Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 02:49 PM Aug 2016

Anyone else noticed that without Senator Sanders, discussion of issues has all but disappeared?

I'd love to see more posts about Hillary's plan to lower Medicare age to 55, and give us a public option, than outrage about dumbf*ck Don's constant idiotic remarks....



209 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Anyone else noticed that without Senator Sanders, discussion of issues has all but disappeared? (Original Post) grahamhgreen Aug 2016 OP
Now that you mention it, my dear grahamhgreen... CaliforniaPeggy Aug 2016 #1
So talk issues. Or just listen to Hillary's speeches on many issues. Hortensis Aug 2016 #28
She's out discussing issues EVERY DAY. Sad that some who appear to be interested miss those talks. George II Aug 2016 #44
Umhm. It's 100% our own choice to miss or focus on issues. Hortensis Aug 2016 #46
That's my point. If people aren't aware of the focus on issues, they don't want to be. George II Aug 2016 #47
Oh, mine too, George. :) Hortensis Aug 2016 #49
So here is the problem of an ebarrassment of riches: she has such detailed plans and policy Squinch Aug 2016 #182
Sad for sure, Squinch. The TV news does very little discussion Hortensis Aug 2016 #200
Excellent post lillypaddle Aug 2016 #134
Graham, how about HRC's $275 B plan for new roads Hortensis Aug 2016 #48
You mean the Infrastructure bank plan Poincare Aug 2016 #76
No, that's not what I mean. People who go to college Hortensis Aug 2016 #78
No President has saidsimplesimon Aug 2016 #168
Too true to a large degree. Without presidential leadership, Hortensis Aug 2016 #171
Well, my dear Califirnia Peggy... R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2016 #95
and what is your contribution to this discussion? KMOD Aug 2016 #103
My contribution is astute observation. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2016 #110
Not on ideas or events, however. Hortensis Aug 2016 #138
You think so? I don't. Squinch Aug 2016 #197
Eleanor is a woman saidsimplesimon Aug 2016 #169
I crave serious discussion about what to do about ISIL Vattel Aug 2016 #2
Honest question.... stevil Aug 2016 #79
Only an ill-informed opinion that Obama's approach is roughly the correct one. Vattel Aug 2016 #107
Agree stevil Aug 2016 #115
Well... Gaytheist212 Aug 2016 #142
Thanks for the post of the month in terms of serious discussion. Vattel Aug 2016 #172
I agree about the Kurds. Vattel Aug 2016 #173
The truth is there is very little we can do. Demsrule86 Aug 2016 #181
Dicussion of anything other than Trump's latest comments inwiththenew Aug 2016 #3
In the news? I totally agree. Bob Buttons Aug 2016 #75
I'm confused. How serious a problem is this? I mean, really.... Moonwalk Aug 2016 #164
Actually, no. madamesilverspurs Aug 2016 #4
Hillary talks about issues everyday! Trump and the media do not. Laurian Aug 2016 #5
Well, today in Iowa she was talking about . . . gratuitous Aug 2016 #8
But it wasn't out of BS's mouth, so our friend graham didn't hear it. Squinch Aug 2016 #183
^^^THIS^^^ Auggie Aug 2016 #150
What is the correlation with Sanders you're referring to? procon Aug 2016 #6
What needs to be discussed? stopbush Aug 2016 #7
Thanks for that dose of reality. As you said, the Dems spent FOUR days "discussing" the issues. nt Tarheel_Dem Aug 2016 #15
The 'platform', a stepping-stone, gets jettisoned, Ghost Dog Aug 2016 #85
Sounds like you assume it's jettisoned already, Ghost Dog. Hortensis Aug 2016 #98
Vital issues. Ghost Dog Aug 2016 #102
Reality is that almost always politicians can Hortensis Aug 2016 #105
I have no idea what you're talking about? Tarheel_Dem Aug 2016 #104
Thank you, Miss Cleo. How much do I owe you? emulatorloo Aug 2016 #149
Has the legislation been written, sponsored, or introduced for loweringg the Medicare age? grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #16
of course not, the legislature is not in session at the moment Johnyawl Aug 2016 #17
Cmon, wouldn't take more than a day... grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #84
Call up Ryan and McConnell and tell them that. Johnyawl Aug 2016 #101
she sponsored it in 2001 KMOD Aug 2016 #21
Allows buy in at 62. But this is great! Will show it around. Would love to have updated version. grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #87
Hillary HAS committed to lowering the Medicare age Hortensis Aug 2016 #83
Absolutely! The link above is very good! grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #89
Bernie's plan was called "Medicare for All," and Hortensis Aug 2016 #99
And, quite frankly skepticscott Aug 2016 #22
Yes, I don't understand why more people don't understand that dynamic. Fla Dem Aug 2016 #116
anyone else notice that Senator Sanders HIMSELF has "all but disappeared" nt msongs Aug 2016 #9
Now that you mention it ... NurseJackie Aug 2016 #32
Is he pulling a "Clean Gene" act? Jakes Progress Aug 2016 #59
He's buying his $600,000 house; can't be too focused on issues right now. Liberal_Stalwart71 Aug 2016 #151
I see your point but Trump's lunacy would still prevail in the news eleny Aug 2016 #10
Some have borrowed her platform & some have called for her murder. misterhighwasted Aug 2016 #11
Be careful! This could be construed as bashing a democrat and will be deleted. n/t Pryderi Aug 2016 #12
You poor dear. Squinch Aug 2016 #184
It's hard to stick to the issues when one candidate eissa Aug 2016 #13
If it's really true that you want to actually hear what the candidate is saying, you certainly..... Tarheel_Dem Aug 2016 #14
Also, Hillary's policy positions and plans have been available to the public for the better Squinch Aug 2016 #185
"This crediting Sanders for everything is obnoxious and dumb." Tarheel_Dem Aug 2016 #202
False Premise. With Sanders, Media Focused on the Math TomCADem Aug 2016 #18
Is there a link to that speech? I'll definitely Rec anything with policy positions, thanks! grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #90
Here is a link to all her speeches - updated daily ehrnst Aug 2016 #133
Why don't you start a thread on that speech, since you want to discuss policy? Squinch Aug 2016 #186
And the powers that be win again rufus dog Aug 2016 #19
I'm confused. Are you saying that the focus here on Trump rather than issues... Moonwalk Aug 2016 #53
I think the media is always looking for the diversion rufus dog Aug 2016 #67
I don't disagree that it's destructive, but let's be real here... Moonwalk Aug 2016 #100
So you want to focus on the issues at hand, but your post is about someone who isn't even Squinch Aug 2016 #187
Hillary has been fighting to reduce the medicare age to 55 KMOD Aug 2016 #20
Well... Trump seems to be discussing them! I hope Hillary is taking notice. That's the FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #23
Trump talks about issues? Dr Hobbitstein Aug 2016 #135
I know its hard to believe, but he does occasionally hit on things like free-trade, NAFTA, etc. that FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #144
That's very concerning. You should be concerned about that for us. Squinch Aug 2016 #198
I am. You should be as well. Don't be a typical lazy ignorant voter that exist om all sides. FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #203
You shouldn't lecture people you know nothing about on subjects you know nothing about. Squinch Aug 2016 #204
Just as you shouldn't dismiss legitimate concerns in such a sarcastic manner from people you FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #205
When I see legitimate concerns, I don't dismiss them. Squinch Aug 2016 #206
So you are saying that "free-trade"--Trade agreements as Treaties and all that goes with it, FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #207
My, my. What a big straw man you built for yourself there! Squinch Aug 2016 #208
Only in your mind. FighttheFuture Aug 2016 #209
August is all about the drama Blue_Adept Aug 2016 #24
When ur Cryptoad Aug 2016 #25
Post removed Post removed Aug 2016 #26
Hillary has been running solely on issues. KMOD Aug 2016 #29
Uhm, if you say so. cleanhippie Aug 2016 #30
I like smilies, too KMOD Aug 2016 #34
Are you really interested? She's been speaking on issues all along. misterhighwasted Aug 2016 #40
