2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II - Page 4

Skeptic Ginger · 31st July 2019, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by Tero

I generally liked Klobuchar about as much as Warren, but in the debate she was weak on ideas, repeating talking points.
Pete is doing well, Beto is impoved but soon history. The Ohio guy is good for Ohio, a midlle of the road guy but with ideas on auto industry. No national appeal.

Moderates fiercely tried strawman arguments, saying free healthcare will lead to free everything:

https://time.com/5639682/2020-democr...ebate-detroit/

Delaney sounded like a Republican in the wrong debate.

Skeptic Ginger · 31st July 2019, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by Aridas

After a bit of consideration, it's probably worthwhile to post this link of one of the things that happened right after the debate.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC was really, really pushing to get Warren to back up a misleading Republican talking point and doing it quite rudely. And again, this is supposedly the leftist, Democrat loving MSNBC that so many on the right like to reflexively point at as if it was the Democratic equivalent of Fox News.

Matthews didn't like Clinton and now Warren. Underlying misogyny anyone?

And he got caught years ago with an open mike joking with Tom Delay about no one liking a bossy woman.

wasapi · 31st July 2019, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Am I the only one watching?

Sad.

I watched, and will again tonight. Warren went way down in my view. I was disappointed by her on a few levels.

Though it not possible, I was most surprised by Williamson. Having just read some of her "angel" quotes, I wasn't sure what to expect.

Delphic Oracle · 31st July 2019, 03:06 PM

My feelings are best summarized by Slate:

CNN’s Debate Questions Were for Losers

Quote:

Question after question was framed up from the ideological perspective of a Heritage Foundation intern or otherwise crafted as a gotcha to generate a 15-second clip for Republican attack ads down the line.

On the one hand, it was a gross display of cynical political theater that wasted everyone’s time. On the other, congratulations to CNN’s Chris Cillizza on what was undoubtedly a phenomenal night of stunted politics-like content.

theprestige · 31st July 2019, 03:15 PM

CNN is not your friend.

Aridas · 31st July 2019, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

CNN is not your friend.

Yes, many of us know. Its pro-corporate, pro-establishment bias has been pretty clear for a fair while, as has its profit-seeking model. Its actual treatment of things that actually are objectively on the left is frequently rather worthy of contempt, easily dispelling the right-wing myths about its biases, not that many right-wingers will stick around to notice - just seeing the way that it frequently calls out some of the egregious sins of the far right (because there are so many egregious sins that the far right commits) if they even look. With that said, though, it remains a fact that it's overwhelmingly more honest and reliable than, say, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda outfits.

Venom · 31st July 2019, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Aridas

Yes, many of us know. Its pro-corporate, pro-establishment bias has been pretty clear for a fair while, as has its profit-seeking model. Its actual treatment of things that actually are objectively on the left is frequently rather worthy of contempt, easily dispelling the right-wing myths about its biases, not that many right-wingers will stick around to notice - just seeing the way that it frequently calls out some of the egregious sins of the far right (because there are so many egregious sins that the far right commits) if they even look. With that said, though, it remains a fact that it's overwhelmingly more honest and reliable than, say, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda outfits.

beautifully put.

Aridas · 31st July 2019, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by Venom

beautifully put.

Thank you!

Childlike Empress · 31st July 2019, 04:56 PM

Here's a livestream:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

edit: but it doesn't show the debate...

dudalb · 31st July 2019, 05:17 PM

Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality.

Aridas · 31st July 2019, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality.

Strikes me that vague jabs combined with nasty and entirely unsupported accusations are generally not particularly convincing.

Venom · 31st July 2019, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality.

A lot?

I don't see it.

Regnad Kcin · 31st July 2019, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality.

Originally Posted by Aridas

Strikes me that vague jabs combined with nasty and entirely unsupported accusations are generally not particularly convincing.

Originally Posted by Venom

A lot?

I don't see it.

More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this.

portlandatheist · 31st July 2019, 06:36 PM

WaPo has a great article on Warren's protectionism
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...-worse-policy/

Quote:

On Monday, however, Warren released her new approach to trade. It’s a great plan — if you don’t like the benefits of trade and want to see it restricted as severely as possible. If you think freer trade is good for the economy and good for foreign policy, then it’s the mother of all dumpster fires.

