Jump to content

democrat Debates


B-Man

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...

This happened in Iowa last night............ :lol:

 

ELDERLY WHITE DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES PARTICIPATE IN FORUM ON MINORITY ISSUES.

 

Which happened to run alongside the Alabama-Clemson College Football Playoff title game, to ensure that no one would see it, much like the DNC’s presidential “debates” this year.

 

 

 

 

and by the by, I am sure that everyone is aware of when the next dem debate is.............right ?

 

The last Democratic presidential debate was buried on a Saturday night up against the opening of Star Wars. Naturally it drew a fraction of earlier Republican debate audiences – and even of the earlier Democratic debates. The next debate is scheduled, astonishingly, on a Sunday night, January 17, the middle day of a three-day weekend. But just in case that might still draw an audience, it is also up against NFL playoff games.

 

There's just no way around it: the Democrats are intentionally hiding their presidential candidates from the public.

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have watched the last 20 minutes of the debate. Gosh is Hillary sucking up to Obama. She must be frightened that if she doesn't he'll send his justice dept after her on the email stuff.

 

Nothing on tube tonight so I have been watching. Totaly agree with you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support Sanders but politics ain't beanbag, Hillary's support of the Iraq war, her support for military intervention in Libya are fine targets along with her cozy relationship with Wall Street and the big banks- it's time for Sanders to start to go negative.

Re Wall Street and the big banks in particular I get the impression that candidates on both sides say things, just about anything, just to cater to certain constituencies. Makes it hard to know what they actually think or whether they think at all. Hillary brandished Volcker over and over to appeal to main street as a check against "big banks". But Volcker doesn't break up big banks, it just prevents them from persuing quantitative proprietary trading strategies. Its also is basically pointless legislation that fails to target the real problems that just about brought down the world financial order in 2008. Institutional prop trading was never a problem. The problem was bank ownership of securitized mortgages in a real estate bubble. Mortgages are typically not a "trading asset". They are the most conventional of retail banking assets. At first the banks were smart enough to sell them to suckers but then they started investing in them because the spreads or mark to market gains were attractive on paper.

The real problem was the failure of bank risk managers and government regulators to identify the risk based on their naive willingness to accept the opinions on credit worthiness of the rating agencies. Breaking up big banks like Saunders would like to do isn't going to solve the problem either if lots of smaller banks are doing the same (wrong) things.

So Hilary appeals to main street and associates herself with Obama's "legacy" except that Volcker was hardly a shining moment of his administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...