2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tom Steyer is a billionaire, not a millionaire. And I am saying that that is to his advantage (in one sense - he has money to campaign), but also it doesn't make him attractive in the eyes of people who don't want to vote for super-rich establishment-types. The establishment bit is the bit that could count against him.
I'd like to see your evidence rather than your supposition that Democrats are OK with millionaires but not a Progressive philanthropist billionaire.

And the fact that you are rolling your eyes because I "didn't look very hard" is also a point against him.

You are contradicting yourself if you think I should look harder to find his name recognition. If I have to look hard, then he doesn't have it.

It's not as if I have to Google Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. They are known. They have name recognition, run for office and been successful. Steyer has never run for office, and is unknown outside of political junky circles.
I know a lot about him and so do a lot of people.

The Atlantic 2018: How Tom Steyer Built the Biggest Political Machine You’ve Never Heard Of
Having spent $120 million and signed up 6 million people, Tom Steyer has assembled, in a year, an organization with more reach than the NRA.

:popcorn1
 
Plus it takes a fundamental misunderstanding of progressive rhetoric. It's not like there's a magic threshold where if you cross over into 10 figures you become an evil James Bond supervillian in the eyes of all the brainwashed cult followers.

If you hold down a good paying job in public service for decades and then write a book about political ideas that sells real well, I probably have no beef with you.

If you float around a number of investment banks and hedge funds and then found your own to make your billions and then start plowing all that into political activity and buying influence (even if it pushes policies I agree with), then I'm already halfway to thinking you're the living embodiment of everything wrong with our entire system.
I do believe you have a different idea of "buying influence" than Steyer does.
 
I never claimed you were poorly informed about Sanders and Warren. I continue to claim you have a poor understanding of their potential to win an election against Trump.

If you're going to complain about me not getting your position, let's reciprocate and I'll wait for you to catch up in your understanding of my position.

I have a poor understanding and I'm naive but that's not "poorly informed"?

Why don't you stop all this ad hominem nonsense and support your positions.
 
I have a poor understanding and I'm naive but that's not "poorly informed"?

Why don't you stop all this ad hominem nonsense and support your positions.

OK then, I agree you are poorly informed: Not about Warren and Sanders (as you maintain I claimed) but about their potential to win against Trump.

It's not an ad hominem to note that your dismissal is naive; it's a fact that you're jumping to conclusions for which you have insufficient evidence.
 
I'd like to see your evidence rather than your supposition that Democrats are OK with millionaires but not a Progressive philanthropist billionaire.

I think it depends on their activities. These don't sound great, though:

The problem is, billionaires are generally pretty bad people, and certainly can’t be trusted to reliably champion the interests of the working class. Steyer, despite his public embrace of environmentalist and progressive causes, was heavily invested in private prisons and even fossil fuel companies. In 2014, the New York Times reported that “Mr Steyer’s fund, Farallon Capital Management, has pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into companies that operate coalmines and coal-fired power plants from Indonesia to China.” For years, his company also “invested heavily in the Corrections Corporation of America, the nation’s largest private prison firm”. Steyer’s investments were so controversial that at one point, Yale students protested the way Steyer was using their university’s endowment.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...llionaire-ross-perot-tom-steyer-election-2020


The irony is all your evidence undercuts your argument, hence the title:

"Tom Steyer Built the Biggest Political Machine You’ve Never Heard Of"

Yeah, that's the problem!
 
Anyone who thinks that Steyer's political-machine-not-yet-heard-of won't be, isn't looking at much of the bigger picture. Kind of silly to dismiss such a well organized ground game because Steyer only recently decided to run for POTUS.

Anyone care to defend why Sanders' revolution hasn't grown much since 2016?
 
Anyone who thinks that Steyer's political-machine-not-yet-heard-of won't be, isn't looking at much of the bigger picture. Kind of silly to dismiss such a well organized ground game because Steyer only recently decided to run for POTUS.

"won't be" what?

I am not saying he has no chance, only that there is no evidence yet that he is a better proposition for president than either Sanders or Warren who have established voter and donor bases.
 
lol, Travis for President!

Build The Train!


And invest in all other forms of infrastructure! From rebuilding roads, to expanding subways, investment into rural broadband and no one has to put up with old lead pipes anymore.


Also, back in the Paris Accord. Back in the Iran deal. Seal Team Six takes out MBS to avenge Khashoggi. No more support for the Yemen genocide. Saudi Arabia gets neutralized by energy independence.



Also Herbie Goes Bananas gets declared our National Film because reasons.
 
They didn't vote for Trump as an outside the establishment candidate. They voted for Trump to punish the establishment. Everything going wrong isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I don't know how to keep saying this to people. Trump wasn't elected as a candidate. He was elected as a punishment. He's a troll writ large.

Why is Trump going to be re-elected? Because how much he's broken the country is the point, not a side effect.

Trump was a reckoning. A brick thrown the window of a country that had left everyone more then walking distance from two Starbucks and a vinyl record store behind.

It's not them saving themselves or making things better for themselves anymore. They're past that. Way past that. When you put a bag of flaming dog poop outside your exe's door and ding-dong-ditch them... it's not in hope of you getting back with them. And Trump is America Conservative's Bag of Flaming Dog Poop. They don't even necessarily like the Flaming Dog Poop themselves. I'm sure some do and some don't but in the end it's just a tool to hurt people with more then anything else.

This is a dying, scared, and angry people trying to do as much damage as they can as they die off.

Need proof of this? Look at the board. Notice how almost none of the major Trumpers have any goddamn interest in anything beyond pure trolling? You think that's just an insular problem here on the board? I assure it's not. It manifests in different ways out in the real world, but it's same base mentality. They know things aren't going to get better for them.

They don't want things to get better. They have no hope. And nobody is trying to give them any. Trump is selling a perfect coded message of "Let's burn this place to the ground while we can, at least they won't win either" and his opponents have tossed them to the wind as racists and rednecks not worth saving. Whatever good people are left in the margins isn't numbered or organized enough to make a difference.

When your opponent is playing "Flip the board over" and not chess it doesn't matter how many moves ahead of him you're thinking.

Yeah buuuuut.... Trump _did_ promise them to make things better. I'm not sure your characterisation applies to the majority of Trump supporters. I think they really want him to fix what he told them they think is wrong with their country.
 
If red America actually inflicted Trump on us good people as a punishment because they just couldn't handle how their towns were no longer viable I say we just let the blue areas break off and become their own nation.
 
Yeah buuuuut.... Trump _did_ promise them to make things better. I'm not sure your characterisation applies to the majority of Trump supporters. I think they really want him to fix what he told them they think is wrong with their country.

This is gonna be hard to put into words exactly, but I think Trump is better at speaking in code to a significant percentage of his core demographic then it seems on the surface.

I think Trump is buried pretty deep into "What he's saying and what message is getting across are pretty far apart" end of scale.

Maybe I'm just being to Pollyanaish (that needs to be a word) and assuming that nobody is actually taking Trump literally because... his literal level is so absurd.

Again we're talking a man who stood in front of a crowd of tens of thousands in Iowa, on national television, and said "How stupid are the people of Iowa?" and won Iowa in a landslide.

I can't put like an exact "X percentage of Trump supporters" number on it, but people looking at Trump and seeing a "Burn the Kingdom Down, at least our enemies will be gone and we can be rulers of the ashes" message is at least a factor that can't be dismissed in all this.
 
This is gonna be hard to put into words exactly, but I think Trump is better at speaking in code to a significant percentage of his core demographic then it seems on the surface.

I think Trump is buried pretty deep into "What he's saying and what message is getting across are pretty far apart" end of scale.

Well, yeah. Except I'm not sure the code is the sender's, but the receivers'.
 
This is gonna be hard to put into words exactly, but I think Trump is better at speaking in code to a significant percentage of his core demographic then it seems on the surface.

I think Trump is buried pretty deep into "What he's saying and what message is getting across are pretty far apart" end of scale.


There was an episode of Pinky & the Brain in which he ran for President, and all of his megalomaniacal proclamations during the campaign got interpreted by the listeners as something they wanted.

Brain: If anyone opposes me, I'll teach them a lesson.
Mother with multiple children: Finally, someone who supports better education.

Brain: Submit to me, and nobody will get hurt.
Elderly man in a nursing home: Nobody will get sick? Health care!! Great health care!!


I'd rather have the Brain in office.
 
I'd like to see your evidence rather than your supposition that Democrats are OK with millionaires but not a Progressive philanthropist billionaire.

There is no question that, as you move to the furthest left like the DSA, there is a definite almost militant bias against billionaires, millionaires and the rich. They endorse Sanders, and his whole schtick is anti-billionaire, anti-Wall Street. See his list of anti-endorsements for instance. But many people want the Dems to move to the middle.

Negatives:
Not a Democrat, but the reception to Howard Schultz was lukewarm.
Random thread from Daily Kos - Would you vote for a billionaire? (spoiler alert - no)

Positives:
Also not a Democrat, but billionaire Ross Perot got 20% of the vote in 1992, and that was in an actual election, not just a primary.
Some Trump voters probably thought that he was a billionaire, and he won.


My anecdote / opinion / competely fact-free take - Seriously? A freaking billionaire? We are going to run a billionaire against Trump? What in the actual ****? Why is finding qualified candidates to be president so damn hard? Why can't a boring, capable technocrat get the job sometime? Do we have to change to proportional representation / a parliamentary system to let a doctor or physicist be president for a change?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom