Sanders with an S

[rawr]

The super delegates were pledged to H Clinton in O8 then switched as she lost primaries. (Haters gotta hate)

i don't see why you took the time to emphasize the use of my word hate. Would you prefer strongly dislike? I've been trying to keep my responsive factual and somewhat speculative without being politically charged.

Yes, I know SDs switched in 08, i mentioned that in the OP; what i'm saying is, we need to find some data to predict the likelihood they'll do it again. I'm not saying i support Hillary, or don't want Sanders to win, or vice versa. I'm just trying to find a hint on what's likely to happen.

 

[rawr]

It takes time for the liberal mindset instilled in students to erode. A few years in the real world and most of them will turn conservative.

perhaps, and i'm sure perspectives change with age as well. Even if, in 12 years, the nation swung to the so-called liberal side of things, maybe in another 30, it would go conservative.

it is really hard to say. You act like it's brainwashing though. This nation has a wide variety of opinions. most people I know, myself included were 'instilled' with a more conservative mindset. Though it may have some to do with geolocation.

 

[Skarekrow]

People keep talking about how many breaks etc... corporations get. The average citizen has no clue how much a corporation pays in taxes etc.

Ummmm….wrong.

But don’t just believe my meme…here’s a link to Forbes -

More Than 90% Of US Businesses Don't Pay The Corporate Income Tax

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...nt-pay-the-corporate-income-tax/#2f28f3d852c4

 

[rawr]

People keep talking about how many breaks etc... corporations get. The average citizen has no clue how much a corporation pays in taxes etc.

I think the point being is

1. Yes, a lot of corporations get breaks
2. Yes, a lot of corporations pay a significant amount in taxes
3. Some (IDK about many) large multinationals route their tax HQs through another country to avoid some tax (e.g. Apple in Ireland)

Small business effects vs big business effects are two different beasts, i would imagine.

 

[rawr]

@skarekrow looks like my guess was roughly correct:

Source: ComputerWorld, May 2015:

Sanders is skeptical of the H-1B program, and has lambasted tech companies for hiring visa holders at the same time they're cutting other staffers. He's especially critical of the visa's use by providers of IT services that are headquartered overseas."Last year, the top 10 employers of H-1B guest workers were all offshore outsourcing companies," Sanders said in a Senate speech in 2013. "These firms are responsible for shipping large numbers of American information technology jobs to India and other countries."

Admittedly biased reddit source

Voted NO on more immigrant visas for skilled workers. (Sep 1998)
Voted YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program. (May 2007)
Voted NO on comprehensive immigration reform. (Jun 2007) (because of amendment to increase the number of H1B visas)

NewsWeek, July 2015

Sanders also stood firm on his opposition to raising the cap on visas for highly skilled workers, known as H1B visas, something businesses and particularly the technology community strongly advocate.

[FONT=playfair_displayregular]“There is a reason why Wall Street and all of corporate America likes immigration reform, and it’s not, in my view, because they’re staying up nights worrying about undocumented immigrants in this country,” Sanders said. And he disputed the argument of business sectors that they can’t find the skilled labor they need in the country, saying in most cases there are plenty of people in the United States able to do the work. “What I think they are interested in is seeing a process by which we can bring low-wage labor of all levels into this country to depress wages.[/FONT]

 

[Skarekrow]

@skarekrow looks like my guess was roughly correct:

Source: ComputerWorld, May 2015:




Admittedly biased reddit source



NewsWeek, July 2015

Awesome!
Thanks!!

 

[the]

Woman have been wearing their big girl pants for a long time and most can run circles around us men - they shouldn’t be paid a percentage of what I make because I have a dick.

1. Being divisive is not helpful.
2. Who hired you and asked about your dick?

 

[Skarekrow]

1. Being divisive is not helpful.
2. Who hired you and asked about your dick?

1. Okay…their pants are probably the same as ours.

2. [MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION] possibly [MENTION=5667]Jacobi[/MENTION]

 

[the]

1. Okay…their pants are probably the same as ours.

2. @rawr possibly @Jacobi

2. How much are they paying?

 

[Skarekrow]

2. How much are they paying?

All you need to know is I’m missing a couple finger digits now…don’t tell rawr I said that

 

[the]

All you need to know is I’m missing a couple finger digits now…don’t tell rawr I said that

greasy

 

[Eventhorizon]

perhaps, and i'm sure perspectives change with age as well. Even if, in 12 years, the nation swung to the so-called liberal side of things, maybe in another 30, it would go conservative.

it is really hard to say. You act like it's brainwashing though. This nation has a wide variety of opinions. most people I know, myself included were 'instilled' with a more conservative mindset. Though it may have some to do with geolocation.

In some sense I believe it is brainwashing. When I left high school I had a pretty liberal mindset and did not even know it. As I entered the work world... which I did at 15, I began to look around and ask questions. I began taking interest in the news as well. Slowly as I started asking questions I started getting answers. Im guessing it was around the age of 28 or so that I realized many of the things I had been told or had been suggested were not factually true or I had only been getting one side of the story. Thinking back to what I had been taught in public school it was absolutely bias even back then.

 

[Eventhorizon]

 

[acd]

The reality is that you really can't get a decent job without a degree. You can't even get a $10/hour job without a degree to struggle to support yourself let alone a family. College needs to be free just as high school is free. Educating people is an investment that will be good for the economy. I don't understand how people can't understand this. It's so simple. It's not like we aren't paying for low income people anyway with social programs. Pay for school so people can pay for themselves.

 

[Tin Man]

1. Okay…their pants are probably the same as ours.

2. [MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION] possibly [MENTION=5667]Jacobi[/MENTION]

Oh so just because I tell you to get naked and bring plenty of lube, you automatically assume it's sexual.

Grow up skarekrow.

 

[Stu]

i don't see why you took the time to emphasize the use of my word hate. Would you prefer strongly dislike? I've been trying to keep my responsive factual and somewhat speculative without being politically charged.

Yes, I know SDs switched in 08, i mentioned that in the OP; what i'm saying is, we need to find some data to predict the likelihood they'll do it again. I'm not saying i support Hillary, or don't want Sanders to win, or vice versa. I'm just trying to find a hint on what's likely to happen.

The point of listing the elected delegates without the super ones is to show that the race between Sanders and Clinton is not a done deal. And it is not a done deal. Most of the states that vote in super tuesday go republicrat in the general.

The point of listing the delegate count with the super delegates included is to demoralize opposition to Clinton.

So the facts are really beholden to the narrative.

 

[Eventhorizon]

The reality is that you really can't get a decent job without a degree. You can't even get a $10/hour job without a degree to struggle to support yourself let alone a family. College needs to be free just as high school is free. Educating people is an investment that will be good for the economy. I don't understand how people can't understand this. It's so simple. It's not like we aren't paying for low income people anyway with social programs. Pay for school so people can pay for themselves.

It makes sense to educate people. The more educated people there are, the more conservative voters there are.

 

[Stu]

Home U.S. Politics World Business Tech Health Motto Entertainment Science Newsfeed Living Sports History The TIME Vault Magazine Ideas Parents TIME Labs
Money LIFE The Daily Cut

Photography Videos TIME Shop
The Boundless Cloud The 100 Most Influential People The 25 Best Inventions of 2015 Future of Giving Global Trade Know Right Now Next Generation Leaders Person of the Year 2015 Top of the World A Year In Space

Subscribe Newsletters Feedback Privacy Policy Your California Privacy Rights Terms of Use Ad Choices
RSS TIME Apps TIME for Kids Advertising Reprints and Permissions Site Map Help Customer Service © 2016 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
Sign InSubscribe

[h=1]Study: Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?[/h] By John Cloud Friday, Feb. 26, 2010

• • 
    
  • inShare7​
• Read Later

Robert Warren / The Image Bank / Getty [h=3]Related[/h]

• Top 10 Religion Stories of 2009

• Email
• Print
• Share
• Reprints

Follow @TIME




The notion that liberals are smarter than conservatives is familiar to anyone who has spent time on a college campus. The College Democrats are said to be ugly, smug and intellectual; the College Republicans, pretty, belligerent and dumb. There's enough truth in both stereotypes that the vast majority of college students opt not to join either club.
But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.
(See the top 10 political gaffes of 2009.) The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services. These aren't entirely new findings; last year, for example, a British team found that kids with higher intelligence scores were more likely to grow into adults who vote for Liberal Democrats, even after the researchers controlled for socioeconomics. What's new in Kanazawa's paper is a provocative theory about why intelligence might correlate with liberalism. He argues that smarter people are more willing to espouse "evolutionarily novel" values — that is, values that did not exist in our ancestral environment, including weird ideas about, say, helping genetically unrelated strangers (liberalism, as Kanazawa defines it), which never would have occurred to us back when we had to hunt to feed our own clan and our only real technology was fire.

http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html#ixzz0gw6qkclr

 

[acd]

It makes sense to educate people. The more educated people there are, the more conservative voters there are.

Not necessarily. I would argue the more educated, the more liberal voters tend to be. Regardless. We are paying for one another anyway. Bernie sees that a more educated workforce is a more self-sufficient and economical work force. Get people up and on their feet. Do you want to be a nation of fast food workers or of engineers and healthcare professionals etc.? And he wants to pay for it by taxing Wall Street... Not us. I don't believe it's free college for just anyone, either. He has said that those with the ability and desire are considered for free public university. A college degree is the new high school diploma. I used to work in a position that helped people get jobs. I know what job requirements and pay are (at least in my area) and it's abysmal.

 

[Eventhorizon]

Not necessarily. I would argue the more educated, the more liberal voters tend to be. Regardless. We are paying for one another anyway. Bernie sees that a more educated workforce is a more self-sufficient and economical work force. Get people up and on their feet. Do you want to be a nation of fast food workers or of engineers and healthcare professionals etc.? And he wants to pay for it by taxing Wall Street... Not us. I don't believe it's free college for just anyone, either. He has said that those with the ability and desire are considered for free public university. A college degree is the new high school diploma. I used to work in a position that helped people get jobs. I know what job requirements and pay are (at least in my area) and it's abysmal.

You keep saying Bernie like he is your long lost grandfather. I for one agree that it makes sense to educate people. Its the best thing for the country. Seriously, look at what happened the last two elections and whats happening this election. Educated people are not only what this country needs but also needs for our place in the world. We have a country full of idiots. Does anyone deny this?
Yes young people coming out of the education system tend to be liberal. You see few that lean conservative. I still stand by my observation that it generally only takes a few years of living in the real world to bring them around. I fully believe that as soon as the Republican party stop pandering to religious groups youll start to see less and less liberal minded people being voted into politics. But I recognize thats only my informed opinion. [MENTION=5045]Skarekrow[/MENTION] posted something indicating it would only cost 75 billion a year to send everyone to college who wanted to go. I find this highly suspect BUT if true we need to question ALL of our law makers why it hasnt happened yet. Back when Democrats had control of Congress and the Presidency and could have done whatever they wanted and did? Telling Americans hey were going to double your deficit of trillions of dollars AND were only going to spend a few billion on education for all... they didn't do it. Why?
People say TAX wallstreet! As if thats really a solution to everything. It will make some people feel better but in the grand scheme it wont bring in this unicorn lead never ending bag of money on a rainbow.