and Muslims refuse to eat the ambrosia that is bacon and both make up a huge portion of the arabic community. While saying that all arabs refuse to eat pork would be a blanket description, if one were to go to the middle east and pull someone off the street to ask their opinion on pork, they would very likely say they do not eat it.

you only feel this way because this information is publicly accessible. where can i find the data that says undocumented immigrants are the ones committing a majority of rape, murder, theft, etc? it doesn't exist.

Of course, though, that means your own experiences with hispanics can't be used to say that they are invalid. This is the flaw with relying on PE and saying it means nothing. It works in a sterile environment of numbers but not in reality and, frankly, it's insulting to tell a person who HAS had horrible experiences with them that their experiences mean nothing because your experiences have shown otherwise. The best option is a middle ground where we acknowledge that each other may have a point and that the truth may lie somewhere between the middle. Illegal immigrants may be more prone to violence and criminal activities (ignoring that they are criminals to begin with), but there are also Illegals who aren't like that and punishing them because of the actions of the few is wrong as is ignoring those who are more prone. I'm not saying that illegal immigrants are more prone to violence. Just that the truth won't come about by claiming the other person is wrong because you're experiences invalidate theirs.

i challenge you to find a point in this topic in which i've claimed my experience with hispanics proves the point i'm trying to make. i've said time and time and time again that when it comes to making a claim, experience isn't reliable. over and over again i say this, but you insist on thinking i'm trying to convey my experience as more reliable than another's.

if i recall, you were the one that asked me for my experience in the first place. i was reluctant to provide the information because i didn't think it mattered. i knew it wouldn't matter, in fact.

Yet many opt to not do so; which is the problem and why your term doesn't hold water. As I said before a sizable chunk come to America via slipping through their borders, hide out within the nation, don't bother registering with the local government or putting in effort to become actual citizens, act as if wherever they are is still Mexico even when it isn't, and so-forth. That's a HUGE difference from someone who is working through the paperwork and waiting for it to all get filed.

whether they opt to do so or not is irrelevant. if you're 18 and don't have your license yet, you don't have your license. if you're 18 and not thinking about getting a license, you still don't have your license. legally, there's no distinction.

also, i'm not the first one to use the term.

Knowing how many stupid theories are out there that thrive on the internet, such as the theory that white people stole the ability to cook food from the blacks (and yes, that is a real theory), I can't say I disagree with you. But then again remaining confined to educational sites on the internet is near-impossible especially when political agendas and false information is getting pushed through real-life educational systems. DOUBLY so since most of the internet is NOT educational sites. Should I refuse to listen to you here because SF is a gaming site but be fine with it on wikipedia?

Like it or not the internets intelligence is not something that can be handled so easily. It is easy to avoid a bastion of stupidity like Twitter, but people on twitter are not confined to twitter in any way, shape, or form and the only thing preventing them from invading an official education site is, effectively, their own laziness.

this might come as a surprise, but those conspiracy theories exist outside of the internet too. political agendas, false information, liars, cheats--they all exist outside the internet too. it's folly to disregard the resources that the internet offers because of these dangers but be fine with it when you encounter it off the internet. really, it doesn't even make sense.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Phoenix Wright

[Ansem]

young voters also have historically tiny voter turnout. if bernie can get those people to vote, he may have a better chance than people think.

ugh, yeah. i think if he spoke at universities he may garner some more support, but there is also the possibility that very few people will show up. im sure his campaign managers have thought of that already too.

[Blaze The Great]

So, any conservatives care to voice their thoughts about their candidates? From what it looks like to me, there a lot of libs talking about libs and libs talking about conservatives, but not much of conservatives talking period.

i see. though you do have a point, that bernie's support is chiefly amongst young voters, young voters also have historically tiny voter turnout. if bernie can get those people to vote, he may have a better chance than people think

I agree with you. My generation is leaning very liberally, both from my own personal experience and statistics. If liberal candidates visited universities, that would probably spike their numbers.

http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/typology-comparison/types/next-generation-left/

Edited July 31, 2015 by Blaze The Great

[Ansem]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/politics/joe-biden-white-house-2016-presidential-campaign.html?_r=0

thoughts? i think this is great, biden brings a sort of balance to the democrat side since clinton is somewhat conservative and sanders is very liberal.

[MartyTheDemonSlayer]

I'm quite happy. I absolutely love Biden, and his debate against Paul Ryan was beautiful. Hillary is still the more formidable candidate in the general election, since Biden's connections to the Obama presidency are an issue unless Obama's upwards trend in the polls continues.However, it's always bad to count entirely on one candidate, as Hillary could completely implode. The Clintons are generally scandal proof, but if something especially egregious came to light the democrats could be left scrambling. Biden would be a good, electable alternative with name recognition (sorry O'Malley.)

[Ansem]

obama's policies weren't terrible, i think republicans hate him more than they hate his policies. obamacare seems like a bad idea with all the republican fearmongering, but its been years since he passed it, and the benefits are showing. the rates of uninsured americans have gone down, and unpaid hospital bills are shrinking

http://wallethub.com/edu/rates-of-uninsured-by-state-before-after-obamacare/4800/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2015/08/02/as-obamacare-takes-hold-unpaid-hospital-bills-vanish/

im sure this bill has more positive influences on the general population as well if i were to look for them. but i wanted to make the point that biden has simply cite these statistics, and i'm sure that would help in his run. i think he has a good shot, like you mentioned he is scandal free, he can associate with the positives of obama's presidency and in both vice president debates with palin and and ryan he has proven himself to be sharp witted. i personally dont think clinton's email "scandal" is a big deal, but that's just me. her opponents will crucify her for it, but im not sure how much it will influence her run.

[I.M. Gei]

wingnuts have been trying to pin bullshit scandals on the clintons since before i was born, so i'm more inclined to view it as a boy crying wolf situation

[MartyTheDemonSlayer]

@jetbeamscantmeltsteelfull

I also support Obama's economic policies and think they have done a lot of good for the country, but if opinion polls don't catch up before 2016 they'll still be a political liability.

As for the email scandal... I think that's a grey area. My father works for the state department and he thinks that Hillary's actions are a bit disrespectful to other government employees, who also find it inconvenient to use a government email address but do it anyways. According to him, it also probably breaks state department policy, though when you're in command you have a little more freedom to break rules. He still plans to vote for her though. All that aside, the scandal at worst amounts to a minor infraction, though it does fit well with an emerging republican narrative of trying to paint Hillary as out of touch. Considering how effective a similar strategy was for defeating Romney, it is slightly worrying, though I'm still confident/hoping that Hillary is well positioned to win.

On the other hand the Benghazi "scandal" is a groundless, politically manufactured issue that should have been lain to rest a long time ago.

[-Cynthia-]

obama's policies weren't terrible, i think republicans hate him more than they hate his policies. obamacare seems like a bad idea with all the republican fearmongering, but its been years since he passed it, and the benefits are showing. the rates of uninsured americans have gone down, and unpaid hospital bills are shrinking

http://wallethub.com/edu/rates-of-uninsured-by-state-before-after-obamacare/4800/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2015/08/02/as-obamacare-takes-hold-unpaid-hospital-bills-vanish/

im sure this bill has more positive influences on the general population as well if i were to look for them. but i wanted to make the point that biden has simply cite these statistics, and i'm sure that would help in his run. i think he has a good shot, like you mentioned he is scandal free, he can associate with the positives of obama's presidency and in both vice president debates with palin and and ryan he has proven himself to be sharp witted. i personally dont think clinton's email "scandal" is a big deal, but that's just me. her opponents will crucify her for it, but im not sure how much it will influence her run.

I love statistics- but statistics are not what a lot of American rely on. Public opinion on Obamacare is still negative overall. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

[I.M. Gei]

I love statistics- but statistics are not what a lot of American rely on. Public opinion on Obamacare is still negative overall. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

the thing with disapproval over the aca is that it's really nuanced; conservatives dislike it reflexively, while a lot of left-wingers dislike it because they don't think it goes far enough/they compare the healthcare exchange (or even the entire law) to the healthcare plan put forth by the right-wing heritage foundation in the 1990s

there are also people who don't like "obamacare", after over half a decade of fearmongering from the far right over "death panels" and "rationed healthcare" and "waiting lines" and the like, but like their state exchanges like kynect—created under the aca, mind you—or the medicare expansion which select state governments have accepted, but others have thumbed their noses at. mcconnell, for instance, campaigned last year on "axe obamacare, but keep kynect", even though they're pretty much the same law

as with most things in postmodern politics, it all comes down to spin and perception

Edited August 4, 2015 by I.M. Gei

[dondon151]

there are also people who don't like "obamacare",

here's a humorous story which supposedly isn't all that uncommon

i went to visit a friend (who currently lives in a small rural town) and went to a local restaurant for lunch

i had a chat there with one of the locals who complained about "that damned obamacare" and then sang his praises for the affordable care act LOL

Edited August 4, 2015 by dondon151

[I.M. Gei]

anecdotal and all, but i've also heard stories like this from an internet friend who lives in coal country in eastern kentucky. plenty of people who will rant about "that darkie in the white house" and obamacare while liking the plans they got under kynect or the medicare they got under the affordable care act's medicare expansion

[Ansem]

its too much to ask for the general populace to have a shred of intelligence

[blah the Prussian]

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."- Winston Churchill

[Phoenix Wright]

as long as we're quoting people, "teach a man to reason and he'll think for a lifetime."

--phil plait

the number of us that have been fortunate enough to be taught well should be extremely thankful. fixing education, i think, can fix a lot of problems this country has. so let's please not start (yet another) circlejerk of how much smarter we all are compared to the general populace. especially since it's likely most of us are average just like them.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Phoenix Wright