TPMtv: TPMtv Highlight Reel: Las Vegas Democratic Debate

[angryfatkid]

So let's get one thing straight...Clinton wants to end the war in Iraq, but she knows that America faces "a formidable adversary"? How can you fight said adversary if you aren't in a war with them? She wasn't making sense.

[ben665ben]

/watch?v=l_QGiEN9VWI

"Cheney doesn't even blush"

[irissunni]

domdom domdom domdom domdom domdom domdom

domdom

[atomicflamethrower]

Preach it, daveoots...

[saq05]

hilary seems soooo fake, the othere two at least seem to be genuine candidates.

[atomicflamethrower]

...and make me favor socialism over capitalism. Benefit for the many is better than having super-rich small percentages of the population...any time you take pennies from millionaires, they freak out...also, the ignorance of what it is to be poor inhibits their understanding of the fairness of taxing the rich 35%...

[ckguitar20]

go to china or india and see what poor is

[atomicflamethrower]

It is because of aristocratic, close-minded conservative people like ckguitar20 that are further screwing up this country because of their support of idiotic presidential candidates like Bush.

[ckguitar20]

if u say so..capitalism is what america is..it means that those who make it rich deserve and should be rich..and those who make it rich they should contribute to those in need..not forcefully but voluntarily..all you are arguing is that millionares dont want to pay..its not the millionaires that it is effecting..its the middle class

[ckguitar20]

there is no reason why someone mkaing 100,000 should pay 35% in income tax..and by haveing a tiered system, u make it not worth it to want to move up in lif because your going to be paying more if you make more becasue u enter a new tax bracket

[adventuregamer1]

It doesn't matter if you pay more, because like I said, a 35% tax on a millionaire will not make as much of a difference as even a 5% tax on a lower-class person. And don't spout that "lower class didn't further themselves" garbage. Neither me or you know how difficult it may be to work your way to wealth when being born poor.

[ckguitar20]

why are you so insistant on talking about millionaires..im talking about middle class families..yes there is poor in america..america has the highest standard of living of any country in the history of the world..75 million americans own their own homes..can u even comprehend that..no society has EVER done that

[daveoots]

Actually, the US is ranked 12th in the Human Development Index, behind Iceland, Norway, Canada, Sweden, Japan, etc.

It should be noted that all of the countries preceding it in the rankings are far more socialist in nature--i.e. high taxes and wealth redistribution--than the US.

If you want to make an argument in favor of US capitalism, stick to the innovation argument.

[adventuregamer1]

The same thought applies to middle class. Taking away more more from middle class than from the poor makes sense because the poor will be affected more than the middle class. That is my belief, that your income should be proportional to your taxation. Obviously this doesn't mean that you should make it meaningless to achieve success..... America certainly does not have the highest standard of living. Owning your home is not all there is it. There's health care, education, etc....

[ckguitar20]

and you do know that in all socialistic health care countries there is an extremly long waiting period for anything medical..and doctors are in shortages due to the fact that they are not privatized so they recieve a set salary

[daveoots]

Actually, I'm in med school right now, and I can tell you, we are headed for a huge doctor shortage--for one, we have an aging population, which is also the main reason for doctor shortages in Europe.

Furthermore, the AMA now strongly supports universal health care.

[daveoots]

What's more, it's simply a different kind of rationing in this country. Some have sufficient health care, some don't and thus cannot afford to get sick, and some have health care and think they're covered but will find it's grossly insufficient when they get a chronic illness.

[daveoots]

Finally, the US spends 16% of its GDP on health care while the vast majority of other nations spend 8-11% and manage to make it universal. So tell me--are we getting what we're paying for, or are we just flushing money down the drain in administrative costs (which constitute 30% of health care costs in the US today)?

[ckguitar20]

well first of all..i know people in Canada who have socialistic health care..my cousin need shoulder surgery but she had to wait 4 months because there was a line..i admitt that the government in general wastes tons of money..however socializing the health care industry is not the way to go..and as for the drugs companies..they are the real evil doers here..chargins hunreds for wat cost cents

[daveoots]

Okay. It's fair to say that no system is perfect, and Canada definitely has its problems. For a better model for what universal (not socialized, that's different) health care can be, one should look at Germany or Australia, where there have a sort of corporatist bargaining system between the government and private health insurance companies. Since those companies have one big customer, they have to keep their pricing and practices fair.

[daveoots]

There is a huge problem with drug companies, too, but I can't see any easy answer there. While the pill itself costs very little money, the research to make all the failures that preceded it are extremely costly. So I wouldn't be too quick to demonize those companies.. but, yes, something is very very wrong.

[ckguitar20]

dont know how anybody who is middle class or above can be a democrat..incase people actually think that the rich dont pay enough taxes..the top 1% of the population pay 40% of the income tax adnt he bottom 30% pay ZEROOOO..doesnt seem fair to me..punish those who make it successful..socialized medicine comes from everyone pockets because "free" health care is really us paying for it

[adventuregamer1]

Well, maybe it would help if you thought of it this way. The poorest people have the least amount of money with which to live on, and taxing them deteriorates their living even more. However, the wealthiest people, even if taxed 40%, will have a great standard of living regardless. That is why the 'unfair' policy makes sense from certain perspectives.

[ckguitar20]

first of all there not taxed 40% (top is 35%)..the top 1% PAY 40% of the entire money collected in income tax..by having heavy taxes on the rich you are saying that..yea get successful and we will take most of it away..the economy is stimulated by people having money in there pockets therefore by lowering the taxes more people have more money to spend..i think even democrats could say that the government does not use tax money correctly

[adventuregamer1]

Good, the top 1% SHOULD pay 40% of the income tax collected. They have the most money to spend. Let me say it again in case you didn't understand - taxing the lower income families directly lowers their standard of living because they need every cent they have. However, the richest people barely notice any effect if they are taxed even as high as 35%. The difference of a few hundred dollars means more to a poor person then a few thousand or million does to a very wealthy person.

[ckguitar20]

so tax those who make it big? 20% of 100,000 is sustantional more then 20% of 10,000..i do belive that the rich should pay more than those that are pooer but why a different rate becasue they make more money? because those in the lower calss didnt further themselves?..America is a capitalistic society..nd the middle class are the biggest section of America

[tyroarzg]

The top 1 percent of the population has a couple million to spare, I guarantee you that.

[ckguitar20]

im not even tlaking about the top 1%..middle class families do not want to move up because fear of entering a new tax bracket..simple economics..lower taxes..more money in everyones pockets..more money spent..more money collected by the government..

[daveoots]

One doesn't reach that top tax bracket without utilizing the resources provided them by the community--our public school system, for example.

It is a highly arrogant notion to think that we achieve wealth solely by our own merits and hard work. Consider Bill Gates, for example, who is donating the vast majority of his fortune to charity, because he humbly acknowledges that which society has given him while at the same time, flourishing in the framework of a capitalist society.

[atomicflamethrower]

You would rather hoard all the money possible and keep disadvantaged families from receiving medical care than support a system that takes a few bucks away and provides healthcare for everyone, especially for those who can't afford it now and are the ones who need it most?

[ckguitar20]

u just defined communism..

[Gloeckz]

Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama!

[chaska773]

Ron Paul 08

check out his USC speach. he is the ONLY candidate capable of DOING what he says he will do.

wake up america. vote Ron Paul 08

[SissyLou1]

What's that jizm on the corner of Shrillary's mouth about 7 minutes into the video? It's pretty gross but not as gross as the woman herself. She's a one-woman horror show.

[bombersB52]

What's that I hear? Sounds like a whole lot of voters walking away! Who can blame them?

[bombersB52]

Finally, a Presidential race centered around skin color and gender! Just what we've all been waiting for! Thanks a lot, GW!

[euquerofazerparte]

hilarious point.

[MooseOfReason]

Independents give us a choice. The media annoints two bozos with the same philosophy and positions. If an Independent get enough votes, it's the Democrats and the Republicans that make it a "mess".

[Madaxxeman]

For those of you that are considering their vote to any candidate that voted for the iraq war please watch this short video. /watch?v=jlgav80cpbg

[mikheii]

what the hell was that "independents mess up the vote" shit

3rd parties are exactly what this country needs, not this whole oligarchy system that destroys internal constructive dissent

[illusionofsafety07]

wheres Dennis? Ya i forgot GE holds large war contracts.....keep the one man who has never voted to fund the war off of the debate.

[TobiasSchnaars]

I agree

NO CFR. Period.

Dennis K, Ron P, Mike G

for Pres w/ 2 VPs

[cleanyournose]

No CFR members for presedent period!

[JustThisGuyYaKnow]

Any one of these candidates will be so much better than the other side.

[MooseOfReason]

Who won 2nd place in Nevada? Oh yeah, the guy who proved your statement wrong.

[humbledcowboy]

this is worse than watching 'the view'.

[inmyhumble0pinion]

I found it interesting that Hillary Clinton referred to Barack Obama as 'Senator Obama' while Obama referred to Clinton as 'Hillary,' except near the end of the discussion, when Obama referred to Clinton as a senator during a criticism of her handling of 9/11.

It's just an observation.

[bebop54]

it's a wonder they don't choke on their own words ...what a bunch of baloney!!!!....

even the phoney facial expressions ......WHEW!!!!!!@

[cwanda]

All three look like they should be in the US leadership - maybe Pres, VP, Defense secretary.

Coming from a town with a mill is a bad thing? Used to be that was pretty special - better than a town with no mill.

[sjsc76]

Enough already issues please no more rhetoric...

[bodah44]

why arn't they talking about the economy i think thats the big issue at the mo, they have to keep reminding people its are repulican party that has ruined the economy, but there wasn't much footage so its hard to tell, be great if TPM could put 2 videos up instead of 1, or even get josh 2 do a summury of how he thinks it went

[crazycatfguy]

Because they don't have a plan to fix it. Like it or not a Republican named Ron Paul is the only candidate that has. It is somewhat comical to hear Democrats talk about giving us free healthcare when we are broke and the insurance lobby has never lost a fight.

[skinnychef]

does that mean we should succumb to the lobby, and force everyone to get insurance, like some of these "health care" plans would propose? sounds like pork barrel from the get go to me.

[crazycatfguy]

That is a possibility no one complained when the Medicare drug plan was passed increasing corporate profit.

[skinnychef]

no doubt, and the FDA is trying to remove alternative medicines from the health food store shelves... it's a racket.

makes Shaft look like less of a bad mutha-(shut your mouth!)

[Quizzic]

I liked their "weaknesses", LOL.

[strikhendonia]

Her strength is that she "thinks she can deliver change"?

Thats not a strength it's a campaign slogan.

[7thStreetSaints]

that's Obama's campaign slogan. Hillary is leading the push against Bush, already looking like the candidate - if both other candidates confer this issue to her, then the debate moves to the economy in which Clinton can allude to the 90s, and Edwards can use his populism. Obama will get creamed if this debate moves to the next major issue of the economy.

[heckofanutjob]

Hillary's weakness is impatience for action? Hardly.

I'd say it's the opposite.

[patriot4usa1]

Just three Lobbyist spokesmodels all posturing together. Upstaging one another, maybe, but not debating.

No, the only Dem candidate with plans and a voting record to match his rhetoric got shut out of the debate by GE (protecting their investment in their stooges.) It's a good thing they did, too.

In any of the debates that Kucinich was allowed into, he showed that the others were just Republicrats. He hasn't been allowed in a debate since.

[SwobyJ]

Exactly, there is no 'debating' anymore; they are all agreeing with each other in public, (..and perhaps behind the scenes)

[alfie22aa]

What bliss! To have three inteligent, capable Democratic candidates, any of whom could walk into the Oval Office on day one and do a great job. Contrast that with the draft-dodgers in the America Hating/Terrorist Enabling GOP.

[Fringe111]

This was the first debate that really talked about the issues. Hillary's attack on Bush about him going to the mideast and litterally beging them to lower oil prices was a gem.

I have new respect for her and overall the Dems had it together

[cheeseaura]

Considering she will be just as bad if not worse...

[Fringe111]

Don't you think it's time to stop sniping here and start listening. This country will never heel if we look backwards.

[bootpdx]

Why didn't she attack her husband then? He had eight year sot get us off oil. She is a hypocrite.

[Fringe111]

Don't you think it's time to stop sniping here and start listening. This country will never heel if we look backwards.

[eastwood13]

If "race or gender were not part of the campain" neither one of these canidates would be considered "top-tier"... well, maybe Hillary would just because of name recognition alone.

[FattKidd]

As far as I'm concerned, the Dems can't loose: no matter who gets the nomination, the Dem candidate will be head and shoulders above the GOP nominee. The only thing I don't like is the exclusion of Kucinich/Gravel in these debates and I wish they would all advoacate opening up the debates NOT ONLY to other Dem candidates but also third party candidates.

[DevBlazed]

Better rally behind the black man, the republicans are coming.

[gallomex13]

OBAMA the  only candidate bringing the "us" back in USA.

OBAMA 2008

[bootpdx]

OBAMA/EDWARDS '08

[gallomex13]

"a son of a MILL worker" sounded more like and insult than a compliment. LOL

[gallomex13]

This MILL talk from Edwards is getting as old as the 9/11 from Guliani.

[7thStreetSaints]

this is Edward's personal story in his message of true progressive change - while Rudy is using a colossal tragedy for political benefit...

do you fail to see the distinction?

[gallomex13]

I fail to see how repetition of a Mill will work for anyone. When he said it the first 3 times its was enough, 20 thousands times later its too much.

do you fail to see how desperate people get to use their past instead of using their Ideas to get votes?

[7thStreetSaints]

Edwards IS using his ideas though, he's the only one of the three who can truly call himself a progressive and his policies are the most detailed and articulate of the three. "20 thousand times" - stop using hyperbole to try to discredit Edwards. His recounts of his past are there to lend support for his cause of true progressive change.

[gallomex13]

He might be a great guy, but I suggest you look at videos from the early stages of his campaign, and all his Ideas were said by Hillary and Obama before his "detailed" plans came alive.

[7thStreetSaints]

oh c'mon - in the first debate Edwards came right out and attacked the other candidates, particularly Hillary, for accepting copious amounts of lobbyist money.

You can say that he wasn't as progressive in '04, but he has maintained his position as a popuplist since '06.

[milkmantx]

Good work V!!!

[JeremyBlueDuck79]

The fact that Obama voted against the awful bankruptcy bill-- and that Hillary and Edwards voted FOR it-- tells you all you need to know about who's really looking out for the little people.

[JobDDT]

They really laid off Hillary. Almost like they were afraid to say anything that might make it look like they were "picking on the girl".