2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Getting directly to the source to avoid confusion, here is Warren's plan.

Like it or not, clearly it's a plan with specific points that are obviously pertinent to rural America. I suspect that people who dismiss this as a non-plan are echoing right wing BS, as opposed to reading the plan.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I do't know about the Scientoogy claim, but any review of Williamson past shows she is a classic New Age Nutjob.
Click to expand...
That's what I think too. She has said all sorts of things that are sure not to be popular with people who are reality-based. But just because we have a low opinion of her doesn't mean it's copacetic to hang every tenuous rumor around her neck.

I'd also like to remind readers that professional bodies such as the APA question how much anti-depressants are prescribed.
 
applecorped said:
You obviously didn't read it because there's no plan there just the usual rail against big business and the promise of medicare-for-all and hopefully that'll help rural America ..........somehow
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

That's really all that deserves, especially after jimbob took the time to illustrate how horrendously wrong you are. Thank you, jimbob, for sparing me any reason to respond with more than that.

jimbob said:
  • That’s why I’ve pledged to address consolidation in the agriculture sector by reviewing — and reversing — anti-competitive mergers and breaking up big agribusinesses that have become vertically integrated.
  • And I’ll take it one step further — charting a new farm economy that replaces our government’s failed approach with one that guarantees farmers a fair price and protects our environment.

I'm not sure how these last two would work, or indeed if it would actually be a good idea, but that is indeed more than just "medicare for all".
Click to expand...

For those last two... if you're curious, they're gone into in much more depth with Leveling the Playing Field for America’s Family Farmers and A New Farm Economy, respectively. Unsurprisingly, both look rather sensible, overall.

varwoche said:
I didn't follow the link -- it wants a sign-in.
Click to expand...

Small note - Medium has yet to actually require me to sign-in. I've been able to close the request and even just refresh the page to avoid being bothered to do so.
 
Aridas said:
:rolleyes:

That's really all that deserves, especially after jimbob took the time to illustrate how horrendously wrong you are. Thank you, jimbob, for sparing me any reason to respond with more than that.



For those last two... if you're curious, they're gone into in much more depth with Leveling the Playing Field for America’s Family Farmers and A New Farm Economy, respectively. Unsurprisingly, both look rather sensible, overall.



Small note - Medium has yet to actually require me to sign-in. I've been able to close the request and even just refresh the page to avoid being bothered to do so.
Click to expand...

:D
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
How is that different?
Obviously membership and supporting the organization isn't true, but yes, is the answer to your first question.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think that there's a big difference between holding similar views, and endorsing someone else's views.

Also, Scientology is a cynical scam that preaches anti-psychiatry in support of their own alternative offering, upon which their entire business model is based.

People who have misgivings about psychiatry for other reasons are not endorsing Scientology and don't concern me the way Scientologists concern me. She can be wrong about psychology without being a Scientologist, and that seems to be the case here.

So Williamson has been citing a Scientology paper but otherwise has no connection to promoting Scientology. Seems clear enough including how Wasapi's mistake happened.
Instead of trying to change the subject to Wasapi's comment (which needed to be addressed mind you but now has been), perhaps we can get back to all the reasons supporting Williamson is either trolling, or impossible to honestly and intelligently support given she's a nut-case.
Click to expand...

Okay, sure. Be my guest. But I voted for Trump in 2016. You're probably going to have a hard time finding a mainstream Dem candidate I'd prefer over Williamson. Who should I like more? Biden? Harris? Mayor Pete? Roberto O'Rourke?
 
Williamson is giving her 15 minute speech at the Iowa State Fair on CSPAN.

She's spewing a big CT that all health problems are caused by chemicals in the environment, corporations are poisoning you, we don't need health insurance reform, we need to get chemicals out of the environment.

If you can stomach it and you really want to know what she's about: watch for yourself.
 
Unknown said:
Trump says that even Joe Biden is a radical leftist. Hell, Joe is so middle-of-the-road, he had one ball removed to be closer to the national average.
Click to expand...

:boxedin:
 
Aridas said:
:rolleyes:

That's really all that deserves, especially after jimbob took the time to illustrate how horrendously wrong you are. Thank you, jimbob, for sparing me any reason to respond with more than that.



For those last two... if you're curious, they're gone into in much more depth with Leveling the Playing Field for America’s Family Farmers and A New Farm Economy, respectively. Unsurprisingly, both look rather sensible, overall.



Small note - Medium has yet to actually require me to sign-in. I've been able to close the request and even just refresh the page to avoid being bothered to do so.
Click to expand...

somehow...
 
Watched Tom Steyer at the Iowa Fair on CSPAN. I hope he makes it to the debate stage. I could vote for this guy.

I'm trying hard to favor a female candidate but when I hear Steyer I'm impressed. I remember how much Obama was still establishment, not that Obama didn't do a great job, but there were disappointments. The only female candidate I think is not more of the same establishment is Warren and I'm not totally convinced she could win against Trump. It's too easy for the right wing to demonize 'socialists'.
 
Venom said:
Biden caught himself there a bit afterwards, but the damage was done.
Click to expand...

More importantly. Joe is as likely to trip over his own tongue as Trump, and you'd really want someone with clear and concise speech to make a fool of him than another old white bloke who's as likely as Trump to say something outrageous.
 
The Atheist said:
More importantly. Joe is as likely to trip over his own tongue as Trump, and you'd really want someone with clear and concise speech to make a fool of him than another old white bloke who's as likely as Trump to say something outrageous.
Click to expand...

He's simply uninspiring and that's a bad place to start from.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Watched Tom Steyer at the Iowa Fair on CSPAN. I hope he makes it to the debate stage. I could vote for this guy.

I'm trying hard to favor a female candidate but when I hear Steyer I'm impressed. I remember how much Obama was still establishment, not that Obama didn't do a great job, but there were disappointments. The only female candidate I think is not more of the same establishment is Warren and I'm not totally convinced she could win against Trump. It's too easy for the right wing to demonize 'socialists'.
Click to expand...


In fact, it's so easy that any Democratic candidate that wins the nomination will be demonized as 'socialist'.
 
Cabbage said:
In fact, it's so easy that any Democratic candidate that wins the nomination will be demonized as 'socialist'.
Click to expand...

And already has, really. Once more, understand and remember that "socialist" is being used by a number of these people in ways that include such controversial things as supporting public schooling. Thus, all the Democratic Party candidates easily apply.

It may also be worth noting that the current push for charter/private schools can likely be largely traced back to Virginia - as they fought against school desegregation. They literally passed and enforced laws to force the shut down of public schools that were willing to go along with the Supreme Court decision requiring that public schools desegregate while working on getting a private schools where they could still legally segregate running and a lot of the other southern states followed their lead. If I recall correctly, one of the major reasons that Harry Byrd, one of the extremely influential political figures in Virginia at the time, fell from grace largely because he was favoring the complete abolition of public schooling as the solution to that Supreme Court decision. That's not to say that it was all about racism, however much racism was inseparable from the decision-making process in a number of ways (when extremely racist rules are very, very strongly stacking the deck in one's political and economic favor and the other answers than racism mostly only come out with extra prompting, it's safe to call it inseparable). That's a bit of an aside, though.
 
Last edited:
My take is that we are down to 3 candidates. Harris and Buttigieg are now out; they were 4 and 5 respectively, It's really Bernie, Biden or Warren, and my money's on Warren. Harris is out because she can't break Biden's lock on black voters; I read (can't find link) there was a Quinnipiac poll out there with her getting 1% of black voters nationally. Wow.

The Biden-Warren-Bernie match sets up an interesting dynamic. We have heard endlessly about the gender gap; that women tend to vote for the Democrats more than men. This logically implies that there are more female Democrats than male--does this give Warren an advantage? OTOH, you could argue that Biden represents the establishment Dems while Warren and Bernie split the radical wing. Warren would have one big advantage--she would be the youngest among the three, even if she isn't by much.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
No, not buying that. Sanders and Warren are campaigning on free ponies. No one else is that blatant.
Click to expand...

I think you're overestimating the "integrity" of the GOP. It doesn't matter whether Biden, Harris, et al are campaigning on free ponies or not: The GOP have already decided to claim that they are.

“I think the choice that we face in the country today is a choice between freedom and socialism, increasingly. President Trump has been advocating an agenda that’s built on the principles of freedom in the marketplaces, lower taxes, less regulation, more access to energy, better, fair trade deals,” Pence told CNBC on Friday.

“But increasingly, whether it be Joe Biden, whether it be Bernie Sanders, whether it be Elizabeth Warren and others in their party, they’re advocating a socialist agenda of more government, higher taxes and the same tired policies that created the malaise of the last administration where you saw less than 2 percent economic growth,” Pence said.
Click to expand...

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/442071-pence-biden-is-advocating-a-socialist-agenda
 
Brainster said:
My take is that we are down to 3 candidates. Harris and Buttigieg are now out; they were 4 and 5 respectively, It's really Bernie, Biden or Warren, and my money's on Warren. Harris is out because she can't break Biden's lock on black voters; I read (can't find link) there was a Quinnipiac poll out there with her getting 1% of black voters nationally. Wow.

The Biden-Warren-Bernie match sets up an interesting dynamic. We have heard endlessly about the gender gap; that women tend to vote for the Democrats more than men. This logically implies that there are more female Democrats than male--does this give Warren an advantage? OTOH, you could argue that Biden represents the establishment Dems while Warren and Bernie split the radical wing. Warren would have one big advantage--she would be the youngest among the three, even if she isn't by much.
Click to expand...
Well isn't that special. :rolleyes:
 
Cabbage said:
I think you're overestimating the "integrity" of the GOP. It doesn't matter whether Biden, Harris, et al are campaigning on free ponies or not: The GOP have already decided to claim that they are.



https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/442071-pence-biden-is-advocating-a-socialist-agenda
Click to expand...
No, of course the GOP is going to scream socialism no matter who the candidate is.

IMO, the independents are going to hear, yeah sure, you say that about everyone when it comes to the no-free-ponies candidates. But with Warren and Sanders, the accusation is going to ring true.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
No, of course the GOP is going to scream socialism no matter who the candidate is.

IMO, the independents are going to hear, yeah sure, you say that about everyone when it comes to the no-free-ponies candidates. But with Warren and Sanders, the accusation is going to ring true.
Click to expand...

Well then what free ponies, specifically, are you referring to? Looking around I'm seeing that a majority of Americans (even Republicans in some cases) support such free ponies as Medicare for all, taxing the wealthy, and student loan forgiveness.

For examples:

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...f-americans-support-elizabeth-warrens-college

https://fortune.com/2019/02/04/support-for-tax-increase-on-wealthy-americans-poll/

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...blicans-say-the-support-medicare-for-all-poll
 
Free ponies: free college for everyone.
Universal Child Care and Early Learning for all.
Warren wants to ban private health insurance along with Medicare for all.
Rent subsidies for large numbers of the population.
Guarantee government jobs for everyone.

That's part of the list.

Some of these things are rooted in good ideas. But already the candidates are being smeared because of the proposals.



And on the 'Biden is going to blow it' note:

Biden Misdates 2018 Parkland Shooting in His Latest Blunder

He didn't just misdate it, he claimed he was VP when it happened, but it was well after he was no longer VP.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Free ponies: free college for everyone.
Universal Child Care and Early Learning for all.
Warren wants to ban private health insurance along with Medicare for all.
Rent subsidies for large numbers of the population.
Guarantee government jobs for everyone.

That's part of the list.

Some of these things are rooted in good ideas. But already the candidates are being smeared because of the proposals.


And on the 'Biden is going to blow it' note:

Biden Misdates 2018 Parkland Shooting in His Latest Blunder

He didn't just misdate it, he claimed he was VP when it happened, but it was well after he was no longer VP.
Click to expand...


