NMR: If you watched the debates who did you like?

catsareniice1 · September 2015

I liked John Kasich, Lindsay Graham, Marco Rubio, Jebb Bush, Chris Christie and Carly Fiorina.

Loved Ben Carson and liked Trump initially but not sure they will be strong in foreign affairs.

We need someone strong with the direction this world is going in.

Anyone but Hillary. She would put a nail in the coffin!

hoffse · September 2015

I dislike most of them. I might be able to get behind Carly, but otherwise.... I'm unenthusiastic.

I don't want another Bush OR another Clinton. I'm ready for some of the dynastic families to move on from politics.

Can't stand Donald. I've always thought he was ridiculous, even in the good old realty TV days. Only difference is I could avoid watching him with realty TV. I can't seem to get away from him on the news these days. The whole thing has turned into a circus.

I also tend to vote for different parties at the state level vs. the federal level. I'm pretty moderate, and I really dislike the extremes that both parties attract. I'm fairly progressive on social issues, but I'm also really cheap (I'm guessing most of us on this board are...). With the way the parties line up, those interests conflict.

vlagrl29 · September 2015

If hilary gets in I heard bill would be VP - I think Carly owned the stage that night. I would say she is the only one I liked, but I did agree with a couple of Rand Paul's policies. I'm keeping my mind open this time around. I'm fiscally conservative, but socially moderate.

hoffse · September 2015

vlagrl29 said:

If hilary gets in I heard bill would be VP - I think Carly owned the stage that night. I would say she is the only one I liked, but I did agree with a couple of Rand Paul's policies. I'm keeping my mind open this time around. I'm fiscally conservative, but socially moderate.

I don't think he could be VP under the Constitution, since he served 2 terms as President and the VP must be Constitutionally eligible to be President. The only wrinkle is that the 2-term rule has the word "elect" in it, and in his case he wouldn't move from VP to Pres through an election. Still, I would be surprised if that argument worked.

Obviously none of that has been tested at the Supreme Court, but you better believe there would be a lawsuit if she tried to appoint him as her running mate.

catsareniice1 · September 2015

vlagrl29 said:

If hilary gets in I heard bill would be VP - I think Carly owned the stage that night. I would say she is the only one I liked, but I did agree with a couple of Rand Paul's policies. I'm keeping my mind open this time around. I'm fiscally conservative, but socially moderate.

I agree Carly was amazing! Very smart and serious about the job. Rubio impressed me too. I have a feeling they really care and want to make positive changes. I am also fiscally conservative but socially moderate.

Bill as VP oh hell no! Can't stand the site of the man! He is the definition of War on Women!! lol

Xstatic3333 · September 2015

vlagrl29 said:
If hilary gets in I heard bill would be VP - I think Carly owned the stage that night. I would say she is the only one I liked, but I did agree with a couple of Rand Paul's policies. I'm keeping my mind open this time around. I'm fiscally conservative, but socially moderate.

I think this was said half joking-it would be total suicide if she did this.

I have pretty serious policy differences with all of the GOP candidates as an admitted social liberal. I do sometimes support local GOP candidates who are socially liberal/fiscally conservative, but that just doesn't seem to exist nationally. However, I did enjoy watching the debates and hearing their different perspectives. From a strictly debating standpoint I think Rubio did the best, and I'm surprised he's not polling better. I think Trump would be very bad for this country and strongly disagree with his views on immigration reform.

vlagrl29 · September 2015

We will be watching the DNC debate next month. I was happy to find out that I was able to watch the debate live on the CNN website. I hope they do this again next month for those of us that don't have cable.

Xstatic3333 · September 2015

vlagrl29 said:
We will be watching the DNC debate next month. I was happy to find out that I was able to watch the debate live on the CNN website. I hope they do this again next month for those of us that don't have cable.

Definitely! That was huge. I'm excited for the DNC debate, though I wish there were more serious candidates in the mix. I don't think Hilary is electable at this point. Too unpopular nationally.

catsareniice1 · September 2015

Xstatic3333 said:

We will be watching the DNC debate next month. I was happy to find out that I was able to watch the debate live on the CNN website. I hope they do this again next month for those of us that don't have cable.
Definitely! That was huge. I'm excited for the DNC debate, though I wish there were more serious candidates in the mix. I don't think Hilary is electable at this point. Too unpopular nationally.

No way! She is too corrupt and out of touch. Curious to hear Sanders but I would not elect a socialist. Had enough of that.

als1982 · September 2015

I'm a Democrat, so to keep my blood pressure down, I don't watch the GOP debates.

dragonstarjk · September 2015

LOL, ditto what @als1982 said.

No really though....I don't have TV so I didn't watch the whole debate, but I watched several clips. If I had to choose, I would choose Carly. I disliked Jeb Bush, Lindsey Graham, and Bobby Jindahl. I think Rick Santorum is a good speaker but don't agree with a lot of what he said. I appreciated George Pataki's opinion about Kim Davis. I also liked when Christie called out the others for bickering about themselves instead of talking about the issues.

I don't think I can even dignify the fact that Donald Trump is running for President so I have nothing to say about him.

bparkhur · September 2015

To me, they are all terrible.

Sorry, not much to add.

MommyLiberty5013 · September 2015

I liked Fiorina and Carson as well as Cruz and Christie. Rubio was good too.

catsareniice1 · September 2015

MommyLiberty5013 said:

I liked Fiorina and Carson as well as Cruz and Christie. Rubio was good too.

I forgot about Cruz! Like him as well.

bmo88 · September 2015

Though I am a registered Democrat, I am pretty open to both political parties. That said, the GOP candidates (heck almost all presidential candidates) this year have been way too over the top for me to want to spend time watching them. So, I did not watch the debate.

But it's interesting to hear everyone else opinion!

vlagrl29 · September 2015

Xstatic3333 said:

We will be watching the DNC debate next month. I was happy to find out that I was able to watch the debate live on the CNN website. I hope they do this again next month for those of us that don't have cable.
Definitely! That was huge. I'm excited for the DNC debate, though I wish there were more serious candidates in the mix. I don't think Hilary is electable at this point. Too unpopular nationally.

Honestly if I were to vote democrat this time - it wouldn't be for bernie or hilary - if biden ran i think he would be the best bet.

simplyelise · September 2015

The Dem undercurrents are pointing to Biden running. He'll likely announce with enough time to get in the upcoming DNC debate.

I don't like any of the republicans personally or politically. I'm actually very conservative in my own personal life with my personal decisions, but I'm a liberal voter. DH and I met when we were working for democratic state reps at the state capitol and DH worked on the Claire McCaskill campaign (against Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin), so we're pretty bona fide donkeys.

Mostly I'm just tired of hearing about them all the time. Looking forward to the thinning of the crowd and finding comfort in the fivethirtyeight blog until that happens.

formerlyGDaisy09 · September 2015

Totally agree that the last thing we need is another Bush or Clinton in the white house. I've not watched the debates, I think I'd spend the whole time yelling at the TV.

I'm ready to support a Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren campaign...

Xstatic3333 · September 2015

formerlyGDaisy09 said:
Totally agree that the last thing we need is another Bush or Clinton in the white house. I've not watched the debates, I think I'd spend the whole time yelling at the TV.

I'm ready to support a Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren campaign...

I love the way Bernie is running his campaign, keeping it about the issues and reaching out to audiences (Liberty University) that aren't likely to agree with him and at least making an attempt at finding common ground. I also love his record of getting things done in the Senate. I don't agree with him on everything, but he's really strong on most of my key issues. Hilary, meanwhile, seems more focused on getting celebrity sound bites then advancing a policy agenda. Somehow, however, she shot up in the latest poll. Sigh...

I enjoy following politics in general, despite how frustrating it can be sometimes.

als1982 · September 2015

formerlyGDaisy09 said:
Totally agree that the last thing we need is another Bush or Clinton in the white house. I've not watched the debates, I think I'd spend the whole time yelling at the TV.

I'm ready to support a Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren campaign...

I have a mad girl crush on Elizabeth Warren. As for Bernie, I like the idea of him. But gun control is a big issue for me, and I don't love his libertarian stance in that regard. So between him and Hillary, I'm team Clinton.

hoffse · September 2015

I am increasingly becoming a single-issue voter, which for me is taxes/spending/budget. Many of the candidates haven't presented a cohesive and thought-out tax plan. A few of those who have are proposing things that would require a full overhaul of the tax system. The last full overhaul was in 1986, and all changes since have been in the context of the 1986 plan.

Clinton wants to change the capital gains tax rates and system - in a way that will de-incentivize investing. Her proposal is completely ridiculous, and even some of the left-leaning media outlets have acknowledged that.

Sanders wants to overhaul the estate tax regime (which would bring in far more estates than there are now), and he's on record as saying that a 90%+ marginal income tax rate is reasonable. He also wants to add transfer taxes on financial transactions. So every time you and I buy or sell a stock, Uncle Sam gets a cut for the transaction that just occurred, not just capital gains. Even more concerning, every time a company is bought or sold, that would trigger transaction taxes. The effect? Fewer transactions, not just from individuals but also companies. And transactions, by the way, are a huge source of economic growth.

Then you have Trump. He doesn't have an "official" plan yet, but he's on record from a few years ago proposing a plan that would require a complete and total overhaul of the income tax code. It would eliminate pretty much all deductions and credits and simply be a flat tax based on how much you make. The rates would be progressive, but not marginal. Best of luck to you getting that one passed, given the sheer number of changes.

Or Jeb Bush who wants to double the standard deduction so it drastically reduces the number of people scheduling deductions, including charitable contributions. This would likely have the effect of reducing charitable contributions across the board. He also wants to impose AGI floors on most scheduled deductions, which I'm not fully opposed to, but it winds up penalizing a group of people who live within their means by limiting the mortgage interest deduction. Of all the proposals I've seen, Jeb's seems the most comprehensive and has a reasonable shot of making it through Congress. Doubling the standard deduction is a huge concern for me, however, because of the effect on giving.

And the entire republican party wants to increase spending on defense, without some oversight of costs. Ridiculous.

I'm not married to any one party. I just want to see a tax plan that's not (1) ridiculous, (2) punitive to taxpayers who live within their means and support charities, and (3) un-passable because it requires a full overhaul.

Anybody? Sigh.

Xstatic3333 · September 2015

That was really interesting @hoffse, thanks! I hadn't learned much about the various candidates' tax plans. From what you said, it does look like that may be one area where I differ from the rest of my party.

It sounds like a lot of us have one main issue driving our decisions. Mine is climate change, which will pretty much always land me on the left.

hoffse · September 2015

Yeah I struggle with this because socially I'm pretty liberal. I care about the climate, I'm pro-choice and pro-women's health, I was pro-gay-marriage before it swept through most of the states.

But I also think that if I have to live on a budget, the government should have to also, and that makes me suspicious of entitlement programs.

I'm in favor of a progressive income tax system because the wealthy CAN afford to pay more due to diminishing marginal returns on every extra dollar they make. But I also think that the rallying cry of "increase taxes on the wealthy" and "increase taxes on corporations" needs to be tempered with an understanding of how taxes drive human behavior. Look at the French, for instance. Their tax system is such that at a certain income level you actually make more by NOT working and living off the largess of the government, rather than being gainfully employed. So what do people do? They play bocce all day instead of doing something useful. Many of their high income earners have left the country because it costs them too much to live there. The politicians were surprised when this happened, but they forgot one of the most important things to remember about very wealthy people: when all else fails, they have an escape plan. And they have the financial capacity to actually go through with it. If Bernie got his 90% marginal rate, I think you would see a lot of money leave this country.

I think most of us can agree that taxes serve an important role. And we can also admit that we don't want to be the ones to actually pay. The difficulty is corralling those competing interests and moving toward a tax regime that funds the needed governmental mechanisms without driving away your tax base.

vlagrl29 · September 2015

I also heard bernie would put a cap on incomes. While I may like his ideas I don't want to be taxed to death and broke.

simplyelise · September 2015

I'm actually pretty far away from being a single-issue voter.

I am pro-gay marriage (check)
I am pro-single payer health care (damn you, congress)
I am pro-Common Core (math ed degree from a uni that contributed greatly to the research)
I am pro-life (but of course it gets sticky. I don't like ridiculous restrictions on PP in my state which don't serve to do anything but raise campaign $, I think at the end of the day, my ideal would be comprehensive and mandatory sex education in schools, easy access to free birth control and plan B, and abortions exceptions for rape/incest up to 12 weeks)
I am fairly isolationist in foreign affairs, but I also believe we turn a blind eye from countries in need but that we don't have an economic interest in
I am in favor of a simple path to amnesty for children who were brought to the us
I am in favor of universal requirements for background checks in all sales or transfers of weapons, and wait periods for gun purchases from registered dealers
I am in favor of decriminalizing marijuana and eliminating mandatory minimums. Not sure I'm in the tax and regulate camp, but maybe treating it more like a parking ticket violation.
I am very against the death penalty
I'm against privatization of social securty
I believe climate change is real and urgent, but working in energy, I also know that the cost of large transitions to alternative energy will be very expensive for consumers, many of whom are on a fixed income. I generally support the Clean Power Plan, but I don't think it's 100% implementable.
I am opposed to unlimited and dark money in political campaigns
I am in favor of more (waaaay more) regulations on the financial industry
I am in favor of a simplified tax code that is progressive (not up to 90% though!) and which eliminates tax shelters whenever possible. (sure, not likely this is politically possible)
I'm anti torture, anti gtmo, and want a lot more oversight over the military
I don't think Israel should get a free pass to do whatever it wants (esp. complaining about Iran's nuclear program when Israel itself likely has nuclear weapons and refused to sign on to non-proliferation agreements)

At the end of the day, I don't yet know who I will support. My primary back in 2008 was meaningless thanks to our state legislature, and by that point it was only Obama and Clinton and I picked Obama for primary and general. But before the thinning of the crowd, I had supported Biden, so I might look into that again.

The one thing I'll say in favor of Bernie is that to me, he's the only one in the whole field who gives you the second sentence. All politicians have the first sentence stump or party response to a question, but Bernie gives you the second third and fourth sentences to the answer. He's considerably more liberal than I am, but with congress holding him back, a President Sanders' effective actions might not be that far off from my politics.

MommyLiberty5013 · September 2015

I care a lot about a variety of issues. But I think my top 4 are pro-life, cutting spending/entitlements, revamping the tax code to make is more simplified with no or much fewer loopholes, and following the Constitution properly.

With the exception of Rand Paul and Donald Trump (from the top tier, not even considering the 2nd tier) I would be pretty happy with any of the GOP candidates for the nomination for the ticket. My top choices are Carson, Fiorina, Cruz, and Rubio.

vlagrl29 · September 2015

@simplyelise - Why are you pro common core? I've heard so many bad things about it both from teachers and parents. It seems so many more are homeschooling because of it plus all the standardized testing. Honestly those math problems look so confusing to me.

hoffse · September 2015

What I find frustrating is that many of us can probably relate to some points from both sides. Sure, there are those who are all-in for either camp, but most people are moderate.

The lack of compromise over the last 15-20 years has made the 2-party system one that I just can't relate to. I almost wish we had a coalition government, even if that would slow down legislation.

I think the two-party system also increases the number of single-issue voters. Ultimately, when your real views on all of these things are split right down the middle you have to rank your issues and you end up voting for whoever is most inline with you on the one or two things you care about the most. For me:

1) Taxes/Budget/Spending - #1

2) I'm strongly in favor of looking at a national transportation plan, both to lower energy consumption and to decrease the number of drivers on the roads (thereby decreasing the number of accidents and decreasing the amount of money spent on road work). People say the US is too big for trains. That is simply not true. There have been proposals to link major US cities by rail for years, and high-speed trains are now up to about 220 mph, using magnets for propulsion.

3) I'm pro-choice, even though it's a choice I could personally never make. I also wish we would move on from this issue because it's not exactly developing law anymore.

4) Gay marriage - again, pro-gay-marriage, and now that this has been accomplished it's time for the people who are "anti" to move on and fight about something else. It's the law of the land. Get over it.

5) In favor of a national health plan that looks at costs, rather than regulating the insurance side. Medical billing has gotten crazy, and people don't use medical insurance for insurance but as a way to pre-pay for things they know they will need. This needs to be re-examined.

6) I am very much in favor of gun control. I also think that if you kill it, you (or somebody) should eat it.

7) Legalize marijuana and tax the bejeezes out of it. Exhibit A: Colorado.

8) I think the criminal justice system needs to be overhauled. While I think people who commit crimes need to go to jail, I worry that we have lost the "innocent until proven guilty" standard in our courts. I also think sentencing has gotten out of hand. And I think it's really crazy that a prosecutor can introduce inadmissible evidence in a grand jury proceeding to get somebody indicted. After indictment, the odds of a guilty plea (and jail) are over 95%. The odds of a criminal case actually going to trial when the rules of evidence finally attach are about 5%. And yet, prosecutors have a carte blanche in the indictment phase.

9) I'm very interested in foreign affairs. We live in a global economy and the US is a key player. I don't think we can thrive while ignoring political realities in other countries, and I think we have a moral obligation to help the citizens of countries that are in turmoil (Syria).

als1982 · September 2015

hoffse said:
What I find frustrating is that many of us can probably relate to some points from both sides. Sure, there are those who are all-in for either camp, but most people are moderate.

The lack of compromise over the last 15-20 years has made the 2-party system one that I just can't relate to. I almost wish we had a coalition government, even if that would slow down legislation.

I think the two-party system also increases the number of single-issue voters. Ultimately, when your real views on all of these things are split right down the middle you have to rank your issues and you end up voting for whoever is most inline with you on the one or two things you care about the most. For me:

1) Taxes/Budget/Spending - #1
2) I'm strongly in favor of looking at a national transportation plan, both to lower energy consumption and to decrease the number of drivers on the roads (thereby decreasing the number of accidents and decreasing the amount of money spent on road work). People say the US is too big for trains. That is simply not true. There have been proposals to link major US cities by rail for years, and high-speed trains are now up to about 220 mph, using magnets for propulsion.
3) I'm pro-choice, even though it's a choice I could personally never make. I also wish we would move on from this issue because it's not exactly developing law anymore.
4) Gay marriage - again, pro-gay-marriage, and now that this has been accomplished it's time for the people who are "anti" to move on and fight about something else. It's the law of the land. Get over it.
5) In favor of a national health plan that looks at costs, rather than regulating the insurance side. Medical billing has gotten crazy, and people don't use medical insurance for insurance but as a way to pre-pay for things they know they will need. This needs to be re-examined.
6) I am very much in favor of gun control. I also think that if you kill it, you (or somebody) should eat it.
7) Legalize marijuana and tax the bejeezes out of it. Exhibit A: Colorado.
8) I think the criminal justice system needs to be overhauled. While I think people who commit crimes need to go to jail, I worry that we have lost the "innocent until proven guilty" standard in our courts. I also think sentencing has gotten out of hand. And I think it's really crazy that a prosecutor can introduce inadmissible evidence in a grand jury proceeding to get somebody indicted. After indictment, the odds of a guilty plea (and jail) are over 95%. The odds of a criminal case actually going to trial when the rules of evidence finally attach are about 5%. And yet, prosecutors have a carte blanche in the indictment phase.
9) I'm very interested in foreign affairs. We live in a global economy and the US is a key player. I don't think we can thrive while ignoring political realities in other countries, and I think we have a moral obligation to help the citizens of countries that are in turmoil (Syria).

Call me fresh, but I've added you and @simplyelise to my girl crush list.

brij2006 · September 2015

I've decided that I'm way too conservative for any of the candidates. So for now I'm not following it until it's narrowed down some more.

simplyelise · September 2015

@vlagrl29

The standardized testing has nothing to do with common core. It was a requirement of no child left behind. Also, most states actually have requirements for yearly testing of some kind so that they can compare schools and assess if requirements have been met for accreditation.

Common Core isn't even a curriculum, it's a set of standards for each grade to work on with a guideline for when skills should be introduced, practiced, and mastered. It was created from the results of decades of research on the best practices for teaching math and english. With an emphasis on not just rote memorization, but understanding of numbers. On the english side, it does not mandate any specific books that must be read or not be read. It just adds standards for non-fiction reading. Most kids are about two grades higher in fiction reading than they are in non-fiction reading. So they have trouble reading textbooks

As far as why the math problems look weird. I got my math ed degree from one of the uni's that developed "new math" and it definitely took me awhile to understand the different ways of teaching operations and algebra, etc. But what those viral stories on the internet don't show you is that math is still being taught the way you remember it. Kids are still doing multiplication written out (and memorizing their tables), but they are also being taught how to do a box multiplication. Adding these additional methods to the usual ones helps kids develop an understanding of how numbers are manipulated and what you are actually doing. Sure, you can write out 45x18 and finish the problem like we all did growing up. But making kids write it out as a box (40x10 = 400 and 8x5=40, so my answer is 440) helps them understand what's happening when they use the shorter method.

The best way I've been able to explain common core math is this: some people just click with math and have a way of thinking it through that comes naturally, while many others just don't get it naturally. Common Core, in addition to providing comprehensive learning standards for each grade (simply replacing similar standards that were already being used), attempts to foster that math thinking that comes naturally to some. When I am doing math in my head and trying to figure out how old my dad is when he was born in 1957, I don't write out 2015-1957 in my head and carry the ones, etc. Instead, I think 3 to 1960 then 40 to 200, so 43 plus 15 is 58. That is a common core technique that parents have freaked about, but it's just encouraging sound mathematical thinking.

Common core reading and math standards were developed through research based methods to give the best learning results. Previous state standards were developed decades ago with usually very little explanation of what mastery looks like. When kids have a better understanding of what they are doing to numbers when they perform simple operations, it becomes easier for them to understand higher level math

Super long rant, sorry. But yeah, I think the opposition boils down to people thinking Obama made it (really started by the Uni's and the national governor's association), parents not liking the inferred idea that the way they learned it wasn't good enough, and conspiracy theory loving state representatives who know nothing about education or research.

Also, for some reason, people think it mandates the reading of lots of technical manuals? Which somehow means Obama wants your child to work in a factory? Idk it's baffling to me.

NMR: If you watched the debates who did you like?

Re: NMR: If you watched the debates who did you like?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards