2016 elections - because it's never too early

[The Minsky Moment]

Troubling that anyone could see Trump in that debate and think he has any business running for President.  Most people over the age of 8 or 9 have better self-control.

[jimmy olsen]

I have to see a clip of this, sounds amazing! 

There were other nasty exchanges in abundance, but the most interesting was the latest immigration flare-up between Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. The contours of that fight are very well-worn at this point – Cruz attacks Rubio for passing the Gang of Eight immigration bill, Rubio attacks Cruz for flip-flopping on "amnesty" – but this latest exchange got personal. Cruz attacked Rubio for going on Univision and saying in Spanish that he wouldn't immediately rescind Obama's executive orders on immigration. Rubio replied: "I don't know how he [Cruz] knows what I said on Univision because he doesn't speak Spanish." Cruz, who, like Rubio, is of Cuban descent, shot back: "Si quieres – ahora mismo, dice lo ahora, en español, si quieres." (It's a bit rough, but it translates to: "If you want – right now, say it now, in Spanish, if you like.")

That was an amazing moment. The two Latino candidates in the Republican field get into an argument over Spanish fluency in the context of proving which one of them is more anti-immigrant. That Republican reboot is really coming along swimmingly.

[Tonitrus]

Troubling that anyone could see Trump in that debate and think he has any business running for President.  Most people over the age of 8 or 9 have better self-control.

Indeed.  It seems like the easy way to beat Trump in a debate is just to cleverly bait him into exploding and hitting his self-destruct switch.  His bombasity is somewhat camouflaged in these multi-person debates...but a skilled opponent in a one-on-one would probably easily make him immolate himself.

[Phillip V]

I have to see a clip of this, sounds amazing! 

There were other nasty exchanges in abundance, but the most interesting was the latest immigration flare-up between Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. The contours of that fight are very well-worn at this point – Cruz attacks Rubio for passing the Gang of Eight immigration bill, Rubio attacks Cruz for flip-flopping on "amnesty" – but this latest exchange got personal. Cruz attacked Rubio for going on Univision and saying in Spanish that he wouldn't immediately rescind Obama's executive orders on immigration. Rubio replied: "I don't know how he [Cruz] knows what I said on Univision because he doesn't speak Spanish." Cruz, who, like Rubio, is of Cuban descent, shot back: "Si quieres – ahora mismo, dice lo ahora, en español, si quieres." (It's a bit rough, but it translates to: "If you want – right now, say it now, in Spanish, if you like.")

That was an amazing moment. The two Latino candidates in the Republican field get into an argument over Spanish fluency in the context of proving which one of them is more anti-immigrant. That Republican reboot is really coming along swimmingly.

This shit is why I keep watching the Republican debates.  A whole new fucking level.

[Admiral Yi]

Does he speak Spanish with a Canadian accent?

[Barrister]

I will add though that the tax plan being put forth by even all of the establishment lane Republicans this year is frankly extremely conservative, it's weird that in a country that generally gets more liberal on most issues over time one party is actually markedly more conservative on frankly every issue in 2016 versus where Republicans were ideologically in say, 2000.

Maybe this is exactly why.  The fact that liberal ideology is winning out is causing conservatives to turn reactionary.

I don't think that's correct at all.

You can only point to a narrow range of social, mostly sexual, issues where the US (and the West) has consistently moved to the left over the last 50 years.

In other ways... conservatism has been absolutely triumphant.  Free trade for example.  I know in the 1988 federal election the US FTA was hugely controversial.  Now we have free trade agreements with dozens of countries, all with little comment.  Tax rates have decreased.  Union membership has steadily declined.  Home ownership has increased, welfare has decreased.  Pacifism is largely discredited.  Debt and deficits... well it's still an issue, but at least the left now acknowledge they're a problem - not so much in the 70s or 80s.

I know, I know... lots of you will say "but I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative".  Fair enough, but if you want to talk about what ideology has been "winning" the last 50 years or so you have to look at all issues, not just social/sexual ones.

[Monoriu]

I am totally against Bernie Sanders.  I think his polices are bad and will lead to ruin. 

But I understand where he is coming from.  I simply disagree with his policies.  I think he, as a person, is alright.  If the American people somehow ending up picking his as their next president, I will understand. 

Guys like Ben Carson, Donald Trump, and Ted Cruz are on another level.  I visited their web sites, listened to their quotes, and saw some of their debate performances, and I thought, why are these people there in the first place?  Their views are out of touch with reality.  They behave obnoxiously.  It is normal to have people with extreme views around.  It is bizarre to have people who hold such views make it so far in the political process.  This is unbelievable.  Either I have grossly misunderstood them, or something is wrong with the Republican Party.

[Berkut]

I will add though that the tax plan being put forth by even all of the establishment lane Republicans this year is frankly extremely conservative, it's weird that in a country that generally gets more liberal on most issues over time one party is actually markedly more conservative on frankly every issue in 2016 versus where Republicans were ideologically in say, 2000.

Maybe this is exactly why.  The fact that liberal ideology is winning out is causing conservatives to turn reactionary.

I don't think that's correct at all.

You can only point to a narrow range of social, mostly sexual, issues where the US (and the West) has consistently moved to the left over the last 50 years.

Those social issues are the ones that conservitards really, really care about though.

In other ways... conservatism has been absolutely triumphant.  Free trade for example.

Not a conservative issue.

  I know in the 1988 federal election the US FTA was hugely controversial.  Now we have free trade agreements with dozens of countries, all with little comment.

That is because it isn't a conservative issue. You aren't going to just define things that have changed in a particular direction as "conservative" are you?

  Tax rates have decreased.

Well, not really. Effective tax rates for most people have not really changed. The rich have had their tax rates cut, but I would argue that THAT isn't actually a conservative issue either - it is a rich persons issue, and most actual voting conservatives are not really all that energized about their economic prospects being relatively poor because the 1% are getting tax breaks.

Union membership has steadily declined.

True, but not because the conservatives have "won" on that issue - this is just the result of the changing economic climate and framework. And again, most actual conservative voters don't care about such abstract stuff.

But I will agree that this, at least, an actual "conservative" issue at least.

Home ownership has increased,

Yeah, because liberals are so dead set against home ownership!

welfare has decreased.

Again, I think most liberals would agree that less people needing welfare is a good thing.

  Pacifism is largely discredited. 

Not a conservative issue, and in point of fact the conservatives lost on Iraq, and they are generally considered to have had an absolute disaster of a foreign policy while their previous President was in office.

Debt and deficits... well it's still an issue, but at least the left now acknowledge they're a problem - not so much in the 70s or 80s.

Really? In the 70s and 80s nobody acknowledged that was a problem, and since then they do, while the conservative leaders have racked up massive debt spending like there was no tomorrow?

How can you possibly call this a "win" for conservatives???

I know, I know... lots of you will say "but I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative".  Fair enough, but if you want to talk about what ideology has been "winning" the last 50 years or so you have to look at all issues, not just social/sexual ones.

And yeah, if you do that...the hard core conservatives are being demolished. Their ideology, especially on the critical social issues they care so dearly about, is being casually dismantled. The US is less religious, more tolerant, more accepting of homosexuality, and just generally much less white bread, male dominated society. Which really, really, REALLY pisses them off.

[PDH]

Ugh.  A misplaced / means replies go to hell.

[Zanza]

In other ways... conservatism has been absolutely triumphant.  Free trade for example.  I know in the 1988 federal election the US FTA was hugely controversial.  Now we have free trade agreements with dozens of countries, all with little comment.  Tax rates have decreased.  Union membership has steadily declined.  Home ownership has increased, welfare has decreased.  Pacifism is largely discredited.  Debt and deficits... well it's still an issue, but at least the left now acknowledge they're a problem - not so much in the 70s or 80s.

Maybe it's different in Canada, but most of these issues aren't "conservative" issues in this European country at least. If anything they are issues of our classical liberal party.

[Martinus]

In other ways... conservatism has been absolutely triumphant.  Free trade for example.

Uhm, free trade is classic liberalism. 

In fact, liberalism has been so absolutely triumphant on economy issues, nobody in America even realises there used to be a conservative economic doctrine (which survives, very stunted, in Europe), and its (liberalism's) tenets have been accepted wholesale by both right and left (with the right adopting a more laissez faire version of it, and the left the so-called socliberalism of early 20th century).

[PRC]

A Ted Cruz presidency is scarier than a Donald Trump presidency.

[Martinus]

A Ted Cruz presidency is scarier than a Donald Trump presidency.

I agree.

[jimmy olsen]

A Ted Cruz presidency is scarier than a Donald Trump presidency.

Agreed

[Martinus]

Troubling that anyone could see Trump in that debate and think he has any business running for President.  Most people over the age of 8 or 9 have better self-control.

Indeed.  It seems like the easy way to beat Trump in a debate is just to cleverly bait him into exploding and hitting his self-destruct switch.  His bombasity is somewhat camouflaged in these multi-person debates...but a skilled opponent in a one-on-one would probably easily make him immolate himself.

That's why those Trump-Sanders debates are going to be fun to watch.