undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrm_-rf_slash10y ago0 comments

There was a gold-played in the New York Times I saw once speculating on a Trump/Sanders debate that went something like this:

Moderator: Mr Trump, how will construct your wall, and how will you pay for it if Mexico refuses?

Trump: We aren't gonna take no for an answer. Mexico is gonna pay for that wall, believe me.

Moderator: Senator Sanders, how will you pass your policy ideas through a recalcitrant congress?

Sanders: We need a political revolution! People need to vote in large numbers and elect people who will support my bills.

Moderator: Thank you both for your detailed and informative responses.

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

r00fus10y ago· 1 in thread

The amusing part is that Hillary will face the same pressures as Sanders in trying to push even moderate or GOP-appeasing policy through the current congress.

So the only policy that would get passed is the ones which benefit the funders of both the GOP and centrist Democrats - ie, corporate friendly legislation like the TPP and/or perhaps revenue repatriation tax holiday.

Sanders' benefit (from a progressive viewpoint) is that at the very least, he is a guaranteed veto on stuff like that. Meanwhile he would be drumming daily on voting out those who oppose his policies instead of caving to the GOP/Centrists.

secstate10y ago

This. And that's why "settling" for a centrist democrat simply slows the slide into corporate ownership of the US. The real issue here is having winner-take-all elections. We'd have a much more spirited public debate if we had ranked-choice voting.

mc3210y ago

I think that sums them up and the process pretty well. Sadly true.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse