[billw55]

blackshoe, on 2015-April-25, 11:04, said:

Sure you can. There will be consequences, of course. There would be consequences (what will the neighbors think of you?) even if it weren't illegal.

blackshoe, on 2015-April-25, 11:12, said:

The folks who founded this country attempted to go another way. They suggested that "…to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…"

Considering these two together, one could argue that it is illegal precisely because the neighbors think it is peculiar and bothersome. And conversely, that if the neighbors didn't think anything odd of it, it would not be.

blackshoe, on 2015-April-25, 11:12, said:

Someone upthread said that filing tax returns in the US is voluntary. Really? What do you think would happen if you didn't. Okay, the IRS doesn't currently have to manpower to go after the little guy. What about Bill Gates? Suppose he just doesn't file, and when they go after him (and they will) he says "but filing is voluntary, I don't have to do it"? What do you think would happen?

Well, if he gave enough of his would-be tax bill to the right politicians, chances are pretty good that nothing would happen, and the whole thing kept quiet.

Actually, in a less direct way, isn't this how the very rich actually do operate?

[kenberg]

Cthulhu D, on 2015-April-27, 01:16, said:

The candidates shouldn't matter one iota

For me, it does.

This is not just rhetoric.. I usually vote for a Democrat. In the 2014 election for Governor of Maryland, I voted for the Republican candidate.

Way upthread, Helene posted an article from Psychology Today on voting behavior. ok, it is Psychology Today, but anyway here is an excerpt:

Quote

James Fowler and Laura Baker have conducted a series of studies on voting behavior in families. They found that the party affiliation of adopted children tended to be similar to that of their adopted parents and siblings, suggesting that party affiliation was culturally transmitted. When the authors compared the voting behavior of a large sample of identical and fraternal twins, they found that identical twins were more similar than fraternal twins in regard to whether or not they voted, but no more similar in their choice of candidate. In sum, this work suggests that voter turnout is related to genetics while party affiliation is related to environment.

As I mnetined, my parents usually voted Democratic, but in 1952 (the first presidential election I paid much attention to) they Liked (and voted for) Ike. So who knows? Maybe both my Democratic tendencies and my willingness to stray all come from the way I was brought up.

Note to Democratic strategists: Yes I expect to vote for your candidate. But it's not a guarantee, and threatening to burn me at the stake for heresy is actually not the best way to keep me on your side.

[ArtK78]

kenberg, on 2015-April-27, 06:51, said:

Note to Democratic strategists: Yes I expect to vote for your candidate. But it's not a guarantee, and threatening to burn me at the stake for heresy is actually not the best way to keep me on your side.

Damn. That would have been fun to watch.

[Winstonm]

Cthulhu D, on 2015-April-27, 01:16, said:

The candidates shouldn't matter one iota - never has the gap between the GOP and the Democrats been bigger. The reason America is in deep is because people somehow think this is a personality battle between Hillary and whoever the republican clown car spits out. But look at the party policies for even 5 seconds:

Democrats pro social safety nut, republicans gut the ACA, medicare and convert medicare to a voucher system
Democrats pro high income tax hikes, and probably extent - Republicans cut taxes on the wealth and cut programs like food stamps that lower the effective tax rate on lower income family
Democrats pro 2010 finacial reform, republicans cut it including consumer protections
Democrats pro climate policy (if required to be exec action), republicans would block efforts to regulate.

That's just the fist 4 things that spring to mind, igoring supreme court justices - it's not inconceivable that 1-2 more republican justices could see gay marriage overturned. Trying to make it about Hillary's personality is what is wrong with the system.

I think it is actually a little deeper than personalities - the choices are narrowed to social conservative (read: Christian right) or wanton communist harlot.

I'm voting for the harlot because I like to live life on the edge.

[cherdano]

awm, on 2015-April-25, 09:59, said:

It's more of an anecdote than an argument. But the trend of the economy doing better under demand-side economics is actually quite well documented. The same comparison would hold for Clinton vs. Reagan, for example. Or you can get better information at the state level, where governors like Scott Walker and Sam Brownback have implemented supply-side schemes to great fanfare and grandiose claims about the economic benefits, only to see their states perform worse than neighboring states with different policies.

I have often seen claims like this. But I have never seen a study that was both rigorous, methodically sound and showed significant results. Have you?

(And remember that there is always a lot of fiddling possible in such studies. "Let's assume presidential policies have no effect until 8-10 months after the president gets elected." and BOOM! Suddenly the burst of the dot-com bubble is mostly attributed to Clinton rather than Bush, and the study collapses.)

[kenberg]

ArtK78, on 2015-April-27, 08:41, said:

Damn. That would have been fun to watch.

Perhaps we could do it as a fundraiser.

[blackshoe]

billw55, on 2015-April-27, 06:30, said:

Actually, in a less direct way, isn't this how the very rich actually do operate?

So the anti-rich would have us believe. For all I know, it might even be true.

[gwnn]

What do y'all think of Bernie Sanders? He seems to be making a lot of sense. But he is against the death penalty and that might cost him a lot of support? It's more or less an established fact that Hillary will get the nomination but I'm just curious what others think of Bernie Sanders (not necessarily his chances).

[hrothgar]

gwnn, on 2015-May-10, 10:30, said:

What do y'all think of Bernie Sanders? He seems to be making a lot of sense. But he is against the death penalty and that might cost him a lot of support? It's more or less an established fact that Hillary will get the nomination but I'm just curious what others think of Bernie Sanders (not necessarily his chances).

I donated $250 to Sanders the day he announced. I disagree with Sanders on trade, but for the most part I like his policies.
(I certainly prefer him to Clinton)

I don't expect him to win the nomination, but I wish him well.

[kenberg]

As a guess, I would expect to like him. Honestly, I have not spent any time thinking about it. Being against the death penalty is fine with me, but often that's a state imposed penalty not a federal one. It would be good for a change if when the Republicans described the President as a Socialist he could say, yes, so I have said. But then I suppose they will call him a Communist. Or the Anti-Christ.


It's true that if by being a Socialist he means that the government should replace private enterprise to a far greater extent than now, I would not agree. But he is from Vermont so I figure that he is not totally nuts. Already that puts him ahead of several other presidential hopefuls.

[Winstonm]

cherdano, on 2015-April-27, 13:32, said:

I have often seen claims like this. But I have never seen a study that was both rigorous, methodically sound and showed significant results. Have you?

(And remember that there is always a lot of fiddling possible in such studies. "Let's assume presidential policies have no effect until 8-10 months after the president gets elected." and BOOM! Suddenly the burst of the dot-com bubble is mostly attributed to Clinton rather than Bush, and the study collapses.)

Although it is not a study, this is fairly strong evidence IMO.

Quote

Sam Brownback’s failed ‘experiment’ puts state on path to penury

[Winstonm]

gwnn, on 2015-May-10, 10:30, said:

What do y'all think of Bernie Sanders? He seems to be making a lot of sense. But he is against the death penalty and that might cost him a lot of support? It's more or less an established fact that Hillary will get the nomination but I'm just curious what others think of Bernie Sanders (not necessarily his chances).

I favor Elizabeth Warren over Sanders.

[gwnn]

Don't we all? I wonder if she's just building up some sort of momentum (there's already a website https://runwarrenrun.org/) from people who want her to run or if she is genuinely resolute about not running. I'm obviously a bit isolated here and see much of my taste of American public opinion/political climate on Facebook and Youtube, but Elizabeth Warren seems to be a bit of a media celebrity nowadays (appearing in even mainstream media) so she could have a shot against Hillary Clinton. Or am I just living in Fantasyland?