3. Washington
Image copyrightGetty Images
When asked if they trust the government, 89% of Republicans and 72% of Democrats say "only sometimes" or "never", according to Pew Research. Six out of 10 Americans think the government has too much power, a survey by Gallupsuggests, while the government has been named as the top problem in the US for two years in a row - above issues such as the economy, jobs and immigration, according to the organisation.
The gridlock on Capitol Hill and the perceived impotence of elected officials has led to resentment among 20 to 30% of voters, says polling expert Karlyn Bowman, from the American Enterprise Institute. "People see politicians fighting and things not getting done - plus the responsibilities of Congress have grown significantly since the 1970s and there is simply more to criticise. People feel more distant from their government and sour on it," she says.
William Galston thinks part of the appeal of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders is down to frustration with what some see as a failing system. "So on the right you have someone who is running as a 'strong man', a Berlusconi and Putin, who will get things done, and on the left you have someone who is rejecting incrementalism and calling for a political revolution," he says.
Ted Cruz, who won the Republican caucuses in Iowa, is also running as an anti-establishment candidate. "Tonight is a victory for every American who's watched in dismay as career politicians in Washington in both parties refuse to listen and too often fail to keep their commitments to the people," he said on Monday night.
4. America's place in the world
Image copyrightAFP
America is used to being seen as a superpower but the number of Americans that think the US "stands above all other countries in the world" went from 38% in 2012 to 28% in 2014, Pew Research suggests. Seventy percent of Americans also think the US is losing respect internationally, according to a 2013 poll by the centre.
"For a country that is used to being on top of the world, the last 15 years haven't been great in terms of foreign policy. There's a feeling of having been at war since 9/11 that's never really gone away, a sense America doesn't know what it wants and that things aren't going our way," says Roberto Suro. The rise of China, the failure to defeat the Taliban and the slow progress in the fight against the so-called Islamic State group has contributed to the anxiety.
Americans are also more afraid of the prospect of terrorist attacks than at any time since 9/11, according to a New York Times/CBS poll. The American reaction to the San Bernardino shooting was different to the French reaction to the Paris attacks, says Galston. "Whereas the French rallied around the government, Americans rallied against it. There is an impression that the US government is failing in its most basic obligation to keep country and people safe."
5. Divided nation
Image copyrightiStock
Democrats and Republicans have become more ideologically polarised than ever. The typical (median), Republican is now more conservative in his or her core social, economic and political views than 94% of Democrats, compared with 70% in 1994, according to Pew Research. The median Democrat, meanwhile, is more liberal than 92% of Republicans, up from 64%.
The study also found that the share of Americans with a highly negative view of the opposing party has doubled, and that the animosity is so deep, many would be unhappy if a close relative married someone of a different political persuasion.
This polarisation makes reaching common ground on big issues such as immigration, healthcare and gun control more complicated. The deadlock is, in turn, angering another part of the electorate. "Despite this rise in polarisation in America, a large mass in the middle are pragmatic. They aren't totally disengaged, they don't want to see Washington gridlocked, but they roll their eyes at the nature of this discourse," says Paul Taylor. This group includes a lot of young people and tends to eschew party labels. "If they voted," he says, "they could play an important part of the election."
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
- Status
Ever since the English stole Bryan Adams they're all we've got.
You disgust me! You have Steve feckin Yzerman! The greatest hockey player to ever grace the ice!
I think the only crap answer she gave was the Iraq related question - she admitted she made a mistake (what choice did she have lol!)...but as to why she made the mistake...she kept pinning it on the Bush administration. I get she couldn't say, 'those opposing were being called unpatriotic and no way a career politician like myself is going to make a mistake like that'...but, she could have given a better response.
She played hot potato with the euthanasia question - and that's fair enough...that is a tough, tough question.
She played hot potato with the euthanasia question - and that's fair enough...that is a tough, tough question.
It's a bit sad that Hilary has to drag out poor old Bill on a leash in order to make her seem vaguely palatable to voters.
I've decided that from watching & listening to her for a while now. She panders to whatever room she is speaking to.
Bernie's message remains consistent and is in stark contrast to Hillary.
Not only that...she loves playing the "I'm a woman!" card as well.
Anything to get votes.
Nothing wrong with that.
Cruz - I'm a Christian...praise be to God...hey, everyone, look at me...I'm a Christian.
Obama didn't exactly get out there and say, wait wait...I'm only half black.
"The woman card".
Not like the man card hasn't been in use for, I dunno, some millennia or so.
Not like the man card hasn't been in use for, I dunno, some millennia or so.
How do you feel about her using 9/11 to deflect questions about her large campaign donations from Wall Street?
It was shameful on her behalf.
What was she saying, that she got to having decent relations with Wall Street after being a recently elected New York senator when 9/11 targeted the US financial sector? Shameful, shameful!
She has every right to given that she would be the first woman President.
You must've missed his speech at Liberty University.
It's more that you're bringing up something entirely spurious to smear her character (in fact twice on this page alone, given your annoyance at her saying that she's a woman). She got into office in 2001, so I'd think 9/11 probably did play a fairly big part in how she served her terms. I doubt it played much of a part in her funding from Wall Street, I think that's pretty much going to happen whoever the candidate is in a New York race for public office.You should be a PR agent with that sort of spin you can put on things
Maybe you should stick to presenting the case for Sanders, and not go down the path of a lot of other e-Berners where most of their driving force is their hate for Hillary.
Sanders is the angry old grandpa sputtering the same stuff for the last 30 years. You could call that consistent.
I mean, he never would do anything to please voters when it's again human rationale or his own beliefs. Get all the guns you want people!
The Social issues of same sex marriage and pro choice are not what really matters to Progressive Democratic voters.
Being a Progressive means how much you are for ordinary people as far as thier pocket books are comcerned.
It is not enough to accept the current law with regards to Health care. Covering everyone is not enough. Affordable health care is the key.
Its not enough to say you want to reduce College fees. Quanity how much you are going to reduce such fees to make college affordable.
Being a Progressive means how much you are for ordinary people as far as thier pocket books are comcerned.
It is not enough to accept the current law with regards to Health care. Covering everyone is not enough. Affordable health care is the key.
Its not enough to say you want to reduce College fees. Quanity how much you are going to reduce such fees to make college affordable.
You know that's not what he means. Should Palin say (and according to you, be justified in saying), vote for me because I'd be the 1st woman president?
Bernie has 100% vote ratings from both Planned Parenthood and the Human Rights Campaign. Hillary's figures are 100 and 89. Her public stance on abortion is less liberal than his. She has got both their endorsements. The presidents of both organisations are connected to her campaign via family.
Wow. I mean, it was a weak deflection by her, but she had votes to protect. What are you deflecting for?
She was asked about Wall Street deregulation and lobbying in the context of their shady bullshit which caused the recession. She said that I stood by them on 9/11. In what universe does that answer the question she was asked?
I saw the whole thing.
It was the same message. Income inequality at the centre. He made the case both as he usually does and by quoting a few Bible verses.
He straight-off acknowledged that he would never agree on abortions and gay marriage. He told them that if they wanted to reduce abortions, they should support him since abortions are often correlated with childhood poverty.
Hillary is a "proud progressive" and "proud moderate". That's not the same message.
This is from a paper that endorsed Hillary
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...l-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...l-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/
$675,000 for speaking is quite incredible. Is that a typical fee?
Depends on the profile of the speaker
I've never heard any male candidate, anywhere, claiming some special insight solely by virtue of being 'a man'.
Having been quite closely aligned in the past, socio-political attitudes among men and women have diverged somewhat in recent decades, partly because Western liberalism has succeeded in inserting a wedge between the sexes, as it has done between the races and other groups within society, but much more directly by the effect of divorce and the increase in the number of unmarried adults, which means that women are now statistically more likely to be clients of the state.
Good and bad news for Bernie.
The good (even better than expected): http://www.vox.com/2016/2/3/10904988/bernie-sanders-political-revolution-poll
The bad (the end of his campaign if it holds): https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersFor...ace_in_new_hampshire_is_tightening_according/
The good (even better than expected): http://www.vox.com/2016/2/3/10904988/bernie-sanders-political-revolution-poll
The bad (the end of his campaign if it holds): https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersFor...ace_in_new_hampshire_is_tightening_according/
Of course she'd be justified in saying it, it's factually accurate she'd be the first female President. The point is, there'd be a hell of a lot of other reasons not to vote for her. If you don't think Clinton is worth the vote, fine, just don't complain about her mentioning the fact she'd be the first female President. It's true and worth bringing up. You can still have the opinion the cons outweigh the pros of it.
It was definitely a shit answer, I'll give you that, but shameful is something I expect Fox News to come out with.
Not sure whether it was a coincidence or not but my computer decided to crash as soon as I put that on
Too much Trumping.Nah, throughout her political career she has pandered, taken the route of least resistance, and accepted money from sources that have conflicting interests with those of the people of our country. She is just another slimy politician in a long line of them. Not to say she wouldn't do an adequate job or that our country wouldn't make any progress under her, it wouldn't be very meaningful though.
Last edited:
As opposed to Bernie who promises a good deal, but we have no idea if they are achievable or not? Look at Obama and the number of filibusters he had to face with. I like Bernie Sanders, I like his ideas, but I have no idea if they can be pushed through with US is such a state of polarization between the two parties.
You know that's not what he means. Should Palin say (and according to you, be justified in saying), vote for me because I'd be the 1st woman president?
Bernie has 100% vote ratings from both Planned Parenthood and the Human Rights Campaign. Hillary's figures are 100 and 89. Her public stance on abortion is less liberal than his. She has got both their endorsements. The presidents of both organisations are connected to her campaign via family.
Wow. I mean, it was a weak deflection by her, but she had votes to protect. What are you deflecting for?
She was asked about Wall Street deregulation and lobbying in the context of their shady bullshit which caused the recession. She said that I stood by them on 9/11. In what universe does that answer the question she was asked?
I saw the whole thing.
It was the same message. Income inequality at the centre. He made the case both as he usually does and by quoting a few Bible verses.
He straight-off acknowledged that he would never agree on abortions and gay marriage. He told them that if they wanted to reduce abortions, they should support him since abortions are often correlated with childhood poverty.
Hillary is a "proud progressive" and "proud moderate". That's not the same message.
Thanks berbatrick, you encapsulated that way better than I could have. Some folks here clearly see what they want to see.
Hillary would be better than any GOP'er, but she definitely would be more of the same...nothing will truly change.
She is indeed another slimy politician who will say anything to get a vote. In my eyes, she is the democrat Mitt Romney.
They can if we continue to elect people in other parts of our government that stand for the people first and foremost. I would rather be idealistic, naive, and pursue these great ideas as opposed to being cynical, scared of failure, and okay with settling for less. Settling for less does not mean I am opposed to compromise when necessary which is where Bernie stands as well if you look at his political career.
Even if Sanders has to compromise on a lot of his views/plans, it's probably still better to have someone committed to them in power than someone who isn't, for those who adhere to his views. Especially when it's probably the Democrats best chance to put someone like Sanders up as their candidate and still be likely to win the election.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-ca...efends-bernie-sanders-goldman-sachs-criticism
If she endorses, it would be pretty nice.
If she endorses, it would be pretty nice.
Surely if you liked Warren and was persuadable by her endorsement, you would already like Sanders. This isn't like with the R race where you have a single constituency, say, moderates, being split 4 different ways by reasonably qualified individuals. The ideological battle lines are clear. It's not liberals whom Sanders needs to do better in.
Somewhat of an unrelated ad hominem, for which I apologize, but let's all bear in mind that Warren set herself out as Native American for much of her academic career, presumably for personal advancement through diversity hiring policies, a transparently hypocritical ploy. She's no St. Elizabeth here.
Somewhat of an unrelated ad hominem, for which I apologize, but let's all bear in mind that Warren set herself out as Native American for much of her academic career, presumably for personal advancement through diversity hiring policies, a transparently hypocritical ploy. She's no St. Elizabeth here.
I hadn't even realised it was in doubt who she'd endorse, she was not-so-subtly hinting the other day that certain candidates would face jail time were they not who they were. Why hasn't she endorsed him already?
Bernie and Hillary debate tonight. On MSNBC. 8.00pm Central.
She was apparently intimidated by Hillary into not running. A lot of the people backing her to run then switched to Sanders. Not sure how verifiable that 1st line is though.
And no, no senator has endorsed him. Which is why her endorsement (plus she's a credible anti-Wall Street voice while not using words like socialist) would be big.
Good question. I'd guess an endorsement is like an impact sub - you don't put 36 year old Drogba on in the 15th minute, you save him for the moment he can do the most damage. The logic may be to give an impression of building momentum?
It's clear Rubio did the same with Senator Tim Scott as well, for instance, and Giuliani famously did this with Charlie Crist in 2008 (only to have it backfire on him).
True, just after New Hampshire then you'd think? But as you say, it's a bit like preaching to the converted (some might say the already ordained).
Incidentally, Rubio ticking up heavily in the latest NH and nationwide polls. Looks like it might be finally happening (Trumplosion).
There is a debate on Saturday... I'm sure Trump will attend and I'm sure the insults will fly.
It will be interesting to see if he can still insult / outrage his way to frontrunner status
- Status