GOP "debate"

[MrFun]

Bernie Sanders for president!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh good. I feel much better about myself now .

[regexcellent]

Bernie Sanders is staunchly pro-gun and anti-immigration.

[giblets]

Bernie Sanders is staunchly pro-gun and anti-immigration.

He'll have a hard time winning over racial minorities with those stances

[Aeson]

I'm not sure I can stomach an election now that Stewart and Colbert are both gone ...

[Alexander's Horse]

At some point Trump's accountant is going to tell him he's had enough fun.

[dannubis]

This seems to shape up like McCain and miss Alaska all over again, but in the superlative

[regexcellent]

He'll have a hard time winning over racial minorities with those stances

Yet somehow he's managed to win over MrFun

[grumbler]

Bernie Sanders is staunchly pro-gun and anti-immigration.

If by "staunchly anti-immigration" you mean "supported the 213 immigration reform movement," then, yes.

[grumbler]

He'll have a hard time winning over racial minorities with those stances

Only if people believe that these are actually his stances. I suppose there will be bumper stickers saying this, and there will be those whose news comes from reading bumper stickers who will believe it.

Saunders is certainly more moderate on immigration reform and gun control than many on the left, but he isn't "staunchly" anything but moderate on those issues (unlike other issues, where he can be a wacko).

[Alexander's Horse]

[Egbert]

The Trump mouth appears to be getting the Trump in a spot of bother. LOL

I guess we won't be hearing much more about him if he keeps the motor mouth operating.

Or am I mistaken?

[Alexander's Horse]

nope right on target

[Sir Og]

It does seem like a strange way of doing things. Start out having to be extreme and then somehow moderate that to be able to actually have a chance of being elected. Why are the moderates not engaging with the primary process, why is it just the people on the edges that seem to matter?

This is a side effect of the effort to bring amateurism/innocence to politics. In an attempt to fight corruption and "deals" you end up with the current system.

http://www.amazon.com/Political-Realism-Back-Room-Strengthen-Democracy-ebook/dp/B00WNCUMEW

I personally think that a direct democracy model as in Switzerland is better that representative democracy with "Back-Room Deals" to make the whole thing work smoothly.

[Proteus_MST]

This is a side effect of the effort to bring amateurism/innocence to politics. In an attempt to fight corruption and "deals" you end up with the current system.

http://www.amazon.com/Political-Realism-Back-Room-Strengthen-Democracy-ebook/dp/B00WNCUMEW

I personally think that a direct democracy model as in Switzerland is better that representative democracy with "Back-Room Deals" to make the whole thing work smoothly.

The direct democracy in switrzerland surely has produced some good decisions ... for example banning transiting goods traffic from the streets (and forcing the transiting trucks to pass through switzerland via train).

On the other hand not everything decided in switzerland was good (at least not in the beginning). For example women in switzerland gained the right to vote as the last country in europe ... the first referendum (in which only men could vote) in 1959 produced a majority against giving women the rights to vote.
Only after the second referendum in 1971, women were given the rights to vote ... but still not in every canton. In some cantons women were barred from voting on local decisions till 1991 (when it was decided that federal law (with regarded on womens suffrage) superseded local law).

(and I actually wonder how direct democracy would work out if it wouldn´t be implemented in a small country like switzerland, but in a rather large country like germany or the USA)