I also say so. Hillary's a notorious policy wonk Hortensis Aug 2016 #51
This is exactly why I've always liked her. xmas74 Aug 2016 #174
Me too, 100%. Despite the criticism some are trying to make stick, Hortensis Aug 2016 #175
I like being bored, just a bit, xmas74 Aug 2016 #178
Yes. She gave a talk at Stanford about counterterrorism Hortensis Aug 2016 #179
Uhm, if you actually listened to the candidate. Jakes Progress Aug 2016 #61
Yeah, to those who don't hate her to the point of not paying a bit of attention you can see she's... uponit7771 Aug 2016 #111
Issues are secondary ......stop trump is primary.... beachbumbob Aug 2016 #27
So why not post an OP about issues? cwydro Aug 2016 #31
I was wondering the same thing Andy823 Aug 2016 #65
True dat. cwydro Aug 2016 #81
Those pesky others! Squinch Aug 2016 #189
That's why I included the Medicare thing. Opting in at 55, and providing a public option are huge! grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #92
That's your policy discussion? Squinch Aug 2016 #190
Because the real motive behind this call for "discussion of the issues" was to push for Squinch Aug 2016 #188
The media loves the Trump slow motion train wreck for higher ratings than issues. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2016 #33
If you don't think Clinton is discussing issues you aren't watching/reading the same news others are George II Aug 2016 #35
Exactly. DawgHouse Aug 2016 #42
+1 uponit7771 Aug 2016 #112
No, I noticed no such thing DFW Aug 2016 #36
That the media prefers to focus on Trump's dumbfuckery TacoD Aug 2016 #37
That train left a LONG TIME AGO davidn3600 Aug 2016 #38
I, and millions of others are voting KMOD Aug 2016 #43
I will also be voting with great satisfaction FOR Hillary, FOR progress. Bongo Prophet Aug 2016 #80
Indeed. KMOD Aug 2016 #82
100% WRONG. For millions it's ALL about issues. Hortensis Aug 2016 #74
Nope. Squinch Aug 2016 #191
No, it's exactly the same as when Sanders was in the race, issues-wise oberliner Aug 2016 #39
No, 45 talks about issues all the time. DawgHouse Aug 2016 #41
I see what you did there! ;) Liberal_Stalwart71 Aug 2016 #152
Heh heh Squinch Aug 2016 #192
I see a lot fewer "Hillary's gonna get indicted" threads. JoePhilly Aug 2016 #45
Amen Grassy Knoll Aug 2016 #57
Well there does remain a...miasma...of "concern" ismnotwasm Aug 2016 #64
Yea ... but most of those are pretty weak and transparent. JoePhilly Aug 2016 #68
Me too ismnotwasm Aug 2016 #69
Its nice to have DU supporting Democrats again. JoePhilly Aug 2016 #71
So true ismnotwasm Aug 2016 #162
Thank god. No way Washington will indict Clinton. Last time I saw Christie and Hillary, grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #93
How are those two facts related? Is that you talking about issues? Squinch Aug 2016 #193
That and "Just you wait until CA!!11" Starry Messenger Aug 2016 #109
+1 uponit7771 Aug 2016 #114
No. Just less flame fests. And I don't miss that shit. SunSeeker Aug 2016 #50
So many issues discussed in this thread alone... think Aug 2016 #52
Without the primary, I see a lot less arguing and much more discussion on DU. MichiganVote Aug 2016 #54
It takes at least two to have a conversation. alfredo Aug 2016 #55
No etherealtruth Aug 2016 #56
As those of us familiar with Warhammer and Eldrad of Ulthwe like to say... Shandris Aug 2016 #58
Churn, churn, churn. Jakes Progress Aug 2016 #60
Now now, there have been plenty of posts about the important issue of BS buying a new vacation home CBGLuthier Aug 2016 #62
No. ismnotwasm Aug 2016 #63
Issue threads sink like a rock. NCTraveler Aug 2016 #66
Lots of education issues addressed. Thanks, NCtraveler. Hortensis Aug 2016 #88
OMG. 3 recs. We can do better, surely. grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #97
Talking issues right now GulfCoast66 Aug 2016 #70
A Trump noise problem not a Sanders or Hillary problem... in the media NotHardly Aug 2016 #72
Issues here? No. GD16 has rarely discussed issues. nt riderinthestorm Aug 2016 #73
I second that motion but we may as well hold our breath. nt Doremus Aug 2016 #77
I believe this post is about DU, not the media. That Guy 888 Aug 2016 #86
Post removed Post removed Aug 2016 #91
Just hoping this will lead to more policy posts.... grahamhgreen Aug 2016 #94
Ain't gonna happen. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2016 #96
Well, that explains ornotna Aug 2016 #108
One not need to go off their own lake R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2016 #113
So very, very true. ismnotwasm Aug 2016 #163
. Squinch Aug 2016 #194
As expected. nt LWolf Aug 2016 #106
Lol. No, I haven't noticed such things but given that Donald trump La Lioness Priyanka Aug 2016 #117
Nope. johnp3907 Aug 2016 #118
We have regressed into the Batshit Crazy vs. Emails portion of the election season. Vinca Aug 2016 #119
Yes. CentralMass Aug 2016 #120
No. betsuni Aug 2016 #121
No. Loki Aug 2016 #122
What do you think they speak about on the campaign stops and town halls? IronLionZion Aug 2016 #123
No. But maybe it feels that way to some because the main "issue" was R B Garr Aug 2016 #124
It's hard to talk issues when there's a clown on stage lighting his farts on fire & smearing poop on Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #125
There is only ONE issue now lapfog_1 Aug 2016 #126
When the nazis are kicking down your door workinclasszero Aug 2016 #127
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ <- yes, 'issues' detail seem to be missing from this link Sunlei Aug 2016 #128
It's still there. Click on "Health" TwilightZone Aug 2016 #132
Thanks, when I click the word 'issues' on the website, no detail of issues shows anymore Sunlei Aug 2016 #137
"Issues" just takes one to the main issues page. TwilightZone Aug 2016 #139
Thanks, the top menu link issues- https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ Sunlei Aug 2016 #143
It's Hillary's fault that the Corporate Media Liberal_Stalwart71 Aug 2016 #129
Nope. What I noticed is detailed policy speeches by Clinton being overshadowed by the latest... Nitram Aug 2016 #130
No 66 dmhlt Aug 2016 #131
Are you saying that there is no discussion here on Hillary's issues? ehrnst Aug 2016 #136
Anyone can bring up issues in an original post. MineralMan Aug 2016 #140
Yes. It's very odd, isn't it? If he wanted to discuss issues, why does't he discuss issues? Squinch Aug 2016 #201
Absolutely have. zentrum Aug 2016 #141
What does that even mean? I guess you haven't watched any of HRC's speeches, lately? MADem Aug 2016 #145
It means "all DU'ers are stupid low information voters except fo me" emulatorloo Aug 2016 #147
Mmmm hmmm! nt MADem Aug 2016 #148
Exactly! Also: "YOU PEOPLE never talk about important issues! To show how bad that is, I'll talk Squinch Aug 2016 #195
+1. Agreed, and "thinly-veiled" is being kind. R B Garr Aug 2016 #155
HRC just NOW gave a wonderful speech where she talked about increasing wages MADem Aug 2016 #166
No. But thanks for stirring the pot. emulatorloo Aug 2016 #146
+1, I wonder if I started a thread entitled, "Isn't it great Bernie Sanders is gone R B Garr Aug 2016 #154
Very good question. Squinch Aug 2016 #196
It would be like fireworks: a brief, beautiful burst of light, then nothing. betsuni Aug 2016 #199
The primaries are over. nt Lisa0825 Aug 2016 #153
I've noticed fewer posts linking to HA Goodman. (That's good, right?) NurseJackie Aug 2016 #156
Is this an OP to bring up a false narritive? Almost everyday there is posts here linking still_one Aug 2016 #157
Definitely noticeable. egduj Aug 2016 #158
I already know where Hillary stands on the issues. Gamecock Lefty Aug 2016 #159
She is giving a major economic speech today, which will include tuition free college, et. I wonder still_one Aug 2016 #161
No. sheshe2 Aug 2016 #160
We don't need anything to divide the HRC and BS primary supporters obamanut2012 Aug 2016 #165
The media coverage is shaped by the nature of the contest they're covering. Jim Lane Aug 2016 #167
Well, Trump's idiocy has sucked all the air out of the room. alarimer Aug 2016 #170
No. WhiteTara Aug 2016 #176
It's getting pretty bad. This morning I had a post hidden for asking questions. B Calm Aug 2016 #177
NO I didn't. Demsrule86 Aug 2016 #180

CaliforniaPeggy

(148,873 posts)
1. Now that you mention it, my dear grahamhgreen...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 02:51 PM
Aug 2016

I had not noticed it.

But you're right. I would love to see more posts on those topics too.

But Trump is such an easy target.........and most of us would rather gossip.

It is a shame.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
28. So talk issues. Or just listen to Hillary's speeches on many issues.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:01 PM
Aug 2016

Both these posts, this whole thread!, are wasted opportunities by that standard.

Hillary addresses issues, usually local and regional, every single day. Perhaps you've only been listening to what the press chooses to show, the stuff you're complaining about in fact. You know how they do, but what are you listening to that you're missing all the discussion of issues? Everyone listening to her realizes very quickly why she's called a policy wonk.

As for DU, just pick one. How about discussing the issue of federal funding and organization to combat infectious diseases which know no state boundaries and will be spreading? Such as Zika? Hillary spoke on that just yesterday. The Republican House is holding up funding, of course. Should Democrats pass the House's bill with the restrictions on Planned Parenthood because containing Zika is the most important issue right now?

A bunch of issues there. How about states' rights versus federal power? The conservative desire to shrink government and federal taxation, thus federal assistance to states? God's role in plagues and the different party views on that? Climate change and spread of tropical diseases. Why the Republicans want to eliminate the National Institutes of Health? The role of hypocrisy in partisan politics? (Could partisanship survive without it?)

President Barack Obama has said he would veto the measure with the Planned Parenthood restrictions. But top Republicans have not relented either, and have increasingly put more pressure on Democrats to back off their blockade of the Zika measure, which has already passed the House.

“We would love for Sen. Kaine and others to end that filibuster and pass the bill, but it doesn’t sound like they’re prepared to do that,” said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), referring to Clinton’s running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia. Apparently they believe an earmark for Planned Parenthood in the future is more important than preventing the threat of Zika now.”

Still, Clinton is demanding that Congress pass a separate, $1.1 billion Zika measure that the Senate cleared earlier this year with nearly 90 votes, or a new funding bill that was “free of politics,” according to a Clinton campaign aide.

The Zika virus is “one of the canaries in the mine,” Clinton said at the Miami health center, and she added that it’s a test in how the government and the public deals with an epidemic because “diseases are going to find their way here” given the rise in global travel and climate change.
During her tour of the clinic, Clinton asked doctors and others about who’s getting tested for Zika and what challenges they face in treating the fast-growing virus. She also noted that she has sent two campaign aides to Puerto Rico, another locale affected significantly by the Zika virus, for what she billed a “fact-finding mission.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/clinton-congress-reconvene-zika-226821#ixzz4Gxwd07gm



Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
46. Umhm. It's 100% our own choice to miss or focus on issues.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:39 PM
Aug 2016

All Hillary's speeches are on line and available to all.

Of course not all will be interested in her plans to make it much easier for small business owners to meet differing tax requirements in different locations, but for some it's of compelling interest.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
49. Oh, mine too, George. :)
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:44 PM
Aug 2016

I love having a policy wonk to vote for who's famous for boring audiences with nothing but talk of serious issues. But not everyone feels that way.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
182. So here is the problem of an ebarrassment of riches: she has such detailed plans and policy
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:43 PM
Aug 2016

positions, and they have been posted and available for months. Since very early in the campaign.

So where other politicians are working things out and then putting them up for public review, they get press for that. She doesn't, because her stuff has been up and available for public review since early in the primary.

The fact that people mistake that preparedness and lack of drama for her not having policies or well publicized positions is very sad.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
200. Sad for sure, Squinch. The TV news does very little discussion
Sat Aug 13, 2016, 06:29 AM
Aug 2016

of issues for anyone, though. Both Trump's and Clinton's economic plan speeches were addressed mainly in terms of the criticisms each made of the other. Sad all right!

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
48. Graham, how about HRC's $275 B plan for new roads
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:42 PM
Aug 2016

and bridges, and the jobs that'll create? We could discuss that.

Here's an article that includes that and many other issues addressed in Hillary Clinton's 'Family First' economic plan explained. http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/10/news/economy/hillary-clinton-economy/

Poincare

(11 posts)
76. You mean the Infrastructure bank plan
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:50 PM
Aug 2016

That privatizes public infrastructure by giving banks the option to go in halvsies with any generated proceeds. We used to issue bonds and pay for the stuff, wholly owned by the commons. Her plan is just another take on socialize the losses and privatize the gains. Besides the IEEE has put our modernization cost at 6 Trillion dollars. We have virtually zero percent for borrowing costs and we have to cry poor mouth to pay for it. Yeah plenty of money for the war machine, plenty for our wall street casinos, but bupkus for the people who have to live and die with outdated and decrepit infrastructure. Let me tell you something. Our insurance industry is starving for safe low risk investments aka government bonds. The losses are starting to catch up and if things keep going the way they are, your premiums for any risk management policy are going to skyrocket. Metlife just posted a 2 Billion dollar loss, because they couldn't hold out any longer. The deflationary economy is coming if something doesn't change with our moronic governance.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
78. No, that's not what I mean. People who go to college
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:53 PM
Aug 2016

are taught to vet all sources used for papers for honesty and reliability. The reason for that had only a passing focus on not getting our papers handed back with failing grades. We were being taught the importance of using honest, unbiased sources.

But, on the issue of privatization, Hillary intends to put an end to the private, for-profit prison industry. Would you like to discuss that issue, Poincare?

Grahamhgreen? Want to discuss the issue of prison reform?

saidsimplesimon

(7,888 posts)
168. No President has
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 02:37 PM
Aug 2016

the authority to fund infrastructure. It is nice that Mrs. Clinton expresses her support. Without the US Congress and State legislators, nothing will come of it. "The answer my friends is blowing in the wind."

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
171. Too true to a large degree. Without presidential leadership,
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 06:40 PM
Aug 2016

it won't happen either. We're electing a president who intends to make it happen if she can, as well as democratic legislators who want to make it happen.

As opposed to someone who'll build a road if they make it yoooge and name it after him and legislators who are committed to lowering taxes for the wealthy and opening public lands to profiteering.

Don't forget to take friends out to vote and dinner.

 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
95. Well, my dear Califirnia Peggy...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:47 PM
Aug 2016

Great minds discuss ideas;
average minds discuss events;
small minds discuss people.

~Eleanor Roosevelt

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
138. Not on ideas or events, however.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:21 AM
Aug 2016

And the OP and initial response were complaining about the behavior, extremely inaccurately, I might add, of a person who is not Bernie Sanders. NOT discussing ideas or events.

Do YOU have an issue you would like to discuss?

 

Vattel

(9,289 posts)
2. I crave serious discussion about what to do about ISIL
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 02:53 PM
Aug 2016

(especially because I have a looming deadline for an article on that topic).

Gaytheist212

(5 posts)
142. Well...
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 10:09 AM
Aug 2016

One of the things that has gotten lost in this election is how HRC and the Russian Foreign Minister signed a political solution to the civil war in Syria. It was Kofi Annan's plan and, because of Russia's relationship with Syria and our being onboard with it, there was international momentum to put it in place. Alas, Obama was caught on a hot mic talking to Putin making promises of easier political dealings after the 2012 election. Well, he started getting hammered over being too soft on Russia and Obama pulled the agreement Hillary signed. Now, we have what we have there: a total humanitarian crisis and worse instability in the region.

As for now, things with Russia have to change. Putin has dug himself in, he now wants to keep Assad whereas he was once willing to toss him aside because he views Syria as his toehold in the Middle East and it is a "stick it to the west" thing. There is no resolving ISIS without resolving the Syrian civil war. Assad can only stay in power with Putin's money and weapons. There needs to be a no-fly zone over Syria. First of all, it would allow civilians to get out of cities where they are sitting ducks. Secondly, it deprives Assad of air superiority which weakens him greatly. Would Russia tempt fate and see if NATO would shoot one of his planes out of the sky? I doubt it because he has no credible way of retaliating if the plane got shot down. What did he do when Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet? He did nothing because he certainly couldn't attack Turkey because it is a member of NATO. I don't even think he'd let it get to the point where HRC moved to put one in place because his cessation of bombing would be a humiliation too. He might be given the choice to save face, make himself look like a power player, and help broker a political solution to Assad before HRC moves ahead to implement a No Fly Zone. Without Putin, Assad has nothing.

As for Iraq, this is a situation of taking territory back bit by bit. Honestly, the problem with ISIS in Iraq isn't so much fighting them now because it is clear that when faced with actual force and conventional warfare, they break easily. The real problem in Iraq is what happens after ISIS. The people fighting on the same side to defeat ISIS have completely differing political agendas than ours. The Kurds are fighting them because they don't want to be exterminated and they will most certainly want their own state when this is over. That will not go down well. Almost everyone in the region, especially Turkey, will fight this tooth and nail. I happen to believe that the US must stand by them and broker a decommissioning of its rebel/terrorist groups on those grounds. A Kurdistan would be just and possibly stabilizing state.

While that is happening, there are political issues in Iraq which make it ripe for sectarian uprisings and militia groups. Sunni members of Iraqi society must be given and feel they have an equal shot and stake in the country. ISIS didn't just roll up and kidnap everyone. They were welcomed by a great extent by Sunnis in Iraq who were marginalized and abused by the Shi'a dominated government. How one resolves the religious blood feud surrounding these religious sects is beyond me. The hatred is based on genuine religious fanaticism, literal tribalism, and Iraq will continue to be a cite for a proxy war between Iran and the Sunni states.

Saudi Arabia continues to spread salafism via military attacks on Yemen (which we support), madrasahs, and financial incentives. As they see their influence with us wane and get insecure about any rehabilitation of our relationship with Iran, they may feel emboldened or angered to meddle in Iraq directly or proxy states in the Gulf. Then there's the fact that the Sunni states hate Iran and would be inclined to interfere via terrorism with another Shi'a dominated state. No, there won't be an ISIS style machine taking over cities, towns, and regions in Iraq, but sectarian violence will persist in some form.

As for ISIS attacks in the West, this is just ISIS lashing out because it no longer can put videos up of them rolling through cities in Iraq and Syria. They are losing badly in their so-called caliphate and are actively discouraging their followers from coming there. They are telling people who might be influenced by them that random attacks in the West are now more "blessed" than the previously more blessed mission to fighting in Syria and Iraq. They are essentially taking victories where they can get them by exploiting vulnerabilities in Europe, be it societal or intelligence.

Europe seems incapable of learning the lesson we learned after 9/11: intelligence sharing between agencies is vital to stopping attacks. Belgium's state intelligence apparatus are a complete joke and the state itself doesn't function well. But, Europol is a mess. There needs to be actual real time intelligence sharing between all member states of the EU. The EU functions as a single state in many ways, but not in intelligence sharing. If they had streamlined intelligence sharing not hampered by national borders, a few of the deadlier attacks could have been disrupted. This is a major problem. And, they don't seem to understand that certain prison populations need to be segregated. Almost all of the European nationals who've been ISIS inspired attackers have been involved in petty crime and radicalized in jail only to recruit others. Of course there is the abject failure of European states to integrate the second generation immigrants of people from former colonies or colonized states. I know Europeans like to deny they have a race problem, but they do. The issue on integration of second generation immigrants and opening up opportunities is an issue I'm not prepared to address.

These are a few ideas and issues surrounding ISIS and the Middle East. I am sure Donald Trump is equipped to know, understand, and tackle.

 

Vattel

(9,289 posts)
172. Thanks for the post of the month in terms of serious discussion.
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 05:14 AM
Aug 2016

Puzzled by the last sentence though. Were you being sarcastic?

 

Vattel

(9,289 posts)
173. I agree about the Kurds.
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 05:48 AM
Aug 2016

We have to draw a line there and be willing to do whatever is necessary and just to defend them. I believe that they have a right to secede, and I hope they do so.

It is tempting to think that Biden's old three-state solution to Iraq is the only feasible way to address Iraq's problems. But whereas an independent Kurdistan seems doable, I have no idea how an independent Sunni state could be brokered. If Sunnis and Shi'a in Iraq must live together under a single government, maybe a new constitution is in order, one that would be less majority-rule because it would require more power-sharing between the two groups. As long as you have majority rule and the majority is Shi'a, it is hard to see how Sunnis won't end up being on the losing end of the stick.

As for Syria, I don't see how getting rid of Assad helps anything. Stability and gradual movement towards reform seems to me to be a better approach, but I welcome being schooled on this point.

Bob Buttons

(51 posts)
75. In the news? I totally agree.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:47 PM
Aug 2016

In the news, for sure, that's the case. But as long as the news we're consuming is funded by ads, and as long as ad revenue is affected by number of views, we'll wind up having ratings-driven reporting. One reason I like the subscription model for news, since it shifts the focus away from clickbait and toward quality content. (Sometimes.)

Moonwalk

(2,322 posts)
164. I'm confused. How serious a problem is this? I mean, really....
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 01:20 PM
Aug 2016

...I not trying to be flippant here, but I just don't understand the implied alarm or discomfort with what seems to me to be a reasonable thing. We have to win this election. And so we have to pay attention, for now and the next 90 days, to what Trump is doing and saying. He IS the republican candidate. And we did the same when Obama was up against McCain and then Romney. I didn't see anyone fretting that we weren't discussing issues back then--not when we were all shocked by Romney's "percent" remark.

So, why does this focus on the republican candidate and what he's saying (and what he would likely do if elected) lead you to the assumption that we aren't discussing issues, and/or will not discuss issues 90 days from now? Why do you believe without Bernie Sanders we've somehow lost our way and can't return to discussing issues until and unless he comes back?

I want to understand. Please explain.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
8. Well, today in Iowa she was talking about . . .
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:08 PM
Aug 2016

According to the synopsis at Daily Kos, Clinton talked about jobs, boosting small businesses, raising the minimum wage, the salutary effects of her economic proposals, and how as a nation we're stronger together.

So yeah, nothing about issues at all. At least, that's what we'll get from any reports the popular media may deign to file about her appearance.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
183. But it wasn't out of BS's mouth, so our friend graham didn't hear it.
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:48 PM
Aug 2016

Hillary's voice is too high for some people to hear.

procon

(15,805 posts)
6. What is the correlation with Sanders you're referring to?
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:06 PM
Aug 2016

Do you want more discussions about Sanders, or are you saying Sanders was the motivation for most discussions on DU, or it's something altogether different? I'm stumped; this thread could have opened the dialog you pine for, but instead, you're just as focused on Trump as everyone else, which is certainly appropriate given today's news.

stopbush

(24,311 posts)
7. What needs to be discussed?
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:06 PM
Aug 2016

The platform is written, the conventions are over. The Ds spent 4 days laying out their platform and giving people a reason to vote for them. Sanders had unprecedented input into the platform. Hillary, Tim and their surrogates are on the hustings delivering the message of the platform to diverse groups of voters.

DU is behind our nominee and the platform. There is other work to be done that's more important than reaffirming what we've already affirmed. That work is centered on solidifying and expanding the base of people who will vote for Ds in the fall.

We're in the silly season that always precedes the debates. The debates usually center on issues (not a guarantee this year). That's the next opportunity for the issues to be discussed.

It has nothing to do with Sanders being out of the limelight. It's what happens every election cycle.

Just because you're unaware of what's going on doesn't mean it isn't happening.

 

Ghost Dog

(16,881 posts)
85. The 'platform', a stepping-stone, gets jettisoned,
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:36 PM
Aug 2016

rest assured, once election consumated. It's not a problem.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
98. Sounds like you assume it's jettisoned already, Ghost Dog.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:57 PM
Aug 2016

Oh, I see you're from the Canary Islands. What issues are you involved in there, aside from climate crises, of course?

Have you checked the party platform against our nominee's own issues statements, btw? I haven't, but I know there's tremendous overlap.

 

Ghost Dog

(16,881 posts)
102. Vital issues.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 07:07 PM
Aug 2016

My point is that politicians, everywhere, tend to proceed as follows:

1. Elections! Say/ do whatever it takes to obtain power;
2. Now I'm in power. Completely different ballgame...

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
105. Reality is that almost always politicians can
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 07:21 PM
Aug 2016

only hope to accomplish part of what they want. Sometimes a very small part. Plus, they usually can't be at all sure ahead of time just what is going to be possible or to what degree and what's going to turn out to require far too much sacrifice of other goals.

Will we get control of the Senate? Or only a majority. Or not even that? How many House seats will we gain, and how will the Republican half's shrinkage affect their willingness to cooperate in order to get what they want? What new leaders and power blocs will emerge in and out of government? How about all the state offices that would come into play for certain goals? Or not? How about future judicial decisions that will make all the difference to some issues?

How about the effect of natural disasters on each possible goal? Terrorist acts? International economic crises?

These are not things we knew while we were choosing our candidate and making up our platform.

Nevertheless, taking a stand and putting all the desired and possibly achievable goals on the table not only has value in itself by saying this is who we are and what we want for our nation, but it is usually a very helpful and often just plain necessary step if they are to be pursued.

Oh, and let's not forget 2018, when half the people claiming to be concerned now and the facile cynics may not bother to vote and we'll be at risk of losing everything we might have gained in this election. That little reality will have a profound effect on what our political capital is expended on and when.

Johnyawl

(3,205 posts)
17. of course not, the legislature is not in session at the moment
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:38 PM
Aug 2016

plus the republicans still hold the majority, so it wouldn't do any good anyway
 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
84. Cmon, wouldn't take more than a day...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:33 PM
Aug 2016

Be it resolved the Medicare eligibility age is hereby reduced to 55.

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
87. Allows buy in at 62. But this is great! Will show it around. Would love to have updated version.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:37 PM
Aug 2016

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
83. Hillary HAS committed to lowering the Medicare age
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:30 PM
Aug 2016

for certain groups. As a candidate, of course. She is not currently a legislator.

Would you like to discuss that, Grahamhgreen, or read Hillary's thoughts on it? Her proposal is called "Medicare for More." There are plenty of issues in that one topic alone. Nothing's free, after all, but there is a large group between 50 and 65 who are doing too well to qualify for Medicaid but not well enough to afford insurance without an employer contribution.



Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
99. Bernie's plan was called "Medicare for All," and
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 07:00 PM
Aug 2016

I still want to work toward that. Talk of Joe Lieberman today reminded me that his opposition was THE one crucial vote that kept us from taking healthcare reform in that direction. He'd agreed to a public option, an expansion of Medicare, and a plan had already been developed for that, and then he changed his mind.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
22. And, quite frankly
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:49 PM
Aug 2016

The tighter we can tie the Trump millstone around the necks of the Republican party, the better chance we have to re-take at least one chamber of Congress, and actually see some of the Democratic platform accomplished. We can talk issues until we're blue in the face between now and November, but if the GOP holds the House and Senate, it'll just be wasted breath, since they will stonewall any agenda of a Clinton White House.

Fla Dem

(23,144 posts)
116. Yes, I don't understand why more people don't understand that dynamic.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 10:19 PM
Aug 2016

Without congressional support; senate and house, it will be very difficult to pass major legislation. I'm hoping the Trump shipwreck will move some RWer's to compromise more than they have done for the past 8 years.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
32. Now that you mention it ...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:08 PM
Aug 2016

... that's right. But, speaking from experience, whenever you buy a new house, that always takes up a lot of time.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
151. He's buying his $600,000 house; can't be too focused on issues right now.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 10:55 AM
Aug 2016

Again, though, I don't understand this thread.

Just because the OP doesn't see HRC on the T.V. doesn't mean that she's not discussing issues.

This thread is ridiculous.

And the primaries are OVER! Looks like some people still can't get over it.

eleny

(46,166 posts)
10. I see your point but Trump's lunacy would still prevail in the news
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:10 PM
Aug 2016

Bernie would be valiant in trying to keep things on track. But he'd be fighting off "commie" smearing from now until election day. Trump would find a new high gear.

misterhighwasted

(9,148 posts)
11. Some have borrowed her platform & some have called for her murder.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:13 PM
Aug 2016

But the obvious common thing they have all done is to censor her message.

Because Hillary Clinton's 2016 message knocks all the loser candidates outta the ball park.

None hold a candle to her strength, her intellect, her experience nor her compassion.

Without slandering her character they have nothing.
Without censoring her message they would never have lasted as long as they did.

Which is why she abandoned the Press and big rallies and simply took her campaign directly to the people who waited to hear from this bright & accomplished woman.

And it worked beautifully.

eissa

(4,238 posts)
13. It's hard to stick to the issues when one candidate
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:25 PM
Aug 2016

continues to make one bizarre move after another. Our media would rather cover the continuous garbage coming out of his mouth, than anything relevant the Clinton campaign is doing.

Tarheel_Dem

(31,188 posts)
14. If it's really true that you want to actually hear what the candidate is saying, you certainly.....
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:27 PM
Aug 2016

have other options. DU is a hodge-podge of discussions. People post direct links to Hillary's rallies all the time, and they usually drop like a stone. So, if discussion is your true intent, there's no excuse for not being informed. And on that subject, I don't remember DU being a bastion of real discussion during the primaries either. It was a contest, just like it is now.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
185. Also, Hillary's policy positions and plans have been available to the public for the better
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:54 PM
Aug 2016

part of a year. And they are detailed and comprehensive.

If there is something the poster wanted to discuss, I wonder why he didn't discuss it.

This crediting Sanders for everything is obnoxious and dumb.

TomCADem

(17,354 posts)
18. False Premise. With Sanders, Media Focused on the Math
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:38 PM
Aug 2016

No difference. Hillary gave a speech about her economic proposals today, but all the focus is on Trump's request that some 2nd Amendment supporter take her out.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
186. Why don't you start a thread on that speech, since you want to discuss policy?
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:56 PM
Aug 2016

Or does it not count if you haven't heard it in some kind of BS context?

 

rufus dog

(8,419 posts)
19. And the powers that be win again
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:38 PM
Aug 2016

At the beginning of the year I posted why I supported Sanders. He has a unique ability to always turn the discussion back to the issues at hand. Most of us go for the tit for tat! With Trump the media can now just cover the circus and the he said/she said.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511279878

Moonwalk

(2,322 posts)
53. I'm confused. Are you saying that the focus here on Trump rather than issues...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:55 PM
Aug 2016

...wouldn't be happening if Sanders was the Dem candidate? Cause I really, really, REALLY don't believe for one second that the situation would be any different. With Trump as the other presidential candidate, Sanders wouldn't fuel any more discussion about issues in the media, or any more than what there is here than Hillary. It's pretty hard to discuss such issues when Trump keeps saying outrageous things that just can't be ignored.

If you meant, on the other hand, that you wish Sanders was still around making policy remarks contrary to those of Hillary that we could discuss here...well, I'd kinda sorta rather everyone would keep focused on winning the election first. If we can get through this, swear in Hillary and bid farewell to Trump, then, believe me, discussion of the issues will be back quick smart. No one has ever gone easy on Hillary, and I'm quite sure that, during her swearing in, there will be posts galore here criticizing her choice of pastor (like with Obama, remember?), her speech, cabinet choices, etc. And then there will be even more discussions about her first 100 days and what she'd said she'd get done, but failed to get done and what she should have gotten done...

Just think of us on break like Congress for the moment. We'll get back to our old tit-for-tat on the issues soon enough.

 

rufus dog

(8,419 posts)
67. I think the media is always looking for the diversion
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:33 PM
Aug 2016

And no matter who was running, Trump would get the attention.

Does the media do it on purpose or do Americans have such short attentions spans that they want to be entertained. I think a bit of both, but it is damn surely destructive.

At this point I think the objective needs to switch to taking out as many Republicans as possible so Hillary has a Dem Senate and a potentially a more sane House. Although I believe the pubs will not learn and continue to obstruct.

Moonwalk

(2,322 posts)
100. I don't disagree that it's destructive, but let's be real here...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 07:02 PM
Aug 2016

...if you got back to Jefferson vs. Adams, and read what one side said to the other in the newspapers (through surrogates, as it was considered uncouth for those running to attack each other personally), you'll find the back-and-forth letters remarkably like internet trolling--including being under pseudonyms! And the newspaper essays by one side or the other remarkably like some of the worst, most bias, most vile pundits we have today. Hannity's a cupcake compared to some of the late 18th, early 19th century commentators.

It was vicious, mean, personal, brutal. And barely at all on the issues vs. "entertaining." Of course, this was a period where fist-fights and, notably, duels weren't uncommon in the congress. Lincoln vs. Douglas debates were watched by picnickers as entertainment. Prior to television, this was drama. So, again, while I agree that the media, for it's first four decades (1960-2000 when Faux news influenced the Gore-Bush election) took elections very seriously and not as mere entertainment...and while I'll totally agree that being entertainment oriented is destructive....We can't really say, I think, that this is all that surprising. I think, alas, taking it seriously and focusing on the issues rather than the entertainment value was actually unique. Viewing it as entertainment seems to have been the norm from the get-go of our nation. We took a break for about thirty years, and have now gone back to what was much more common in the first 200 years of our nationhood.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
187. So you want to focus on the issues at hand, but your post is about someone who isn't even
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:58 PM
Aug 2016

in the race?

Kay.

 

FighttheFuture

(1,313 posts)
23. Well... Trump seems to be discussing them! I hope Hillary is taking notice. That's the
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:55 PM
Aug 2016

real danger. He could con enough dupes to vote for him on Bernie's messages!

 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
135. Trump talks about issues?
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:10 AM
Aug 2016

What bizzaro world do you live in? Hillary has spoken about issues non stop. Trump just insults and denigrates.

 

FighttheFuture

(1,313 posts)
144. I know its hard to believe, but he does occasionally hit on things like free-trade, NAFTA, etc. that
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 10:30 AM
Aug 2016

people do remember. Look it up. I will not waste my time on researching Trump. I just have a good memory and know what I saw in the daily spraying of Agent Orange.

 

FighttheFuture

(1,313 posts)
205. Just as you shouldn't dismiss legitimate concerns in such a sarcastic manner from people you
Mon Aug 15, 2016, 09:11 AM
Aug 2016

know nothing about.

 

FighttheFuture

(1,313 posts)
207. So you are saying that "free-trade"--Trade agreements as Treaties and all that goes with it,
Mon Aug 15, 2016, 09:24 AM
Aug 2016

jobs offshoring, hollowing out of the middle class, etc. are not legitimate concerns?

I stand my be previous statement.

Blue_Adept

(6,378 posts)
24. August is all about the drama
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:55 PM
Aug 2016

Post convention time and the lead-up to debates are pretty much the getting to know you period where the networks try to find drama to create interest. Trump is doing that all by himself.

What are the candidates doing, is the better question. As you can see, they're all hitting the campaign trail and going to meet various groups, rallies, and events, in order to present their case to people directly.

THAT'S where the action is.

If you're waiting for issues to be discussed on TV news, well, you're about 30+ years too late for that.

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
25. When ur
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 03:58 PM
Aug 2016

opponent is self destructing like Hillary's opponent is,,,,, stand back watch with the rest of the world. Now is not the time for policy discussion.

Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

misterhighwasted

(9,148 posts)
40. Are you really interested? She's been speaking on issues all along.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:24 PM
Aug 2016

Here. This site has a whole long list of speeches she's given on all her issues.

https://still4hill.com/
If you scroll to the bottom there are her speeches, on all her issues.

And her well written platform is all there at her website.


There's no reason for anyone to question where she stands. Unless they really aren't interested in the first place.

She had her platform in place when she entered the race.
Not just the what, but the how to get it accomplished.

I can't believe, in a Presidential election people rely on social media & tv news to make their decision for them.
The millions of supporters of her base know where she stands on issues. They took the time to find out.



Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
51. I also say so. Hillary's a notorious policy wonk
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:52 PM
Aug 2016

whose normal mode for years has been talking nothing but issues, problems, possible fixes -- instead of entertaining audiences with trivia. She loves that stuff. You would know that if you knew even a little bit more about her than you apparently do.

xmas74

(29,596 posts)
174. This is exactly why I've always liked her.
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 09:42 AM
Aug 2016

I hate just talk. I prefer a policy wink because I want someone who takes their time, studies the issue from all sides and then develops an evenhanded plan.

It's not a sexy approach but it's what an adult does. The nerd in me, the little girl whom always got far too caught up in every detail, loves what others find boring about her. I don't agree with everything she says and does but I appreciate her thoroughness.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
175. Me too, 100%. Despite the criticism some are trying to make stick,
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 04:25 PM
Aug 2016

she actually spent years running on and on with the policy discussions she loves and resisting pepping up her speeches with more "politician-speak." She was still boring gatherings with too much substance when she ran for the senate in NY.

xmas74

(29,596 posts)
178. I like being bored, just a bit,
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 04:42 PM
Aug 2016

if the boring bits are stock full of details about the issue, what the plan is, why it needs implemented and how to do so. It's smart, nerdy girl, sit in front of the teacher at its best and I love it.

I don't want talk-I want action. I don't want half assed action, either. I want well thought out preparations that include every contingency available. She does just that. I love it.


Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
179. Yes. She gave a talk at Stanford about counterterrorism
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 04:50 PM
Aug 2016

a few months ago, and she's very impressive talking to knowledgeable people about serious topics, a whole different level from the typical campaign speech.

uponit7771

(90,152 posts)
111. Yeah, to those who don't hate her to the point of not paying a bit of attention you can see she's...
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 08:29 PM
Aug 2016

... talking about the issues

Andy823

(11,495 posts)
65. I was wondering the same thing
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:30 PM
Aug 2016

It's not that hard to start a thread on any issue one wants to discuss.

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
92. That's why I included the Medicare thing. Opting in at 55, and providing a public option are huge!
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:43 PM
Aug 2016

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
190. That's your policy discussion?
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 10:05 PM
Aug 2016

You'd probably be able to talk about it much more cogently if you watched some of Hillary's policy speeches, or read some of her very detailed plans and policy positions which have been available to you for the better part of a year.

Maybe if we got Sanders to read them aloud to you you'd be able to acknowledge them?

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
188. Because the real motive behind this call for "discussion of the issues" was to push for
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 10:02 PM
Aug 2016

support for someone who is not even in the race.

Kind of funny when you think of it.

DFW

(53,742 posts)
36. No, I noticed no such thing
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:19 PM
Aug 2016

Maybe some of the media is focusing on Trump because it's so easy. But after all, we haven't stopped thinking about issues, have we? And who said that we are "without Sanders?" He didn't shrivel up disappear, he just joined the effort to defeat Trump when he didn't win the nomination--nothing other than what Hillary did in 2008.

I don't recall him saying "never mind."

TacoD

(581 posts)
37. That the media prefers to focus on Trump's dumbfuckery
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:22 PM
Aug 2016

rather than the issues is not in dispute. That Sanders has anything to do with it is very much so.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
38. That train left a LONG TIME AGO
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:24 PM
Aug 2016

This election isn't about the issues.

Very few people are actually voting FOR someone.....they are voting AGAINST someone.

 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
43. I, and millions of others are voting
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:31 PM
Aug 2016

for Hillary Clinton! And I'm very excited about doing so.

Bongo Prophet

(2,641 posts)
80. I will also be voting with great satisfaction FOR Hillary, FOR progress.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:57 PM
Aug 2016

I love how the OP sets a great example of "discussing the issues" all through this thread.
Be the example you want to see, right?

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
74. 100% WRONG. For millions it's ALL about issues.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:46 PM
Aug 2016

Last edited Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:33 PM - Edit history (1)

I'm one of them. I don't do exciting movements or follow leaders. I turn on to issues and competence in achieving them and am delighted to have someone to vote for who's spent years studying our problems and developing possible solutions because that's what she loves and what she does best.

If you're not easily bored by issues, you might listen to one of her talks to educated audiences. She can speak for hours at different levels depending on her audience.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
39. No, it's exactly the same as when Sanders was in the race, issues-wise
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:24 PM
Aug 2016

The difference now is that there is less back and forth between Sanders and Clinton supporters attacking each other.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
45. I see a lot fewer "Hillary's gonna get indicted" threads.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:32 PM
Aug 2016

Which drowned out almost everything else for 4 months.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
68. Yea ... but most of those are pretty weak and transparent.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:33 PM
Aug 2016

I'm just happy to notice that many fake Bernie supporters (and they were fake) have moved on to infest other sites.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
71. Its nice to have DU supporting Democrats again.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:41 PM
Aug 2016

TRump and the GOP are incredibly dangerous.

And we now have a chance to break the GOP into pieces ... take the Senate ... make critical gains in the House ... and that should be everyone's focus.

That's the only way we can ever enact the policies we all want.

ismnotwasm

(41,856 posts)
162. So true
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 12:29 PM
Aug 2016

In my state of Washington, we are hoping for a good Dem showing. However, I was just on the Olympic peninsula and saw my first (large) Trump signs, plus support for various republicans. Washington state is very purple in actuality--we can never take the hope of a Democratic congress for granted

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
93. Thank god. No way Washington will indict Clinton. Last time I saw Christie and Hillary,
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:45 PM
Aug 2016

they were hugging

SunSeeker

(51,053 posts)
50. No. Just less flame fests. And I don't miss that shit.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:49 PM
Aug 2016

But if you want to talk about issues, why don't you just post a thread about an issue?


 

MichiganVote

(21,086 posts)
54. Without the primary, I see a lot less arguing and much more discussion on DU.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:57 PM
Aug 2016

Maybe you go to another site and see something different. Nothing stopping you from bringing something up.

alfredo

(60,048 posts)
55. It takes at least two to have a conversation.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 04:57 PM
Aug 2016

She talks issues on the stump.

Trump is self destructing, and Hillary is doing nothing to distracting him from that task.

Jakes Progress

(11,117 posts)
60. Churn, churn, churn.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:22 PM
Aug 2016

Or you could actually listen to the candidate. You know, besides on the sound bite express.

CBGLuthier

(12,723 posts)
62. Now now, there have been plenty of posts about the important issue of BS buying a new vacation home
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:25 PM
Aug 2016

brought to you from the "we will decide when we have kicked him enough" crowd.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
66. Issue threads sink like a rock.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:32 PM
Aug 2016

Most did during the primary as well. I can point you to numerous ops dealing with nothing but issues and you will find very few comments. That isn't something new or Sanders related as you claim.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512353651

GulfCoast66

(11,949 posts)
70. Talking issues right now
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:41 PM
Aug 2016

Would like reading a good book while a freight train crashes outside your kitchen window.

A time for everything. But what we are seeing now is unprecedented and will be discussed 100 years from now.

NotHardly

(1,062 posts)
72. A Trump noise problem not a Sanders or Hillary problem... in the media
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 05:43 PM
Aug 2016

It is hard to get a word in edgewise on the media from the Hillary campaign for the simple reason the noise box that is Trump sucks all the air and space out of the news cycle. Maybe what you'd love to do is post media notes about the coverage of her campaign and what it is doing in the local areas where she is presenting... that would be useful rather than backhanded bashing.

 

That Guy 888

(1,214 posts)
86. I believe this post is about DU, not the media.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:37 PM
Aug 2016

When I clicked on this link there were about 104 posts on the home tab of Democratic Underground.

40 are about trump! That includes 4 out of the 5 posts highlighted in TRENDING NOW, 4 out of the 5 post under GREATEST THREADS concern drumpf. Of the 10 posts under THE LEFT COLUMN, 9 concern drumpf and one concerns the dying gop(The Tim Kaine story is about a letter from a lifelong republican and his concern about…. trump).

3… just 3 are about Nominee Clinton!

Keep in mind that 104 includes all posts, including those under COOL, GREAT READS, PLACES, that don’t necessarily touch on the current election.

While trump is a moron, that doesn't mean that the republicans are going to just lose the House and Senate because of it. I think if anything they're going to cheat more than usual. How about the Clinton's Fifty State Strategy? I see some people talking about GOTV within threads concerning the election, but no threads concerning what DU'ers can do. Anything about republican/tea baggers planning to disrupt polls while "guarding against voter fraud"? Complacency towards republicans will lessen the chances of victory(which do look good if you're a Democrat) and may reduce the margin of victory.

Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

 

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)
96. Ain't gonna happen.
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 06:47 PM
Aug 2016

Great minds discuss ideas;
average minds discuss events;
small minds discuss people.

~Eleanor Roosevelt
 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
117. Lol. No, I haven't noticed such things but given that Donald trump
Wed Aug 10, 2016, 10:21 PM
Aug 2016

Is having a national meltdown people are rightfully worried about the fate of the nation and less about specific policy.

IronLionZion

(44,999 posts)
123. What do you think they speak about on the campaign stops and town halls?
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 06:58 AM
Aug 2016
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/

It's on C-SPAN and youtube if you want to watch Hillary and Tim discuss issues like health care and jobs every day.

Avoid Trump's videos.

R B Garr

(16,829 posts)
124. No. But maybe it feels that way to some because the main "issue" was
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 07:11 AM
Aug 2016

Hillary hating, and now we're focused on the real enemy.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
125. It's hard to talk issues when there's a clown on stage lighting his farts on fire & smearing poop on
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 07:15 AM
Aug 2016

The walls.

lapfog_1

(29,038 posts)
126. There is only ONE issue now
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 07:27 AM
Aug 2016

the overwhelming disqualification for high office ( or any office ) of one demagogue, Donald Trump.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
128. https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ <- yes, 'issues' detail seem to be missing from this link
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 07:33 AM
Aug 2016

The issues including 'healthcare' were there last week. ?

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

TwilightZone

(24,614 posts)
132. It's still there. Click on "Health"
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 08:48 AM
Aug 2016

Then "Healthcare"

Not sure what you're seeing, but it's very easy to find.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
137. Thanks, when I click the word 'issues' on the website, no detail of issues shows anymore
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:17 AM
Aug 2016
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/

Above is the main page of her website. main page was updated/changed a couple times this past week.

Along the top menu-bar is the link word "issues", that link doesn't go to any detail list of issues anymore for me.

perhaps the website works differently for cellphones or the list of 'issue details' is in a different place.

IMO the top menu bar should have the detail list of the main 'issues' very easy to find. perhaps you can find the "55 healthcare detail" and post it here for the OP.

TwilightZone

(24,614 posts)
139. "Issues" just takes one to the main issues page.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:45 AM
Aug 2016

The links for the issue categories are below the picture on that page: All Issues, Economy and Jobs, Education, etc.

Click on any category and you should get sub-categories.

Click on a sub-category and you should get details.

For example, if you click on Health and then Healthcare, you should get this page:

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/

Edit: the item about people over 55 being able to buy into Medicare is in the first bullet point on that page.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
143. Thanks, the top menu link issues- https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 10:19 AM
Aug 2016

"The links for the issue categories are below the picture on that page: All Issues, Economy and Jobs, Education, etc."

I get the main picture, with no "issue categories" below the picture.

But thanks for the link, your link worked fine. https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/

Here is the "over 55" info for the OP

Defend and expand the Affordable Care Act, which covers 20 million people. Hillary will stand up to Republican-led attacks on this landmark law—and build on its success to bring the promise of affordable health care to more people and make a “public option” possible. She will also support letting people over 55 years old buy into Medicare.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
129. It's Hillary's fault that the Corporate Media
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 07:35 AM
Aug 2016

is in love with Donald Trump and won't cover her speeches?

Oh, I see.

THE PRIMARIES ARE OVER!!!!!!

Trashing this stupid thread!

Nitram

(22,522 posts)
130. Nope. What I noticed is detailed policy speeches by Clinton being overshadowed by the latest...
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 08:08 AM
Aug 2016

...Trump outrage. Trump's strategy worked during the primaries, but I believe it is working against him now. Don't worry, as so long as we get out the vote, Trump is just a (very nasty) footnote in our country's history. I don't know why you brought Sanders into this. If he had won the primary he'd be dealing with the same thing. But let's stop re-hashing that, OK?

MineralMan

(146,025 posts)
140. Anyone can bring up issues in an original post.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 09:49 AM
Aug 2016

If that's the discussion you want, I suggest that you post some issues-related OPs. Right now, we're working on lowering Donald Trump's poll numbers, though. Electing Hillary Clinton in November is the goal.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
145. What does that even mean? I guess you haven't watched any of HRC's speeches, lately?
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 10:31 AM
Aug 2016

The primary is over--the bashing should stop, and this thread is a thinly-veiled bash.

We are in General Election mode, and the contest is against an orange moron named Trump.

Squinch

(50,342 posts)
195. Exactly! Also: "YOU PEOPLE never talk about important issues! To show how bad that is, I'll talk
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 10:19 PM
Aug 2016

about someone who hasn't been in the race for months! And then I'll throw out the name of an issue without any discussion of it!"

Such crap...

R B Garr

(16,829 posts)
155. +1. Agreed, and "thinly-veiled" is being kind.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 11:17 AM
Aug 2016

It's a pretty blatant bash, but we can't notice the obvious or posts get removed.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
166. HRC just NOW gave a wonderful speech where she talked about increasing wages
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 01:44 PM
Aug 2016

and creating jobs, among other "issues" at a rally that the cable news covered -- but I guess it's easier to criticize than to listen... or something!

R B Garr

(16,829 posts)
154. +1, I wonder if I started a thread entitled, "Isn't it great Bernie Sanders is gone
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 11:15 AM
Aug 2016

so we can concentrate on real issues instead of personal smears masquerading as "issues" -- I wonder how long that thread would last. Hmmm.

still_one

(91,471 posts)
157. Is this an OP to bring up a false narritive? Almost everyday there is posts here linking
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 11:22 AM
Aug 2016

Last edited Thu Aug 11, 2016, 12:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary's speeches and events which discuss the issues you want to engage

Pick up any paper

Today she will present her economic plan, she has also been talking about reforming student debt, and tuition free college, and a multitude of issues discussed schussed during the primary

Sorry but this is an empty thread, 'full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'

Apologizes to Will Shakespeare

still_one

(91,471 posts)
161. She is giving a major economic speech today, which will include tuition free college, et. I wonder
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 12:24 PM
Aug 2016

if those that seem to feel that there is no discussion of the issues during the primary are even paying attention to what happens everyday on the campaign trail, and what is being talked about

In other words, last time I looked DU member can bring up any topic for discussion.



obamanut2012

(25,828 posts)
165. We don't need anything to divide the HRC and BS primary supporters
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 01:24 PM
Aug 2016

True supporters of BS are endorsing Hillary, and true HRC supporters welcome Bernie supporters.

We are all on the same side, and OPs like this do not help.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
167. The media coverage is shaped by the nature of the contest they're covering.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 02:21 PM
Aug 2016

In the primaries, Sanders made a conscious decision not to go after Clinton's "damn emails" or any of the other personal attacks that might have gained votes. Instead, he focused on their ideological differences. Clinton, expecting to win and not wanting to alienate the Sanders supporters any more than necessary, similarly did little to attack Sanders personally. (Of course, she had less material in the first place. Some of her supporters said Sanders's insensitivity to issues of racial justice was shown by his decision to move from New York to Vermont. I'm sure no one on Clinton's staff thought "Vermontgate" had any legs.) The media covered issues because neither candidate was giving them much else to talk about.

The general election is different. Trump has addressed issues somewhat -- such as his call to repeal Obamacare -- but his focus has been, shall we charitably say, less substantive overall. For Clinton's part, she articulates issue positions, as in the press releases and website pages that numerous posts in this thread have trumpeted. Nevertheless, in terms of winning over the undecideds or persuading Republicans to switch, that's not where the action is. Most of the voters who oppose huge tax cuts for the rich are already supporting Clinton. By contrast, tearing down Trump by attacking his personal lack of qualification for the Presidency promises a much greater reward. On top of that, the media, given the choice, will cover a juicy personal issue (be it "Second Amendment" remedies or Clinton Foundation emails) in preference to somebody's boring five-point plan to rebuild the infrastructure or whatever.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
170. Well, Trump's idiocy has sucked all the air out of the room.
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 02:48 PM
Aug 2016

I don't think this is an issues-based election anymore.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
177. It's getting pretty bad. This morning I had a post hidden for asking questions.
Fri Aug 12, 2016, 04:41 PM
Aug 2016

And it didn't have a damn thing to do with the primary. It was about the Democratic platform!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Anyone else noticed that ...