http://www.wolf-pac.com/

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Thursday, May 19th, 2016 6:34pm PDT - promote requested by Januari.

Problem is, Clinton is the more hawkish of the two. Most of the stuff he rails against is all the stuff she'll double down on.

I am by no means a Trump supporter, just saying she's really not better on a wide range of issues, and the few she's better on are mostly to a marginal degree. He's an incompetent. She's very competent, but not even trying to do the right things.

If ever there was an election to be decided on the lesser of two evils, this is it. IMO Clinton is the lesser evil, but only by a nose.

Wow, that was so much better than I thought it would be.

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by ChaosEngine.

That statement below is the reason why this video, while laudable and beautiful in it's way, was a complete waste of time...

When the first reaction is to compare which one of the two turds stinks more, you've already completely missed the message... = \

But he never once mentioned Clinton. He did make a comparison to Sanders, but I'm assuming that's not one of the two "turds" you were talking about.

Also, there was no advocacy to vote one way or the other. The message was clear - do not be fooled by this man and this system. Do not direct your anger towards the ill-defined other in an easy scapegoating attempt to make yourself feel better.

Makes me a more Trump supporter.

The problem is big government. Not corporations or the 1%. It politicians lining their pockets and the expense of Americans.


We don't need a higher minimum wage. We need jobs that have a higher skill set are worth more than minimum wage.

Socialism is just more than ever big government

I think a lot like you do -- big government is a problem. But, while the GOP loudly and constantly *declares* that it is the party opposed to big government, to me it seems pretty clear that that is no longer even remotely true (if it ever was).

Is Clinton even more in bed with all of that than Trump? Probably, yeah. But this isn't an issue that revolves around Republican vs Democrat lines. It absolutely does revolve around corporations.

Yay for Capitalism and everything, but if Capitalism is the ultimate motivator, it stands to reason that these giant corporations *must* be getting a return on their investment when they funnel huge sums of money into politics. Otherwise, as Capitalist enterprises, they wouldn't be doing it.

So while I tend to agree that big government tends to be worse than small government for quite a few reasons (harder to monitor for corruption, less efficient, etc.), I think that big corporations and big government represent a feedback loop that feed off of each other. Thinking that the problem lies in one but not the other is doing yourself a disservice.

Man that was pretty solid.

Sure, but this wasn't an advocacy to vote video, it was an advocacy to stop using differences as an excuse not to talk to other people, ie. encouraging bi-partisanship.

These guys went to bait a reaction, expecting people to go apeshit over Muslims who were supposedly supporting Trump. They didn't, they were willing to talk, be inclusive etc.

So it's possible to put aside differences when people reach common ground, right? Advocating voting for Trump or Clinton is pointless, or even comparing them, is pointless. Either way, things will not get better.

Agreed.
The GOP used to stand for small government.

If Government went back to its original intent then yes it would be smaller and less wasteful.

The feed back loop will always be there but at least with a small government it would be less.

I truly back Ted Cruz for this reason.

Trump and Sanders represents the total frustration of the people towards government.

Sanders will lean towards bigger government control and more "people" controlling companies. I don't thing that is a good thing.

OBAMA has only brought social change. That does not put food on the table.

Trump will do well, but well at what I do not know. One who actually runs an empire He knows that efficiency and getting a good deal at the table is a good thing.

I think he will truly put Americans first. AT least first than Clinton.

Government is run by big business. You need a leader with big balls and a force to recon with to be able to change the status quo. Trump could possibly do this. Bernie and Hillary could not.

@bobknight33 --

I continue to agree with you on a lot of what you're saying (but not all).

Trump and Sanders are both riding a wave of frustration in the people, as you say. Their current popularity, even if both only go downhill from here, has already partially sent that message to both parties. I don't think Trump would make a good president, but if he wins the election I think that really hammering home that message of frustration could be a significant positive outcome. Same goes for some hypothetical scenario resulting in Sanders getting elected, although I personally feel quite positive about the other stuff that I think Sanders would bring to the table, unlike how I feel about Trump.

If there's one area where I think the government could stand to get *bigger*, it's in oversight, evaluation, and accountability. Being under the microscope and heavily scrutinized perhaps isn't a recipe for optimal efficiency, but I think we desperately need more of it in government AND the private sector.

Early in my lifetime, a large corporation that had a relatively benign monopoly by today's standards was considered a big enough deal for the government to step in and break it up. AT&T / Bell got split into the "Baby Bells". Corporations now are vast juggernauts compared to that, but since they make gigantic profits I guess we collectively see them as bastions of Capitalism. But I think that in reality they are doing much more harm to Capitalism with their monopolies, collusion, and corruption.

I think Sanders is the candidate most likely to even *try* to do something to roll back that shift, and bring back oversight and accountability to government. Hillary sure as hell wouldn't do it. And I don't think Trump would either -- he is the literal face of a gigantic Corporation himself, after all.

I had high hopes for Obama. He didn't live up to them, but to be fair I think the lion's share of that is on the Legislative branch. That taught me to be careful about putting much of any stock into Presidential campaign promises, particularly about things outside the scope of what the Executive branch can actually do.

I think Trump and Clinton both put *themselves* first, ahead of all else. I don't think Clinton gives a flying fuck about any of us plebs, beyond attempting to pander to large demographic blocks of us just enough to secure our votes. Maybe Trump cares more for Joe Average than Clinton, but only incidentally -- as a Capitalist he needs Joe Averages to buy his products, and buy into his image.

I don't get the same read from Sanders. I think he actually does give a shit. A lot of his agenda would require a cooperative Legislature, which he wouldn't get -- just like Obama. So in terms of changing the status quo, perhaps his biggest impact would simply be in sending the establishment a loud and clear message that we are no longer content with business as usual in Washington. A message very similar to what electing Trump would send.

It would/ will take me some soul searching, but assuming that Hillary gets the Democrat nomination over Sanders, a desire to send that message might be enough to get me to vote for Trump. But voting for a reasonably tolerable option from a minor party might serve that end just as well. Say Jesse Ventura running as a Libertarian, or Jill Stein from the Green Party. Stein has the very distinct advantage (from my perspective) of being the only current candidate who has said that she would grant a Presidential pardon to Ed Snowden (although Ventura would too, IF he runs). Pardons are one of the few things that a President can actually *do* unilaterally -- and that makes that a pretty damn good "single issue" prompt for my vote, in my opinion.

The problem is that we don't measure our government programs. It gets big because we make programs and then just leave it there like a rotting turd because... well, it works? Right? Or the other party is able to rail against it and destroy it, wasting all the money making it happen in the first place -- because that program doesn't work! Right?

We have amazing technological and scientific abilities to quantify and measure which programs work and which don't. But we don't give a shit.

I found this rather insightful.

@eoe -- That video has been here on the sift also, and I agree that it is quite good and thought provoking.

Corporations and their influence over government have no desire to implement/utilize any of that.

What makes you believe and trust in Trump's motivation to do this? I accept that the figurehead of a larger than life, brash character taking the fight to the industrialists is a nice (if a bit Ayn Rand-ish) mental image that fits a romantic view of things.

But is it any more realistic to believe that a man motivated all his life by the desire to consolidate wealth and power would altruistically suddenly decide to reach out and make drastic changes to create a world which works for the poorest, least educated member of society? On balance of evidence, is that more likely than him turning out to be another Bush? Who i hope we can agree probably didn't make life any easier for the average working family considering wealth inequality has increased steadily since say the early 90s? Is a man at the top of that wealth inequality gap more likely to increase or decrease said gap?

Bernie's supporters feel the urgent need for radical change that essentially deals with social equality. They feel like people like Trump have been manipulating the system against them all their lives - whether that's a fair accusation or not. They're going to need convincing that Trump knows what to do and will do it. Policy documents would probably help his credibility.. it might not be the normal way of doing things but these aren't normal times. I don't see Bernie supporters, sick of being lied to, buying into phrases like "trust me" and "i know".