|
EugeneJ posted:Oh hey, guess who takes more money from Pharma companies than any other candidate? I never doubted this! She has taken lots of money from many different industries and places, such is our election system today.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
Fangz posted:Define worked. GOP favourability's fallen like a stone while Democratic favourability isn't shifting. Worked as in, favourability on that graph seems to match between now and 2012, and the GOP were able to have a blowout election that year. Ultimately, these independents are folding right back into the right when it comes time to vote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Atoramos posted:Worked as in, favourability on that graph seems to match between now and 2012, and the GOP were able to have a blowout election that year. Ultimately, these independents are folding right back into the right when it comes time to vote. I think you and I have a different notion of what a 'blowout' election is. EugeneJ posted:Oh hey, guess who takes more money from Pharma companies than any other candidate? I don't think less than 0.1% of her funding coming from employees of pharma companies is that important. The left tend to do better among the tech sectors. http://static1.uk.businessinsider.com/image/5457fa88dd0895e4048b460c-1200-429/professions_league_table.png
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I don't think less than 0.1% of her funding coming from employees of pharma companies is that important. She is the Pharma candidate. All the Pharma money is going to her. Why would she hurt Pharma with major reform?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:She is the Pharma candidate. All the Pharma money is going to her. All the Pharma money? You might wanna read that article again, buddy. You're also assuming here that pharma employees are uniformly opposed to reform. Fangz has issued a correction as of 20:13 on Mar 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
unironically shocked by manual labor quick someone upload the pic of Bernie being repulsed by a hammer and nails
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Fangz posted:You're also assuming here that pharma employees are uniformly opposed to reform. Lone wolf Robin Hood Pharma employees wanting to make less money and give up their jobs
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Lone wolf Robin Hood Pharma employees wanting to make less money and give up their jobs As I showed earlier, pharma sector workers are actually on average *more left wing* than the general public. Maybe major reform just isn't a dealbreaker for them, also. And as I said, saying Clinton got 'all the pharma money' is just nonsense. She's the individual candidate with the most - which puts her at a *third* of the total amount. On the right, they actually got more, but it was split amongst the crazy number of crazy candidates they have. Fangz has issued a correction as of 20:18 on Mar 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Fangz posted:As I showed earlier, pharma sector workers are actually on average *more left wing* than the general public. That chart's from the UK, you fool
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I actually think this is the way more interesting question. I just kind of assume Clinton will deliver the same mix of plutocracy and milquetoast token liberalism that Obama, Clinton I and Carter have been offering up ever since the 1970s. I'm honestly more interested in what happens to the Tea Party, the Sanderistas, the Trumpers, etc. My pipe dream would be that jaded Trump and Bernie followers coalesce into a viable third party aimed at tackling their shared grievances (assuming there are a few), like campaign finance reform, ending crony capitalist handouts to corporations who don't pay taxes, etc. I seriously doubt that could ever happen given how different both groups are otherwise, but if all the populist anger against how the middle class is getting screwed doesn't find fruition in this round of electoral politics and the Repulicans and Democrats show no signs of addressing some of these concerns, a third party where the Trump and Sanders followers basically joined forces to deal with these problems would be dope af.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:That chart's from the UK, you fool The UK don't call the left 'liberals', nor are PACs a thing, idiot. It's from this organisation. https://www.crowdpac.com/
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Man, the Sanderistas are getting prickly now that their guy is effectively out of the running.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Here's a political affiliation-by-industry graph from a different source if you doubt that one. http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/2015/02/24/the-most-democratic-and-republican-industries-in-america/ Yeah, there's some right wingers in pharma, but there's also a lot of very left wing people, as you might expect from an industry with close links to academia. Shockingly not everyone does medical research for the money. There's about a million pharma workers in the US, of which more than half are left of center. Wow-wee those people gave an average of about 40 cents each to Hillary. Such corruption. Fangz has issued a correction as of 20:35 on Mar 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
It will be like a less remarkable Nixon Administration
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:I never doubted this! She has taken lots of money from many different industries and places, such is our election system today. But Bernie and Trump dont?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Trump is rich enough to not have to fundraise, while Bernie has just raised less money, full stop. He still got 70k from the healthcare industry though, it's actually his fifth biggest sector of contributions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Put another way, if Trump doesn't win (we'll just safely write off Col. Sanders at this point, I think his chicken is cooked) then what lasting impact might he and Bernie leave on the system, if any? Does the Establishment switch up its playbook, do either of the parties try to tap this new found energy, do new political movements appear on the scene? Nothing will happen. If Hillary wins she'll have a do nothing Presidency that will have to withstand 10,000 Republican legal challenges... essentially years that will just be a huge waste of time for America.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
A lot like Obama, but less charismatic and with worse speeches
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Literally this!!! But instead of South America and Afganista- wait nvm
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
First two years of a Clinton presidency looks something like this: 2017: - Inauguration about how we need to come together + look how far women have come - Dem-controlled Senate puts the woman Hillary nominated on the SCOTUS (lol if you think she'll nominate Obama) - Like Obama, decides to tackle an issue besides wealth inequality first. Probably climate change - The bill ends up being a super lovely, watered down version of a carbon credit trading scheme; hailed as a small but incremental step by liberals - Some feel-good bill for equal pay or whatever that the GOP feels obligated to pass given that 62% of women voted for Hillary; hailed as a small but incremental step by liberals - Inflation and pay inches upwards, so the Fed feels the need to raise interest rates back to "normal" - Third Intifada breaks out; Hillary urges calm while secretly supporting Israel behind the scenes 2018: - Hillary decides to flex her muscle versus the Iranians/Chinese and puts us into a needlessly-dangerous crisis - Republicans decide to stop going along with even nominally bipartisan efforts and just stop doing anything - Infuriated Trumpstaffel turn out in record numbers in November, hammering the Dems and retaking control of the Senate
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:She is the Pharma candidate. All the Pharma money is going to her. beyond the point others made about individual employees at these companies not perfectly representing shareholder interests, those who are in the top ranks tend to blanket donate according to likelihood of winning - and hillary has been a clear frontrunner on the D side the whole way Also, "all the pharma money is going to her" is a bit disingenuous given the three republicans listed in that article together have received more than her all that said, I do think Hillary would successfully push this given how big of a deal she's made of it - but of course it would be a compromise with republican legislators, so it won't satisfy anyone on the left and will infuriate the right, in classic hillary form
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
oil's way too cheap. we'll wage war on iran and whatever other producers are on the bad side of the house of saud
Lamebot has issued a correction as of 00:35 on Mar 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Read 1984 and replace "Big Brother" with its feminine form.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Anyone who thinks that the Clinton presidency is going to be anything other than another 8 years of Obama is delusional.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
if u "donate" 100k to the clinton foundation you get to control an armed drone over manhattan and snipe people (maximum of 3 confirmed kills only, 50k for every kill after) from the oval office while bill clinton furiously jerks off on chatroulette and hillary does lines of high grade colombian cocaine off of the constitution
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Anyone who thinks that the Clinton presidency is going to be anything other than another 8 years of Obama is delusional. hell yea
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
4 more years of obama. We'll get a few nice things like expanded rights for women and such, but not a lot of progress will be made from the point we're already at. Very mediocre IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Anyone who thinks that the Clinton presidency is going to be anything other than another 8 years of Obama is delusional. Except for the neoconservatism, of course. Trump is a racist for wanting a temporary ban on Muslim immigration. Instead, we should accept Syrian refugees while constantly bombing the poo poo out of their relatives.  Rapprochement with Iran or Russia? gently caress that! These people are our foreverenemies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
can we declare iraq and afghanistan states yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
 at the idea Iraq will ever be a real functioning state again
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Except for the neoconservatism, of course. Yeah, but you're an Australian, mate. What do you care
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Well rest assured, it will all work out to eventually align with my politics 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Yeah, but you're an Australian, mate. What do you care Please don't misgender me
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
She'll take the Oath of Office, immediately turn and serve Bill the divorce papers, then levitate high above DC and spread her wings, unleashing the Terrigen Mists that neuter all men forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
If she dumps Bill and marries Huma - does Huma become the First Lady? Or the Second Lady? I'm going to go with "Second Pair of Scissors"
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
all balls will be kept in a jar by the sink get it fellas har har har
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Anyone who thinks that the Clinton presidency is going to be anything other than another 8 years of Obama is delusional. let's not forget the various issues on which hillary is significantly to the right of obama
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
EugeneJ posted:You also have to remember that Trump would still have a large, angry mob of supporters at his command if he loses Toplowtech has issued a correction as of 13:25 on Mar 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 13:17
|
|
