It's a difficult issue for Hillary, whose husband oversaw implementation of some of the policies that created this environment.
And all of the Republican voters seem to be more afraid of brown people possibly getting money from the government, than about whether or not they can get sick or go to school without going bankrupt.
But you're absolutely right about Bernie and Hillary. Hillary, to me, isn't much different from Ted Cruz, and even more like Rubio. They're right-wing war hawks in the pocket of Wall Street, and the only things they differ on are social wedge issues that they use to get people on each side to vote for them.
AFAIC, our best hope is Bernie. Cruz and Hillary will both be a disaster and lead us into another war, and Trump is a wild card and highly unpredictable, though I think he's a lot less likely to get us involved in another war than Hillary or Cruz (he royally pissed off the GOP by saying the Iraq war was stupid).
There's a word for that: populist. Policy by opinion poll.
As most European democracies have found out over the past decades, most voters aren't political idealists. Ideas from all over the political spectrum appeal to them. Many of them end up not voting because every major party comes with a package of political ideals that don't work for them.
From time to time, a politician appears who manages to tap that potential, and throws the traditional, ideals-oriented politics into disarray.
Go look at his website now. It's the same old tired Republican canards like selling insurance across state lines (aka gutting your state's insurance commission as all insurance companies relocate to states without meaningful regulation like South Dakota).
The world could do a lot more with lesser wars, no unwanted migration, and no terrorism. The vicious cycle of violence killing innocents and following hate attacks are unbearable. I can't take it any more, I don't think anyone can.
I'm just an average guy looking to live my life, all Muslims are like that except those that have been brainwashed and are used for political reasons.
Why discriminate against me for my faith? Isn't the U.S. a secular country?
There's simply no reason to bring in populations that require more money to support than they contribute.
If we have a great compression, growth and redistribution like in the 50s/60s expect racial/immigration tensions to decrease a lot.
I wonder what led to such environment then, can't be because of anything that happened in the 30s/40s…
I'm not sure that's true. College kids aren't producing anything today. What we're trying to do is to force them to fund our long (and I do mean long) cushy retirements with what they will produce later.
The whole system seems to be set up right now to extract a great deal of what they will produce in the future and pull it back to the older generations. It's a promise to make them pay in the future. Well, promises can be broken, and in this case I'm almost certain will. They can say no.
It is "Everything You've Got" for students, though. If you have any college savings in your own name (or earn any scholarships), it will simply cancel dollar for dollar with university grant aid. Unless you can save more than the total of your grant over 4 years, better to spend it before the first financial aid paperwork (or not save it at all).
Though this only comes into play at a school that offers substantial grant aid. At a state school your savings can actually help.