2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

[TragicMonkey]

Straight or gay, a lot of people seem to be hard-wired to form couples. It's not necessarily out of pressure to conform.

I think Buttgieg is going to have a different problem: His name is too weird. But then, we elected Barack Hussein Obama 7 years after 9/11.

Do you think you'd dislike Buttgieg just as much of he were straight?

If Buttgieg were straight I probably wouldn't even know who he is, he'd blend into the ten or so extras apparently running.

 

[Venom]

Andrew Yang's fondness for Joe Biden (46:23):

I will say the only person who's taken me aside and said that we really need to worry about the fourth industrial revolution because it could potentially tear our country apart is Joe Biden.

 

[Mumbles]

I think the the hatred of Copmala from the progressive wing of the party is quite real. Kamala's history as a DA is not seen as a positive. Given the disproportionate damage the criminal justice system does to black communities, I'm sure much of that distaste is very real. The "tough on crime" democrat is a bit of an outdated political model.

That's the far left, not the average black person who has to worry about their kids, grandkids, nieces, nephews, and so forth getting gunned down - which is why they're the ones organizing against violence whenever and wherever they can. What they don't want is police running around beating random people, and then refusing to investigate actual crimes - or worse, a Ferguson-style white supremacist shakedown PD.

Harris has the same basic problem almost everyone else does - Biden is strongly connected to Obama, and a lot of people have the Obamas photo next to MLK Jr. and Jesus on their mantle. College-age black people, meanwhile, are still leaning towards Sanders as far as I can tell. There's a fairly strong Harris movement, with Warren in 4th.

Again, there are things I like about several candidates - including a few who poll well below her. Overall, I'd probably go with Warren, mostly because she's the only person to say much of anything about the radicalized McConnell courts (By which I mean "Let's toss out Roe v. Wade, quite possibly Brown v. Board, and not let congress delegate authority to experts in the EPA.") But I find the loudly negative coverage of Harris, this early in, to be bizarre.

It's not as vital in the primaries outside of a few Southern states like SC.

It'll be the *entire* South. And last I saw, he was getting killed in Nevada as well - picked specifically to increase the influence of Hispanic voters in early primaries. Hillary was actually pretty vulnerable in 2016, but when the Sanders campaign went down this path, Super Tuesday ended his bid in all but theory.

 

[SezMe]

maybe my read is off, as far as I can tell, everyone to the right of Bernie is garbage.

That's:

• Extreme hyperbole; or
• a bad,bad read; or
• your actual view

If it's the last one, it's not your "read" that's off, it's your head.

 

[SezMe]

He's not on board with Medicare for all. That's smart and realistic. Medicare for all is a pipe dream on a good day. It's 200 proof, unadulterated fantasy. We may as well debate Lord of the Rings plot lines. Ditto free college for all.

It seems like "smart and thoughtful" have become dirty words.

I'm not totally on board, varwoche. With the GOP congresscritters having just arrived from the 18th century, Dems have to start from a pretty far out position so that negotiations end up with something worthwhile. I also think "shooting for the stars" is a reasonable campaign strategy to energize registered voters off their lazy duffs and actually vote. I'll acknowledge some risks in such a strategy but, in balance, I think it's a positive (winning?) approach.

 

[SezMe]

Biden is really something.

Thank you for your substantive contribution to this tread.

 

[Aridas]

I'm not totally on board, varwoche. With the GOP congresscritters having just arrived from the 18th century, Dems have to start from a pretty far out position so that negotiations end up with something worthwhile. I also think "shooting for the stars" is a reasonable campaign strategy to energize registered voters off their lazy duffs and actually vote. I'll acknowledge some risks in such a strategy but, in balance, I think it's a positive (winning?) approach.

Moving the Overton window, alone, grants significant value to much of the "shoot for the stars" stuff in a bunch of ways. Going further, compromise is a good and necessary part of how healthy politics should work. Democrats starting out with... say, the Republican plan and then "compromising" with the Republicans as they try to brazenly try to sabotage it is not particularly healthy, on the other hand. May as well actually fight for something actually GOOD in the first place and be willing to compromise from there, rather than starting with something only somewhat better than nothing and compromising on it. Bernie may be ideologically committed to a fair extent, but it's hard to deny that one of the most important things that he's doing is helping to engage new voters and make them more enthusiastic. Warren is pretty clearly not actually committed to any particular plan on nigh anything so much as making things better across the board by actually addressing so many of the problematic things that honestly should have been addressed long ago or maintained, rather than get worn away by the continual assault on everyone else in quiet ways by those with lots and lots of spare money.

 

[Brainster]

Thank you for your substantive contribution to this tread.

The animation was made up, but the words are Biden's from yesterday. Here's the original video (followed by a bit of humorous commentary lifted from some movie):



I know, it's hard to believe. Sod only knows where Biden thought he was going with the anecdote of kids reaching into the water to rub his legs, and how that tied in with roaches, and kids jumping on his lap, which he loves.


ETA: Notice he can't resist putting his hand on the girl next to him at about 0:18.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The animation was made up, but the words are Biden's from yesterday. Here's the original video (followed by a bit of humorous commentary lifted from some movie):



I know, it's hard to believe. Sod only knows where Biden thought he was going with the anecdote of kids reaching into the water to rub his legs, and how that tied in with roaches, and kids jumping on his lap, which he loves.


ETA: Notice he can't resist putting his hand on the girl next to him at about 0:18.

That's horrid. He's stuttering, the conversation makes little sense. Seems like he's trying hard to say he likes 'the blacks'.


I don't think anything looked untoward about him hugging the kids next to him.

But this part: "Sod [sic] only knows where Biden thought he was going with the anecdote of kids reaching into the water to rub his legs, and how that tied in with roaches, and kids jumping on his lap, which he loves."

That was really creepy bad.

 

[angrysoba]

That's horrid. He's stuttering, the conversation makes little sense. Seems like he's trying hard to say he likes 'the blacks'.


I don't think anything looked untoward about him hugging the kids next to him.

But this part: "Sod [sic] only knows where Biden thought he was going with the anecdote of kids reaching into the water to rub his legs, and how that tied in with roaches, and kids jumping on his lap, which he loves."

That was really creepy bad.

Why did they cut the bit out about him having an onion tied to his belt because that was the style at the time?

Even Donald Trump can make more coherent speeches than Biden. Imagine what he’d be like in the presidential debates where the gloves are really off.

 

[Cabbage]

Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak have dropped out. Not that nearly any of us here likely paid any notable attention to either.

Who?

I'd never heard of them either. I tried looking up some info on Sestak but this is all I could find:

He looks a little green but I'd still vote for him over Trump.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I'd never heard of them either. I tried looking up some info on Sestak but this is all I could find:

[qimg]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/54/94/13/5494139b26b9a6521d6698b858468b58.jpg[/qimg]

He looks a little green but I'd still vote for him over Trump.

He's kind of sexy!

 

[TurkeysGhost]

That's:

• Extreme hyperbole; or
• a bad,bad read; or
• your actual view

If it's the last one, it's not your "read" that's off, it's your head.

People accuse Bernie of being unrealistic, but it's quite the opposite. He's the only one that is open about the nature of our deliberately stymied government.

What is Pete, or Biden, or Warren going to do when they win and McConnell refuses to play ball, as we know he will. Was 8 years of Obama not enough to prove that nothing is to be gained from trying to compromise with these people?

Bernie is calling for a popular movement to recapture the legislature. He intends to use the bully pulpit of the presidency to do so.

How is Warren going to pass her wealth tax? When McConnell says no, and the right wing SCOTUS says no, it's over. Her policies are empty promises and she knows it.

These people are content to not fight the hard battles. Meanwhile, creeping fascism is taking over the right, and the liberals have no solutions.

So yeah, garbage.

 

[TragicMonkey]

People accuse Bernie of being unrealistic, but it's quite the opposite. He's the only one that is open about the nature of our deliberately stymied government.

What is Pete, or Biden, or Warren going to do when they win and McConnell refuses to play ball, as we know he will. Was 8 years of Obama not enough to prove that nothing is to be gained from trying to compromise with these people?

Bernie is calling for a popular movement to recapture the legislature. He intends to use the bully pulpit of the presidency to do so.

How is Warren going to pass her wealth tax? When McConnell says no, and the right wing SCOTUS says no, it's over. Her policies are empty promises and she knows it.

These people are content to not fight the hard battles. Meanwhile, creeping fascism is taking over the right, and the liberals have no solutions.

So yeah, garbage.

How exactly is Sanders going to overcome a hostile Senate? By "calling for a popular movement"? Sounds like it's just words, same as any of the other candidates, until/unless he can actually do it.

 

[varwoche]

I'm not totally on board, varwoche. With the GOP congresscritters having just arrived from the 18th century, Dems have to start from a pretty far out position so that negotiations end up with something worthwhile. I also think "shooting for the stars" is a reasonable campaign strategy to energize registered voters off their lazy duffs and actually vote. I'll acknowledge some risks in such a strategy but, in balance, I think it's a positive (winning?) approach.

I get it but -- it's the issue of telling people in MI, WI and PA who are happy with their insurance that (1) they won't be able to keep it and (2) the replacement isn't defined. That's a losing proposition.

Immediate MFA doesn't even make sense in terms of mundane logistics. Warren realizes that and has proposed a transition period, but is taking heat from purists who enjoy fictional concepts.

 

[Distracted1]

I'd never heard of them either. I tried looking up some info on Sestak but this is all I could find:

[qimg]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/54/94/13/5494139b26b9a6521d6698b858468b58.jpg[/qimg]

He looks a little green but I'd still vote for him over Trump.

Actually, Joe Sestak would have made a wonderful nominee. Trump loses in a landslide to him.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

How exactly is Sanders going to overcome a hostile Senate? By "calling for a popular movement"? Sounds like it's just words, same as any of the other candidates, until/unless he can actually do it.

It's a long term, difficult project, but there's intellectual honesty there. Nothing changes in this country until different people are in Congress. This is inherently a bottom-up problem that can only be solved by intense grassroots activism, which Bernie is quite plain in making his priority. Bernie's talk of mass movements is a plan. It's not a satisfying "i'll just make it happen as President plan", but it's a realistic plan with a chance of success. Bernie isn't talking about technocratic solutions and executive action, he's talking about supporting local activism and organizing and turning that into meaningful political power.

Warren's "Day One" plan is intellectually insulting. No Democratic will accomplish anything meaningful one day one, or day 100, so long as the deadlock of government isn't broken. It ignores the political reality that a president alone can't make change, but everyone but Bernie is happy to pretend otherwise.

 

[varwoche]

@Sezme If I was formulating a message for Warren or whoever, it might look like this...

We are going to expand Medicare to cover X million Americans who today don't have health insurance. Ultimately we'll realize huge cost savings if we implement Medicare for all. However I'm not going to push that on anyone. The American people will decide if expanded Medicare has worked. You will decide if we should take it to the next step and cover everyone.​

 

[d4m10n]

How exactly is Sanders going to overcome a hostile Senate? By "calling for a popular movement"? Sounds like it's just words, same as any of the other candidates, until/unless he can actually do it.

It's a long term, difficult project, but there's intellectual honesty there. Nothing changes in this country until different people are in Congress. This is inherently a bottom-up problem that can only be solved by intense grassroots activism, which Bernie is quite plain in making his priority. Bernie's talk of mass movements is a plan. It's not a satisfying "i'll just make it happen as President plan", but it's a realistic plan with a chance of success. Bernie isn't talking about technocratic solutions and executive action, he's talking about supporting local activism and organizing and turning that into meaningful political power.

Do you believe Bernie's "intense grassroots activism" would overcome the significant structural advantage currently enjoyed by the GOP in the Senate?

https://twitter.com/D4M10N/status/1118595141571436544

 

[acbytesla]

Biden has to remind us just how old and corny he is. New slogan. "No malarkey".