Quote:

“Elizabeth Warren released a trade plan Monday that’s closer to Donald Trump’s agenda than Barack Obama’s,”

Quote:

This means that Warren’s trade policy would actually be more protectionist in its effects than Trump’s, something that I did not think was possible.

Bernie is even more protectionist than Elizabeth Warren. We need a free trade candidate!
At least Delaney gets that much right.

ETA: Sanders scores 13% by USA*Engage on trade issues, no other candidate has a lower score

Aridas · 31st July 2019, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this.

Not because of disagreements within the Democratic Party, though. If there's not a peaceful solution to this, it's more likely to arise from the very rich on the far right and the support that they've created acting to pull off a coup and alter the Constitution greatly to their advantage, as some of them directly helped with in, for example, Chile.

Venom · 31st July 2019, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this.

I'll probably buy a gun now.

Aridas · 31st July 2019, 07:25 PM

Incidentally, you can read Warren's trade plan here. My personal take is that I think that the overall focus is admirable (and that it's actually a plan, unlike Trump's chaos and whimsical bullying), but a few of the specifics are likely to be not so feasible or counterproductive in practice. Like all of Warren's plans, of course, one can fairly safely expect that if she becomes President, further discussion will be engaged in and we would end up with a somewhat more practical form.

Tero · 31st July 2019, 08:12 PM

Gillibrand is going to Chlorox the oval office...

Hellbound · 31st July 2019, 08:34 PM

Wrong thread!

Brainster · 31st July 2019, 11:41 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

You just don't get that nominating somebody far to the left..by US standards...will hand relection to Donnie on a silver platter?

It is simultaneously the single greatest strength and the single greatest weakness of the Left that they refuse to learn the lessons of the past. Part of it is that learning is essentially a conservative undertaking. It is accepting that the people of the past (who originally did the hard work of figuring stuff out) actually have some information that may be useful.

Skeptic Ginger · 1st August 2019, 12:04 AM

The Atlantic: CNN Was Ill-Equipped for This
During the debate it hosted on Tuesday night, the news network made its best effort to convert discussions of policy into the thing it knows best: punditry.

Corroborates the Slate article. Dozens of specific examples in the article.

Aridas · 1st August 2019, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

It is simultaneously the single greatest strength and the single greatest weakness of the Left that they refuse to learn the lessons of the past.

Refuse? Seriously?

This just gets worse when compared to reality. For example, "the Left" that's in question is largely pushing overall positions that have shown great success in the past and really, really aren't breaking new ground. They HAVE learned from the past and are trying to make things better by employing tactics that are known to work far better than what's currently being employed here. It gets even worse when the anti-science, anti-knowledge agenda that's being pushed by "the Right" RIGHT NOW (and has been pushed by them for far too many years now) is taken into account. Seriously, stop buying so easily into the brazen lies and misleading half-truths employed by right-wing propagandists.

Originally Posted by Brainster

Part of it is that learning is essentially a conservative undertaking. It is accepting that the people of the past (who originally did the hard work of figuring stuff out) actually have some information that may be useful.

Isn't it wonderful when you can retreat to a version of "conservative" that has effectively nothing at all to do with what the "conservatives" in politics push to back up your views about what "conservatives" actually are? Isn't it wonderful when you can then use your backed up views to fight against caricatures, further confirming how wonderfully right you are and how wrong those other people are?

Moving on, though.

First, something related -

The centrist case for today's radically progressive candidates

Quote:

I’m a centrist. My policy preferences are much closer to those of Barrack Obama and Bill Clinton than Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But as everyone agrees, the most important thing in this next Presidential election is who can beat Trump and to my eyes, the progressive candidates look better.

The progressive campaigns appear to be based on hope, conviction, authenticity, a forward-looking vision and faith in the American people. The centrist campaigns seem poll-driven and cynical, evasive, a bit elitist, backward looking, and fearful of taking any stance that is remotely unconventional.

Against an unscrupulous candidate that will pitch a dramatically grand, if fake, vision of the future, I don’t think the backward-looking vision of a return to normalcy is enough. Against a candidate who will lie about everything and paint any opponent as an extremist no matter his positions, we need a candidate who isn’t afraid to argue and fight back. The Democratic presidential candidates that have won in the past — from Truman to Kennedy to Clinton and Obama — have been inspiring, bold in their vision, smart, articulate and often controversial. Truman and Kennedy were New Deal type progressives while Clinton and Obama were left of center moderates. But each of their campaigns at least seemed in its own way revolutionary. Each also was, in its own way, innovative in its approach to politics. I don’t see any of that in the centrist candidates this cycle, but I do see it in progressives.

There's a bunch more, but that's the beginning... and I would dare to say fair criticism overall.

Anyways, on to the debate!

Sounds like Booker and Castro did best... but the winners were likely Warren and Bernie. Biden took a beating from quite a few (including himself?) and apparently directed people to a previously nonexistent website that Buttigieg's team promptly snapped up and redirected to his website. I liked Babylon 5 and Inslee's "last best hope for humanity" struck a chord, I think. Yang's "We need to do the opposite of much of what we're doing right now. And the opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." got me to laugh.

Delvo · 1st August 2019, 04:18 AM

Everybody who pays attention knows how bad Biden is, but there are still enough people not paying attention yet to keep him at the top of most polls. He could win the nomination if this goes on long enough with enough people still not paying attention yet for his biggest competitors with more popular policy ideas to start dropping out (and then it won't matter when or if the low-attention people realize their mistake).

One way to head that off, other than somehow getting more people to pay attention soon enough, would be for the top two non-Bidens, whose policies are pretty similar to each other's, one of whom even only ran last time because he couldn't talk the other into running, to unite. Unfortunately, now looks like a premature time to quit from both of their POVs, so they might both delay until it's too late. The best thing to hope for is that they're already thinking this way themselves and it's mainly a matter of timing and which one takes which role.

In that case, the question then is: would I rather have Bernie as the candidate and Betty/Betsy campaigning with/for him, or the other way around? (I know she isn't normally called that, but it makes a better team name.) I prefer Bernie by a bit, but I think going the other way around might work better, for three reasons:

Whatever their actual ages are, Bernie gets more age discrimination against him, even from old voters who generally agree with his policies.
Bernie's more riled-up personality & style seem to fit the rile-them-up advocate/cheerleader role better.
I found a survey I think about a week ago, asking Democrats who their second choices would be, that said Bernie's current supporters were more likely to go to Betty than the other way around. Her supporters were more split between Bernie and Kamala, which looks like some of them are with her for the policies and some are with her for her gender. I think they'd just about all unite behind either Bernie or Betsy in the general election, but in the primaries, while people are still split up, it's best to collect as many as you can so the number against Biden is as overwhelming as it can get, and if that means using a female candidate's gender and some feminists' simple-mindedness as an unfair advantage against Bernie as well as Biden, fine, let's use her gender and some feminists' simple-mindedness as an unfair advantage; anything to get the Republicans' mole out of the way as fast & hard as possible to eliminate the chance of another Republican-versus-Republican-mole general election.

applecorped · 1st August 2019, 04:24 AM

Biden 2020!.........please

TragicMonkey · 1st August 2019, 05:35 AM

I think a Bernie VP to Warren's Pres would work better than the other way around. VP's lesser importance would mitigate some of Bernie's wackiness and greater age. There's more wiggle room for a VP to be eccentric.

Childlike Empress · 1st August 2019, 05:48 AM

Tulsi was again the most searched candidate during the debate, this time in all states. And given that she sues, Google won't have suspended her ads again this time.

Tero · 1st August 2019, 08:20 AM

The healthcare issue: Biden is the one people will support. Independents, for the most part just working Americans not really interested in politics, will not vote forMedicare for all that separates the employer from health issues. Many see it as a benefit. On top of that many employers are self insured. The insurance company just does paperwork. I think in the short run the cost will be less for those employed.

BUT: nobody dared mention a mandate. In fact that is the one point in favor of a true Medicare for all. It will just become a mandate. A deduction in the paycheck, possibly a few hundred each month. Since you can't discriminate, the childless people will support the families.

Skeptic Ginger · 1st August 2019, 08:41 AM

Biden is on top because the vote below him is divided, not because Biden has a majority. It's foolish to predict he's actually ahead until the field shrinks.

Separate note, I'm disgusted, both CNN and the local news only care to egg on fights between the candidates. That's not reporting.

Tero · 1st August 2019, 09:25 AM

It's the modern world. Marshall McLuhan: The medium is the message.

Childlike Empress · 1st August 2019, 09:35 AM

Propagandists Are Freaking Out Over Gabbard’s Destruction Of Harris

They yanked out their old moronic smear and managed to make #Assad trend on twitter, but not #Tulsi, further exposing themselves and the mechanisms of the propaganda system.

Tero · 1st August 2019, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Biden is on top because the vote below him is divided, not because Biden has a majority. It's foolish to predict he's actually ahead until the field shrinks.

Separate note, I'm disgusted, both CNN and the local news only care to egg on fights between the candidates. That's not reporting.

I don't think we will get Biden. I just meant the healthcare will end up the Biden plan. Any of the leftists could get that explained and approved better than Biden.

theprestige · 1st August 2019, 10:08 AM

"Destruction"

kellyb · 1st August 2019, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

I think a Bernie VP to Warren's Pres would work better than the other way around. VP's lesser importance would mitigate some of Bernie's wackiness and greater age. There's more wiggle room for a VP to be eccentric.

I'd add to that:

A whole lot of Democrats really don't see Sanders as "a real Democrat" and won't vote for him for that reason alone.
Additionally, many are still re-living 2016, and still think of Sanders as "the enemy" from when he was running against Hillary.

Furthermore, I think as POTUS, Warren will be able to do a much better job of getting congressional votes to maybe actually pass some of the plans. She's in a better position to make her agenda the democratic party's agenda. A lot of people in congress will dismiss Sanders as "The Trump of the left" and oppose most of the things he tries to do.

rdaneel · 1st August 2019, 12:48 PM

So Don jr., apparently attempting to be snarky, suggested in a tweet that the Democrats do their next debate on Comedy Central. The Daily Show replied that they'd be up for it.

Personally, I think that would be awesome. I just bet they could do a debate that would be both entertaining and informative.

kellyb · 1st August 2019, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by applecorped

Biden 2020!.........please

You should try to get him to run against Trump as a Republican.

I really wish that would happen, for real.

theprestige · 1st August 2019, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by rdaneel

So Don jr., apparently attempting to be snarky, suggested in a tweet that the Democrats do their next debate on Comedy Central. The Daily Show replied that they'd be up for it.

Personally, I think that would be awesome. I just bet they could do a debate that would be both entertaining and informative.

Jesus Christ, no.

Can you imagine? These people trying to do a serious policy debate and crack jokes at the same time. What a crapshow that would be.

... So actually, yeah. I hope they *do* go to Comedy Central for the next one. Let Jon Stewart mod it and everything.

Segnosaur · 1st August 2019, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by kellyb

Quote:

I think a Bernie VP to Warren's Pres would work better than the other way around. VP's lesser importance would mitigate some of Bernie's wackiness and greater age. There's more wiggle room for a VP to be eccentric.

I'd add to that:

A whole lot of Democrats really don't see Sanders as "a real Democrat" and won't vote for him for that reason alone.

Gee, I wonder why that would be the case. I mean, its not like he has been running and sitting as an independent in the senate now, has he?

Beelzebuddy · 1st August 2019, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Propagandists Are Freaking Out Over Gabbard’s Destruction Of Harris

They yanked out their old moronic smear and managed to make #Assad trend on twitter, but not #Tulsi, further exposing themselves and the mechanisms of the propaganda system.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...897c0442ad.gif

Do you have any idea why you've been ordered to stump for Gabbard? How is she supposed to benefit Russia?

Childlike Empress · 1st August 2019, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

Do you have any idea why you've been ordered to stump for Gabbard? How is she supposed to benefit Russia?

A very odd question. Let's see: If you are serious, you are bordering on insanity. If not, you aren't funny. Doesn't look good anyway.

Childlike Empress · 1st August 2019, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

... So actually, yeah. I hope they *do* go to Comedy Central for the next one. Let Jon Stewart mod it and everything.

I'm for Donald Trump as mod. He has the experience.

31st July 2019, 02:44 PM	#121
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 76,950	Originally Posted by Tero I generally liked Klobuchar about as much as Warren, but in the debate she was weak on ideas, repeating talking points. Pete is doing well, Beto is impoved but soon history. The Ohio guy is good for Ohio, a midlle of the road guy but with ideas on auto industry. No national appeal. Moderates fiercely tried strawman arguments, saying free healthcare will lead to free everything: https://time.com/5639682/2020-democr...ebate-detroit/ Delaney sounded like a Republican in the wrong debate.
	__________________ That new avatar is cuteness overload. Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

31st July 2019, 02:46 PM	#122
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 76,950	Originally Posted by Aridas After a bit of consideration, it's probably worthwhile to post this link of one of the things that happened right after the debate. Chris Matthews of MSNBC was really, really pushing to get Warren to back up a misleading Republican talking point and doing it quite rudely. And again, this is supposedly the leftist, Democrat loving MSNBC that so many on the right like to reflexively point at as if it was the Democratic equivalent of Fox News. Matthews didn't like Clinton and now Warren. Underlying misogyny anyone? And he got caught years ago with an open mike joking with Tom Delay about no one liking a bossy woman.
	__________________ That new avatar is cuteness overload. Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

31st July 2019, 02:50 PM	#123
wasapi Philosopher Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 9,744	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Am I the only one watching? Sad. I watched, and will again tonight. Warren went way down in my view. I was disappointed by her on a few levels. Though it not possible, I was most surprised by Williamson. Having just read some of her "angel" quotes, I wasn't sure what to expect.
wasapi Philosopher Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 9,744	__________________ Julia

31st July 2019, 04:15 PM	#126
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Originally Posted by theprestige CNN is not your friend. Yes, many of us know. Its pro-corporate, pro-establishment bias has been pretty clear for a fair while, as has its profit-seeking model. Its actual treatment of things that actually are objectively on the left is frequently rather worthy of contempt, easily dispelling the right-wing myths about its biases, not that many right-wingers will stick around to notice - just seeing the way that it frequently calls out some of the egregious sins of the far right (because there are so many egregious sins that the far right commits) if they even look. With that said, though, it remains a fact that it's overwhelmingly more honest and reliable than, say, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda outfits.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon. Last edited by Aridas; 31st July 2019 at 04:16 PM.

31st July 2019, 04:56 PM	#128
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Originally Posted by Venom beautifully put. Thank you!
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

31st July 2019, 03:06 PM	#124
Delphic Oracle Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 3,701	My feelings are best summarized by Slate: CNN’s Debate Questions Were for Losers Quote: Question after question was framed up from the ideological perspective of a Heritage Foundation intern or otherwise crafted as a gotcha to generate a 15-second clip for Republican attack ads down the line. On the one hand, it was a gross display of cynical political theater that wasted everyone’s time. On the other, congratulations to CNN’s Chris Cillizza on what was undoubtedly a phenomenal night of stunted politics-like content.

31st July 2019, 03:15 PM	#125
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 39,518	CNN is not your friend.

31st July 2019, 04:50 PM	#127
Venom Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 3,317	Originally Posted by Aridas Yes, many of us know. Its pro-corporate, pro-establishment bias has been pretty clear for a fair while, as has its profit-seeking model. Its actual treatment of things that actually are objectively on the left is frequently rather worthy of contempt, easily dispelling the right-wing myths about its biases, not that many right-wingers will stick around to notice - just seeing the way that it frequently calls out some of the egregious sins of the far right (because there are so many egregious sins that the far right commits) if they even look. With that said, though, it remains a fact that it's overwhelmingly more honest and reliable than, say, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda outfits. beautifully put.

31st July 2019, 05:17 PM	#130
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 46,131	Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

31st July 2019, 06:01 PM	#131
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Originally Posted by dudalb Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality. Strikes me that vague jabs combined with nasty and entirely unsupported accusations are generally not particularly convincing.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

31st July 2019, 06:12 PM	#132
Venom Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 3,317	Originally Posted by dudalb Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality. A lot? I don't see it.

31st July 2019, 06:21 PM	#133
Regnad Kcin Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 9,515	Originally Posted by dudalb Strikes me a lot of people in the thread are just mirror images of the Trump supporters they hate do much:Equally blinded by ideology to reality. Originally Posted by Aridas Strikes me that vague jabs combined with nasty and entirely unsupported accusations are generally not particularly convincing. Originally Posted by Venom A lot? I don't see it. More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this.
Regnad Kcin Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 9,515	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

31st July 2019, 06:36 PM	#134
portlandatheist Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,216	WaPo has a great article on Warren's protectionism https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...-worse-policy/ Quote: On Monday, however, Warren released her new approach to trade. It’s a great plan — if you don’t like the benefits of trade and want to see it restricted as severely as possible. If you think freer trade is good for the economy and good for foreign policy, then it’s the mother of all dumpster fires. Quote: “Elizabeth Warren released a trade plan Monday that’s closer to Donald Trump’s agenda than Barack Obama’s,” Quote: This means that Warren’s trade policy would actually be more protectionist in its effects than Trump’s, something that I did not think was possible. Bernie is even more protectionist than Elizabeth Warren. We need a free trade candidate! At least Delaney gets that much right. ETA: Sanders scores 13% by USA*Engage on trade issues, no other candidate has a lower score
	Last edited by portlandatheist; 31st July 2019 at 06:43 PM. Reason: ETA

31st July 2019, 06:47 PM	#135
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this. Not because of disagreements within the Democratic Party, though. If there's not a peaceful solution to this, it's more likely to arise from the very rich on the far right and the support that they've created acting to pull off a coup and alter the Constitution greatly to their advantage, as some of them directly helped with in, for example, Chile.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon. Last edited by Aridas; 31st July 2019 at 06:48 PM.

31st July 2019, 06:49 PM	#136
Venom Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 3,317	Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin More and more I am convinced there will be no peaceful solution to this. I'll probably buy a gun now.

31st July 2019, 07:25 PM	#137
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Incidentally, you can read Warren's trade plan here. My personal take is that I think that the overall focus is admirable (and that it's actually a plan, unlike Trump's chaos and whimsical bullying), but a few of the specifics are likely to be not so feasible or counterproductive in practice. Like all of Warren's plans, of course, one can fairly safely expect that if she becomes President, further discussion will be engaged in and we would end up with a somewhat more practical form.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

31st July 2019, 08:12 PM	#138
Tero Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 1,636	Gillibrand is going to Chlorox the oval office...
	__________________ https://karireport.blogspot.com/2016...d-my-coal.html http://karireport.blogspot.com/

31st July 2019, 08:34 PM	#139
Hellbound Merchant of Doom Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day... Posts: 14,029	Wrong thread!
	__________________ Ideologies separate us. Dreams and anguish bring us together. - Eugene Ionesco

31st July 2019, 11:41 PM	#140
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 17,151	Originally Posted by dudalb You just don't get that nominating somebody far to the left..by US standards...will hand relection to Donnie on a silver platter? It is simultaneously the single greatest strength and the single greatest weakness of the Left that they refuse to learn the lessons of the past. Part of it is that learning is essentially a conservative undertaking. It is accepting that the people of the past (who originally did the hard work of figuring stuff out) actually have some information that may be useful.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

1st August 2019, 12:04 AM	#141
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 76,950	The Atlantic: CNN Was Ill-Equipped for This During the debate it hosted on Tuesday night, the news network made its best effort to convert discussions of policy into the thing it knows best: punditry. Corroborates the Slate article. Dozens of specific examples in the article.
	__________________ That new avatar is cuteness overload. Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

1st August 2019, 01:36 AM	#142
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,608	Originally Posted by Brainster It is simultaneously the single greatest strength and the single greatest weakness of the Left that they refuse to learn the lessons of the past. Refuse? Seriously? This just gets worse when compared to reality. For example, "the Left" that's in question is largely pushing overall positions that have shown great success in the past and really, really aren't breaking new ground. They HAVE learned from the past and are trying to make things better by employing tactics that are known to work far better than what's currently being employed here. It gets even worse when the anti-science, anti-knowledge agenda that's being pushed by "the Right" RIGHT NOW (and has been pushed by them for far too many years now) is taken into account. Seriously, stop buying so easily into the brazen lies and misleading half-truths employed by right-wing propagandists. Originally Posted by Brainster Part of it is that learning is essentially a conservative undertaking. It is accepting that the people of the past (who originally did the hard work of figuring stuff out) actually have some information that may be useful. Isn't it wonderful when you can retreat to a version of "conservative" that has effectively nothing at all to do with what the "conservatives" in politics push to back up your views about what "conservatives" actually are? Isn't it wonderful when you can then use your backed up views to fight against caricatures, further confirming how wonderfully right you are and how wrong those other people are? Moving on, though. First, something related - The centrist case for today's radically progressive candidates Quote: I’m a centrist. My policy preferences are much closer to those of Barrack Obama and Bill Clinton than Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But as everyone agrees, the most important thing in this next Presidential election is who can beat Trump and to my eyes, the progressive candidates look better. The progressive campaigns appear to be based on hope, conviction, authenticity, a forward-looking vision and faith in the American people. The centrist campaigns seem poll-driven and cynical, evasive, a bit elitist, backward looking, and fearful of taking any stance that is remotely unconventional. Against an unscrupulous candidate that will pitch a dramatically grand, if fake, vision of the future, I don’t think the backward-looking vision of a return to normalcy is enough. Against a candidate who will lie about everything and paint any opponent as an extremist no matter his positions, we need a candidate who isn’t afraid to argue and fight back. The Democratic presidential candidates that have won in the past — from Truman to Kennedy to Clinton and Obama — have been inspiring, bold in their vision, smart, articulate and often controversial. Truman and Kennedy were New Deal type progressives while Clinton and Obama were left of center moderates. But each of their campaigns at least seemed in its own way revolutionary. Each also was, in its own way, innovative in its approach to politics. I don’t see any of that in the centrist candidates this cycle, but I do see it in progressives. There's a bunch more, but that's the beginning... and I would dare to say fair criticism overall. Anyways, on to the debate! Sounds like Booker and Castro did best... but the winners were likely Warren and Bernie. Biden took a beating from quite a few (including himself?) and apparently directed people to a previously nonexistent website that Buttigieg's team promptly snapped up and redirected to his website. I liked Babylon 5 and Inslee's "last best hope for humanity" struck a chord, I think. Yang's "We need to do the opposite of much of what we're doing right now. And the opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." got me to laugh.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

1st August 2019, 04:18 AM	#143
Delvo الشيطان الأبيض Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Harrisburg, PA Posts: 8,153	Everybody who pays attention knows how bad Biden is, but there are still enough people not paying attention yet to keep him at the top of most polls. He could win the nomination if this goes on long enough with enough people still not paying attention yet for his biggest competitors with more popular policy ideas to start dropping out (and then it won't matter when or if the low-attention people realize their mistake). One way to head that off, other than somehow getting more people to pay attention soon enough, would be for the top two non-Bidens, whose policies are pretty similar to each other's, one of whom even only ran last time because he couldn't talk the other into running, to unite. Unfortunately, now looks like a premature time to quit from both of their POVs, so they might both delay until it's too late. The best thing to hope for is that they're already thinking this way themselves and it's mainly a matter of timing and which one takes which role. In that case, the question then is: would I rather have Bernie as the candidate and Betty/Betsy campaigning with/for him, or the other way around? (I know she isn't normally called that, but it makes a better team name.) I prefer Bernie by a bit, but I think going the other way around might work better, for three reasons: Whatever their actual ages are, Bernie gets more age discrimination against him, even from old voters who generally agree with his policies. Bernie's more riled-up personality & style seem to fit the rile-them-up advocate/cheerleader role better. I found a survey I think about a week ago, asking Democrats who their second choices would be, that said Bernie's current supporters were more likely to go to Betty than the other way around. Her supporters were more split between Bernie and Kamala, which looks like some of them are with her for the policies and some are with her for her gender. I think they'd just about all unite behind either Bernie or Betsy in the general election, but in the primaries, while people are still split up, it's best to collect as many as you can so the number against Biden is as overwhelming as it can get, and if that means using a female candidate's gender and some feminists' simple-mindedness as an unfair advantage against Bernie as well as Biden, fine, let's use her gender and some feminists' simple-mindedness as an unfair advantage; anything to get the Republicans' mole out of the way as fast & hard as possible to eliminate the chance of another Republican-versus-Republican-mole general election.

1st August 2019, 04:24 AM	#144
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 19,797	Biden 2020!.........please
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

1st August 2019, 05:35 AM	#145
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles July Co-Pither, August TLA & Co-Pither Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 52,488	I think a Bernie VP to Warren's Pres would work better than the other way around. VP's lesser importance would mitigate some of Bernie's wackiness and greater age. There's more wiggle room for a VP to be eccentric.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

1st August 2019, 05:48 AM	#146
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 17,675	Tulsi was again the most searched candidate during the debate, this time in all states. And given that she sues, Google won't have suspended her ads again this time.
	__________________ Audiatur et altera pars

1st August 2019, 08:20 AM	#147
Tero Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 1,636	The healthcare issue: Biden is the one people will support. Independents, for the most part just working Americans not really interested in politics, will not vote forMedicare for all that separates the employer from health issues. Many see it as a benefit. On top of that many employers are self insured. The insurance company just does paperwork. I think in the short run the cost will be less for those employed. BUT: nobody dared mention a mandate. In fact that is the one point in favor of a true Medicare for all. It will just become a mandate. A deduction in the paycheck, possibly a few hundred each month. Since you can't discriminate, the childless people will support the families.
	__________________ https://karireport.blogspot.com/2016...d-my-coal.html http://karireport.blogspot.com/

1st August 2019, 08:41 AM	#148
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 76,950	Biden is on top because the vote below him is divided, not because Biden has a majority. It's foolish to predict he's actually ahead until the field shrinks. Separate note, I'm disgusted, both CNN and the local news only care to egg on fights between the candidates. That's not reporting.
	__________________ That new avatar is cuteness overload. Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

1st August 2019, 09:25 AM	#149
Tero Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 1,636	It's the modern world. Marshall McLuhan: The medium is the message.
	__________________ https://karireport.blogspot.com/2016...d-my-coal.html http://karireport.blogspot.com/

1st August 2019, 09:35 AM	#150
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 17,675	Propagandists Are Freaking Out Over Gabbard’s Destruction Of Harris They yanked out their old moronic smear and managed to make #Assad trend on twitter, but not #Tulsi, further exposing themselves and the mechanisms of the propaganda system.
	__________________ Audiatur et altera pars

1st August 2019, 10:00 AM	#151
Tero Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 1,636	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Biden is on top because the vote below him is divided, not because Biden has a majority. It's foolish to predict he's actually ahead until the field shrinks. Separate note, I'm disgusted, both CNN and the local news only care to egg on fights between the candidates. That's not reporting. I don't think we will get Biden. I just meant the healthcare will end up the Biden plan. Any of the leftists could get that explained and approved better than Biden.
	__________________ https://karireport.blogspot.com/2016...d-my-coal.html http://karireport.blogspot.com/

1st August 2019, 10:08 AM	#152
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 39,518	"Destruction"

1st August 2019, 12:47 PM	#153
kellyb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 12,631	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey I think a Bernie VP to Warren's Pres would work better than the other way around. VP's lesser importance would mitigate some of Bernie's wackiness and greater age. There's more wiggle room for a VP to be eccentric. I'd add to that: A whole lot of Democrats really don't see Sanders as "a real Democrat" and won't vote for him for that reason alone. Additionally, many are still re-living 2016, and still think of Sanders as "the enemy" from when he was running against Hillary. Furthermore, I think as POTUS, Warren will be able to do a much better job of getting congressional votes to maybe actually pass some of the plans. She's in a better position to make her agenda the democratic party's agenda. A lot of people in congress will dismiss Sanders as "The Trump of the left" and oppose most of the things he tries to do.
	__________________ "We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

1st August 2019, 12:48 PM	#154
rdaneel Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: I'M IN THE PHONEBOOK! I'M SOMEBODY!!! Posts: 3,847	So Don jr., apparently attempting to be snarky, suggested in a tweet that the Democrats do their next debate on Comedy Central. The Daily Show replied that they'd be up for it. Personally, I think that would be awesome. I just bet they could do a debate that would be both entertaining and informative.
	__________________ "Let me guess, my theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor "I heard some things I can't prove from someone I don't know, and God dammit, that's enough for me." - Penny Arcade "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from Science!" - Agatha Heterodyne

1st August 2019, 12:52 PM	#155
kellyb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 12,631	Originally Posted by applecorped Biden 2020!.........please You should try to get him to run against Trump as a Republican. I really wish that would happen, for real.
	__________________ "We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

1st August 2019, 01:03 PM	#156
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 39,518	Originally Posted by rdaneel So Don jr., apparently attempting to be snarky, suggested in a tweet that the Democrats do their next debate on Comedy Central. The Daily Show replied that they'd be up for it. Personally, I think that would be awesome. I just bet they could do a debate that would be both entertaining and informative. Jesus Christ, no. Can you imagine? These people trying to do a serious policy debate and crack jokes at the same time. What a crapshow that would be. ... So actually, yeah. I hope they do go to Comedy Central for the next one. Let Jon Stewart mod it and everything.