I'm writing this as I await the third Democratic Presidential Debate. There is a huge faux pas that happened recently with Sanders Campaign and the DNC, which I think many people didn't expect. It has thrown a light on the internal struggle of the very narrow Democratic Candidate Field. Please bear in mind this is more of a stream of consciousness post and will be covering the debate as it happens. I apologize in advanced for any grammar errors or disjointedness.
In comparison to the GOP field, which is still vast and most of the candidates are just not viable. The list includes:
Jeb Bush
Dr. Ben Carson
Gov. Chris Christie
Sen. Ted Cruz
Carly Firorina
Sen. Lindsey Graham
Mike Huckabee,
Gov. John Kasich
Sen. Rand Paul
Sen. Marco Rubio
Rick Santorum
Donald Trump.
Current polls suggest that Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are the front runners, leaving few percentage points for the rest of the candidates. But looking at the field virtually every single one of these people have said moronic statements that should simply disqualify them from being President.
Politifact.com showed that Donald Trump tells the truth only 7% of the time. While Ted Cruz is less than 4%.
Ben Carson has proven he shouldn't be a surgeon let alone president, and generally speaking most of the people in the list are just stupid.
Ted Cruz actually said "Some call me an extremist because I stand for things. It's not that I'm overly patriotic or anything. I just do what God tells me to do. He speaks to me, literally, in my head."
That is a sign of schizophrenia.
Several candidates have signed on to support a so called "First Amendment Protection Act" which would make it constitutional to discriminate against the LGBTQ community, make Federally recognized marriages "one man and one woman" once again, and make homosexual sex acts illegal. All of which were aspects of past laws shot down as unconstitutional. Do these candidates even grasp the idea of protecting the constitution?
So why is it that so many people are supporting the candidates that are simply and without any other way of saying it, dumb? Is it the bravado, the forced coverage by major media outlets?
I think the answer is simple actually, these people reflect the mentality of those who support them. There is a sharp divide between the supporters who want Bernie Sanders to win, who want Clinton to win, and those who support the likes of Trump.
As the dozen or so petitions that exist that supported Sanders post DNC debacle, it is likely that a very large portion of our population supports Sanders over the other candidates. But because other candidates are kept in the mainstream, their presence seems greater, and there in too their support.
While I wait for the debate, still an hour on, I want to point out that of all of the Republican candidates, the little supported Gov. John Kasich is the only candidate on the GOP field to have a truthful rating above 25% according to Politifact.com...seriously why isn't this guy being supported by the GOP base? It's sad that a guy that can actually be truthful is shunned by the Republican voters.
Comparing candidates; Politifact shows that Bernie Sanders doesn't have any Pants on Fire lies, Hillary has one, Donald Trump has 16 ( a whooping 21% of all of his statements, it is noteworthy that 30 more of his statements have been rated as false at 39% of his statements, which means 60% of everything he's said is flat out wrong), Marco Rubio has two pants on fire tying with Jeb Bush.
Tell me, why are so many people attacking the one guy who has never flat out lied to the public?
I want a candidate that is being truthful with his constituents and has a stable solid record.
***
T-minus seven minutes...and I'm arguing with people over how much Trump sounds like Hitler....FFS.
7:06 Still waiting for this to start.
7:17: For Fuck Sake, could they get this debate going already? It was supposed to start at 7, they've spent 17 minutes letting commentators jab at the candidates. Gah!
So apparently it's been pushed off to 7:30....Full coverage is right, it's so full that there hasn't been any debate yet.
7:26 Did they really need to be supported by Blackberry? Maybe, had they used Skype instead, we wouldn't be having the terrible lag with the live stream.
7:31 Introductions, finally...of course they introduce Clinton first, but that is to be expected...seems to be Alphabetical.
7:35 Clinton's opening statement is plebian. O'Malley's poignant and reminiscent of Trumen. Sanders is blunt as usual.
7:38 DNC controversy: Sanders gave a direct reaction to the DNC server breach. He's pointed out that the issue didn't get resolved in a better way. His apology was direct more to the supporters.At least Clinton seems sincere, not entirely sure.
7:43 San Bernadino; I wonder if the Candidates will address the fact that Eyewitnesses didn't see the suspects being claimed by the media? Clinton certainly isn't. Shes framed the terrorist attack as the basis for anti-Islam military action. Typical.
O'Malley at least is acknowledging the failures for first responders and on intelligence sharing. But so far neither have addressed the issues First Responders face, or the veterans who are homeless...ISIS isn't a big issue, and I hope Sanders at least points to this issue.
7:50 Coalition at home; Gun control; at least Clinton has stated a fair argument about gun control. But she isn't addressing the fact that most gun violence in the US isn't caused by Islamic people, but white men. Like the shooting in Madison that happened a few hours ago (12/19/2015). Finally Sanders gets into it. A consensus on sensible gun safety regulation.
I'm glad that O'Malley is showing some balls now.
7:54 Americans already own 7-10 million assault rifles; FFS. Would you confiscate already owned assault rifles? No, really? Almost all guns used in shootings are stolen.
7:58 Clinton is pandering...at least she's pointing out GOP willful ignorance on gun violence issues.
On Donald Trump's suggestion of banning Muslims from immigrating to the US.
Clinton: United on the home front. Report suspicious things...protecting the state and country. Seems very 1984 to me.
8:01 Is profiling every allowable? Sanders "If you see something suspicious then report it". On Donald Trump; we shouldn't scapegoat
8:04 Clinton "Manhattan project to provide law enforcement to access encrypted tech and find a balance of privacy". Proof she doesn't understand why this doesn't work. O'Malley at least seems to get it. Supporting freedom of the First Amendment in face of security issues is a bold stance these days.
8:07 Clinton: we need to have increased vetting and screening process up to 24 months...Not a nation of fear but a nation of resolve....I don't think this plan would work but it's a good sentiment.
O'Malley "We need to act like the great country we are."
8:12 Why did Sanders support Anti-Al Qaeda troops but not for Anti-ISIS...Sander's answer is interesting. I think he could have answered this more simply; we started the Iraq war, we created Al Qaeda, so it was our fault and responsibility to handle them. ISIS isn't our responsibility and we shouldn't be expected to be the police of the US.