Like I said previously, they're going to be smeared by the GOP regardless of what they propose. And I think you overestimate the influence that the GOP's lies have on independents--there is significant support for many of the free ponies you mention, as well. After decades of having government placate corporations and the wealthy I think many independents will be ready for at least a push in the direction that Warren proposes (and I say "at least a push" because I think that's what it will amount to at best; assuming she even wins the presidency I strongly doubt Congress will OK a lot of what she proposes....I do think, however, that a significant number of Americans really want that push to happen).
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Free ponies: free college for everyone.
Universal Child Care and Early Learning for all.
Warren wants to ban private health insurance along with Medicare for all.
Rent subsidies for large numbers of the population.
Guarantee government jobs for everyone.

That's part of the list.

Some of these things are rooted in good ideas. But already the candidates are being smeared because of the proposals.



And on the 'Biden is going to blow it' note:

Biden Misdates 2018 Parkland Shooting in His Latest Blunder

He didn't just misdate it, he claimed he was VP when it happened, but it was well after he was no longer VP.
Click to expand...
Its a shame that Bidens' years seem to be catching up with him faster than he can get to the general election.
I don't see any of the other front runners as being likely to unseat Trump.
 
Brainster said:
Harris is out because she can't break Biden's lock on black voters; I read (can't find link) there was a Quinnipiac poll out there with her getting 1% of black voters nationally. Wow.
Click to expand...


That was after Tulsi "destroyed" her. She sank from 27% of black Democrat voters in the same poll a month earlier to 1% shortly after the debate.
 
Distracted1 said:
Its a shame that Bidens' years seem to be catching up with him faster than he can get to the general election.
I don't see any of the other front runners as being likely to unseat Trump.
Click to expand...

At this point, I really don't see any way for Trump to win regardless of who we run, so I think we should just focus on picking the one who will do the best job. Trump was already in serious trouble with independents -- 52% will "definitely not" be voting for him -- yet he's stuck in the mode of pitching the same demagoguery and alternate reality crap to the same adoring base. Conventional wisdom said he had some chance if the economy was still good next year, but his idiotic trade war has shot that chance all to hell. The election will be Trump's unshakable base versus an anti-Trump blowout.
 
WilliamSeger said:
At this point, I really don't see any way for Trump to win regardless of who we run, so I think we should just focus on picking the one who will do the best job. Trump was already in serious trouble with independents -- 52% will "definitely not" be voting for him -- yet he's stuck in the mode of pitching the same demagoguery and alternate reality crap to the same adoring base. Conventional wisdom said he had some chance if the economy was still good next year, but his idiotic trade war has shot that chance all to hell. The election will be Trump's unshakable base versus an anti-Trump blowout.
Click to expand...
I doubt that premise.
The trade war with China- (even with deleterious effects on the general economy)-will play very well in the "rust belt".
Remember that it became the "rust" belt largely due to the competition from Asia beginning in the 70s and 80s.
The tariffs are exactly the type of policy the people of those regions feel are needed, unfortunately they are about 40 years too late.
 
Distracted1 said:
I doubt that premise.
The trade war with China- (even with deleterious effects on the general economy)-will play very well in the "rust belt".
Remember that it became the "rust" belt largely due to the competition from Asia beginning in the 70s and 80s.
The tariffs are exactly the type of policy the people of those regions feel are needed, unfortunately they are about 40 years too late.
Click to expand...

The problem with a trade war is that it hurts many more people than it helps. Trump saved some jobs in the steel industry with a tariff but at a cost of even more jobs in industries that are now paying more for steel. Farmers are now catching on to the fact that Trump is a clueless, ego-driven idiot.
 
Belz... said:
The point is that you shouldn't assume you're going to win. You have to go with a candidate that will get votes, first, and do the job, second.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't think many Dems are assuming he will lose. There's going to be a GOTV effort like we've never seen.
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
The problem with a trade war is that it hurts many more people than it helps. Trump saved some jobs in the steel industry with a tariff but at a cost of even more jobs in industries that are now paying more for steel. Farmers are now catching on to the fact that Trump is a clueless, ego-driven idiot.
Click to expand...
The way the elections work, however, means that it is not necessarily about how many people a particular policy hurts (compared to how many it helps). Moreover it is about where those people happen to vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom