THE DEBATES 2016

No I don't think Trump supports $15 an hour..Hillary does..and it won't work..especially if you raise corp taxes..it will raise the price of your beans and cost jobs..They won't hire at that pay scale to start.

Im in Va..min wage is lowest of any state and should go up..but $15 is way too much here compared to NY obviously..

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Gern Blansten said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Kat said:

BS44325 said:

Kat said:

Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.

She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

"...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

(snip)

She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

“If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.

Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.

Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.

He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am not defending him on this point. My argument is with all the Hillary supporters who just hated the decision to go to Iraq yet have no problem backing her. They are being dishonest and if they really think it was the worst foreign policy decision of all time then they shouldn't support her. Pick a third party or don't vote. After all you would be voting for someone who voted for the deaths of thousands of american troops and innocent Iraqis and who voted to destabilize the middle east. How could the haters of the war possibly vote for and yet sleep soundly at night? I just don't get it.

Says the guy Professor from Canada.

Correct.

Why don't you ever criticize the neo-cons who lied us into war and the republican members of the house and senate who also voted for it? You continually blame Hillary and double down on the debacle from the safe and relatively cost free comforts of Canada. You are openly advocating for Canada to step up to the plate and pay more money and commit 100,000+ troops to the lost Iraq cause, yes? Talk about hypocrisy?

When is the Commander in Chief not the Commander in Chief? When you invade Iraq and it turns out you were duped.

You clearly do not pay attention. I just said I do not "blame" Hillary. Please read what I write otherwise it becomes impossible to communicate with you. My students get that. I wish you would as well. So again...for the last time I do not "blame" Hillary for supporting the Iraq war. The argument I am making is that her speech does not absolve her from her vote. She wants to turn around and say "well I voted for a coalition and the UN and multilateralism" which is complete and utter bullshit. Obama knew it was bullshit and ran against her on it...my guess is you loved it when he did. She also proved with the invasion of Libya that she doesn't need UN authorization to go to war. You my friend hate neocons but you support Hillary who proved her neocon bonafides not just in Iraq but in Libya as well. At what point do you turn around and say "how can I support someone who keeps voting to invade other countries". So again and again and again until you finally process what I am saying...I am not blaming her for Iraq...I am calling you and others out for hating everything about neocon Bush and Cheney yet loving her. She is the neocon in this race and you are giving her your vote.

I went back four pages and nowhere did you say "I" don't blame Hillary, you said, "Nobody" blames Hillary. Are you a nobody? And just below that post someone pointed out that Trump was blaming Hillary to which you expressed was a legitimate criticism of her vote. Maybe you need to learn how to write better to express your true thoughts so as people like me who follow along and look at the larger body of evidence or discussion points can truly understand where you might be coming from. Further, you called Hillary "complicit" in the decision to go to war with Iraq. Does that not imply blame? You also seem to dismiss everything Hillary stated before she cast her vote. Did Hillary make her decision in a vacuum? Was the neocon led administration not clamoring for war, cherry picking intelligence, planting false stories and falsifying intelligence that was classified, knowing members of the intelligence committees would think they knew more than the rest of us, even if it was false (in hindsight)? Too bad those 22 million emails "disappeared", huh? Then you call her call for multilaterism "bullshit" without making the effort to explain why. Last time I checked the SOS can't authorize military actions. That's the CIC authority. Either you have a gross misunderstanding of our constitution or you want to blame Hillary for everything, much like Trump. Hillary is far from a neocon. If she was, you'd be her greatest champion.

I dont make very much at all. I dont think people should be making $15 an hour to START. Maybe there shoukd be minimum increases based on length of employment, etc, but $15 for an entry level job is too much. Or maybe base the starting wage on local economics, as pj soul eluded to.

Cliffy6745 said:

cutz said:

Cliffy6745 said:

cutz said:

Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?

So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.

I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump

Damn, i'm almost sorry i said i was a undecided voter. I thought this was a thread about the debates. My fault for saying i'm undecided.

Cliffy, you got it: I'm looking at 3rd & 4th party options. Maybe even a write-in vote. And since they don't get the media coverage i have to do the research, so that's why i'm undecided.

Back to the Debates. Apologize if this has already been bought up: Why did Lester Holt ask the Birther question? That doesn't have anything to do with this election.

It's kind of like asking "how big of an idiot are you?"

See Halifax you just did it again. This is what I said about Trump... "He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am NOT defending him on this point." Was that poorly written? Does that sound like I am legitimizing Trump's criticism of Hillary on Iraq? Clearly I am not. If you have read my posts you would know that I disagree with Trump on Iraq. You just need to do better...it really isn't a lot for this nobody to ask.

Now with respect to Hillary you are correct...her decision did not happen in a vacuum. But she cannot claim she was duped, or pressured, or lied too. She had access to every piece of intelligence that her husband's former CIA chief could provide. President Clinton was in agreement. Prime Minister Tony Blair was in agreement. Political allies such as Senator Joe Lieberman was in agreement. Now ultimately George W Bush is the one who made the decision and as I have said a million times the buck stops with him but nobody who hated the war should kid themselves and pretend she wasn't on board with the decision just because she left some wiggle room within the text of some weasely senate speech. To do so is just to maintain a lie so you can vote with a clean conscience. Hillary is the neocon in this race but I absolutely could not support her. The reason why is that the only thing worse then a neocon is a neocon who doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to see things through. After supporting the invasion she proved herself to be a political coward by bailing and putting on this charade of being "duped" when the going got tough. Obama and the democratic base saw through that nonsense in 2008 and it explains why enthusiasm for her is so low right now. It is why her honest and trustworthy numbers can never truly recover. People know that even when it comes to issues of war and peace Hillary will always put her political career above all else and disgust for that type of behaviour is bipartisan. Now when it comes to Trump I may be at polar opposites to him on foreign policy (and am at least honest enough to admit it) but my gut tells me that should he ever find the need to use the military he wouldn't run for the hills the first time it becomes politically difficult. To me that is a critical necessity for being commander in chief and Hillary has failed that test. You keep shilling for her though if you like but spare us your neocon critiques from here on out. I have been reading them for sometime now but since you are so willing to vote for one they will no longer have any meaning.

igotid88 said:

http://youtu.be/h1Lfd1aB9YI

As always, Oliver is spot on.