2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[Andalusian girls]

someone should have told Jeb you win elections as long as you have the most money

[Gredival]

Easily explains everything wrong with our current system. And why citizen's united needs to be overturned. Everything is causing the actual people to have less and less say in our "elections".

Citizens United is one thing, but keep in mind that lobbying existed before Citizens United. Bernie has got people thinking that removing lobbying is a cure all, but it's honestly not. At the end of the day, we would solve a lot more problems making the GOP go extinct than we would even from any reforms lobbying reforms.

Remember that when most of these corporate interests are donating to both candidates in order to try get access later on, their effect on elections is very minimal. Would it be better if these guys weren't allowed to buy a meeting down the line and possibly buy a vote? Surely. But the bigger problem is that there's a whole party out there who are, for the most part, prone to being bought out because their party makes the interests of businesses and the wealthy their stated policy.

And people dont like to admit it, but (some) lobbyists are actually important because senators and reps dont have the time to learn everything about every issue and don't have the office staff (or funding) to do it. Groups like Common Cause and the ACLU, which can only influence politicians through lobbying, are actually really important. Take net neutrality. A flat out ban on "lobbying" would hurt them much more than it hurts ATT/Comcast/Verizon.

We think of "special interests" as the interests of others but standard citizens, as a collective, are a special interest too. And there are a lot of groups who advocate on our behalf.

[Fiye]

Don't forget that Jon Stewart was also lobbying when he was fighting for the Zadroga Act.

Apparently the Donald is going to be talking to the NRA about terrorists buying guns.



He's going to take all the credit for what Obama's been fighting for. I want to scream.

[Dantrag]

Citizens United is one thing, but keep in mind that lobbying existed before Citizens United. Bernie has got people thinking that removing lobbying is a cure all, but it's honestly not. At the end of the day, we would solve a lot more problems making the GOP go extinct than we would even from any reforms lobbying reforms.

Remember that when most of these corporate interests are donating to both candidates in order to try get access later on, their effect on elections is very minimal. Would it be better if these guys weren't allowed to buy a meeting down the line and possibly buy a vote? Surely. But the bigger problem is that there's a whole party out there who are, for the most part, prone to being bought out because their party makes the interests of businesses and the wealthy their stated policy.

And people dont like to admit it, but (some) lobbyists are actually important because senators and reps dont have the time to learn everything about every issue and don't have the office staff (or funding) to do it. Groups like Common Cause and the ACLU, which can only influence politicians through lobbying, are actually really important. Take net neutrality. A flat out ban on "lobbying" would hurt them much more than it hurts ATT/Comcast/Verizon.

We think of "special interests" as the interests of others but standard citizens, as a collective, are a special interest too. And there are a lot of groups who advocate on our behalf.

I didn't even mention lobbying. I was 100% talking about unlimited funding via super pacs and invisible donations for candidates as being a huge issue. Basically the rich are buying off most elections(lets not pretend like Trump's rise is anything near the norm).

Also it's how we've basically got the regressive tax system we currently have in place and that they want to keep implementing. The super rich just want to give as little as possible and that's been something they've been driving into "our" heads for over 60 years. They've basically made the middle class pay a higher % than they do to force "us" to want government to lower taxes as a whole, where they still see the biggest dividends.

[archibaldcrane]

They've basically made the middle class pay a higher % than they do

That's...not really true at all though. The average top 1%er (whose household makes 428k or more) in 2013 paid an effective federal income tax rate of 27.08%, compared to the average of people in the 25-50th percentile (the 2nd-wealthiest quarter of the population - between 36k-75k in household income per year) who paid on average 7.31%

Sure there's state and other taxes beyond just federal income, and I completely agree that the wealthy should pay more in taxes in general, but the percentages aren't even close.

[archibaldcrane]

Or if you want to include payroll taxes:

[Quicklet]

One of the strategies that has been utilized has been to argue for lower taxes for everyone while cutting government services that primarily support the poor and middle class. So yes, taxes have been at historically low rates for most income levels since the Bush era tax cuts were enacted and extended. The problem is that the economic growth that was promised to materialize for the middle class because of those tax cuts never happened. Instead we got massive deficits and a call for austerity, fucking the poor and middle class on the back end when food stamps, welfare, infrastructure, and support for public universities are all being cut, things that generally provide good economic return on investment for our tax dollars because the money either gets spent or improves economic productivity.

It's going to either take a massive economic crisis on the scale of the Great Depression or some kind of huge systemic shift due to automation (or probably both) in order to generate enough pressure to change the narrative.

Also, that chart would be more interesting if it included relative incomes in addition to tax rates. Top 0.1% barely pay a higher rate than top 1% while earning a substantially higher %.

[archibaldcrane]

Yeah, effective tax rates really flatten out past a few hundred thousand or so in household income. And because of how social security taxes work, you're paying a higher marginal tax on your earnings between 37k-118k than you are on your earnings between 118k-189k.

[Rooney]

Trump said in his speech he was a better friend to "the gays" than Hillary, and to "ask the gays" about it. #askthegays is going exactly like you would expect it to. With all the heavy hearts after Orlando, a little humor, especially at the expense of Trump, is welcome.

[ringthree]

If they believe Trump would be horrible, say, for the US economy, it makes perfect sense why they'd support his opponent. The Koch's aren't ideologues to the point where they take their ball and go home when faced with a two-party system. They are appropriately cynical - they fucking hate Trump.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/24/politi...-clinton-2016/

Actually, I have been reading quite a bit that the Koch foundation is being redirected from the old conservative direction to focus much more on libertarian/free market issues. I mean they still support Republicans for sure, but they are aiming to be more issue based and not just dump money on the RNC.

They fucking hate Trump.

[dasva]

Because people only wish to hear what they want to hear.

They wish what they want?

[Dantrag]

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/12/473992...d-paying-taxes


This was interesting. There was a following segment that basically stated that you could buy "papers" for about 3 million dollars to avoid paying your 10 million in taxes. It's not that the rich always cheat or don't always pay, they can afford to fuck with the system and basically get what they want and use those exisiting loopholes or offload money off shores. I'm sure that even if we fix that issue it wouldn't be even close to fixing everythign.

Here in NC our wonderful republicans instated a regressive tax. I paid a good % more than I did the year before. Also on a Federal level I also got back around 45% less than I did the year before. Paid a fuckton more too... So I honestly don't think there is a silver bullet but something needs to be done. But the Republican's trickle down is bullshit.

[Galkaeater]

[Gredival]

I didn't even mention lobbying. I was 100% talking about unlimited funding via super pacs and invisible donations for candidates as being a huge issue. Basically the rich are buying off most elections(lets not pretend like Trump's rise is anything near the norm).

I don't see how Hillary has any vulnerability on this count then, Koch donations or not. Hillary is against CU, and fixing CU is all about SCOTUS which means that getting ANY Democrat in the White House is the biggest step possible.

Unless you think Hillary would put a pro-CU Justice on the court.

Also it's how we've basically got the regressive tax system we currently have in place and that they want to keep implementing. The super rich just want to give as little as possible and that's been something they've been driving into "our" heads for over 60 years.

Republican economics skewing to benefit the rich is a historical trend originating far far far before CU. And it will post-date CU as well because, well, this is pretty much the basis of Republican economics.

[Andalusian girls]

weren't you one of the ones castigating Sanders supporters for their binary good vs evil reductionism of all political activity

[Gredival]

weren't you one of the ones castigating Sanders supporters for their binary good vs evil reductionism of all political activity

I've never made a secret of the fact that I am a progressive, and that as such my interests (which I would posit align with the common good) are almost always better served by a Democrat rather than a Republican.

I mean, are you really going to dispute that Republican economic policies aren't designed to benefit the wealthy (including businesses/corporations)?

What I take issue with is idealism ("I won't vote for a flawed candidate over a deeply flawed candidate because they are both corporate shills!"). I play the game and in that respect, winning is paramount. So I'd gladly take a bunch of flawed donkeys if it meant the extinction of elephants.

I mean I'm pretty sure I've said "Shut up, sit down, vote the party line" at least three times.

[thetruepandagod]

This is the future I fight for.

[notorious bum]

How many of ya'll love it when the intercept does those "follow the money" articles? Those guys are so paranoid lol corporations buying candidates to receive no-bid contracts, avoid paying taxes, and slaps on the wrists when they "accidentally" commit crimes. Fantasyland stuff tbh


This is the type of feminism I've been waiting for: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b09c926cfdc0a8

[Day]

One day when I grow up I'm going to buy my own candidate too!

[Zealot]

Chris Murphy ended his 15-hour filibuster, Republicans in the Senate agreed to hold votes on two gun control measures (expanded background checks, no guns for people on terrorist watch lists). It'll die in the House if it gets out of the Senate, but hey, a filibuster was 1) actually used, not just threatened, and 2) worked.