2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
SezMe said:
Do you consider the Mueller investigation "real evidence" because if you do, his report concluded that Russian interference was "sweeping and systematic" and "violated U.S. criminal law".
Click to expand...

His report never claims that they changed the outcome of the election. So no, it's not real evidence of the claim that they did. See how that works?
 
Ziggurat said:
His report never claims that they changed the outcome of the election. So no, it's not real evidence of the claim that they did. See how that works?
Click to expand...


To the contrary, acknowledging the facts that A) Russians interfered, and B) The election was won on a slim margin, the default position is that Russian interference did indeed affect the outcome. Please provide whatever evidence you may have that it did not........














.....yeah, I thought so. LOL! :rolleyes:
 
Ziggurat said:
Victory is what defines a "better candidate", in cases where victory can be/is determined (it becomes messier for hypothetical matchups). But it's a mistake to conclude that whether a politician is a better candidate is the only thing that matters about them. It obviously isn't.
Click to expand...

Again, I reject your overly simplified definition of what makes a candidate better. You simply repeating your definition neither changes that nor gives any reasoning to accept it beyond your already rejected appeal to personal authority. I led out by pointing that cheating, for example, can allow a worse candidate to tip the scales to victory. That's even more relevant when the cheating is done by someone else and is significant enough that how good or bad the candidates are just doesn't even matter.

Ziggurat said:
And your belief that the Russians tilted the election isn't supported by any real evidence.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Just the evidence that you wish didn't exist. The effect that the Russians had directly was certainly tiny compared to, for example, Fox News' emotional predation propaganda, yes, but it's also well worth remembering that the Russians fed that, along with so much else. The whole Seth Rich conspiracy theory that Fox went all in on was started by the Russians, for example. Trumps margin of victory in three of the main states that Russia focused on alongside the Trump campaign was really tiny - tiny to the point that Russia's many-faceted efforts are very likely to to have shifted the field - especially if you include the multiplier effect caused by the profit-focused corporate and overtly partisan right-wing media's choices.

Enough of this derail, though. To poke at actual Candidate related news -

Tulsi voted present when it came to impeaching. Tulsi is, perhaps, the only one of the first or second tier Democratic candidates that I would seriously consider not voting for. I'm glad that she's not even qualified for this next debate.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Just the evidence that you wish didn't exist.
Click to expand...

It’s odd, this evidence I wish didn’t exist... why can’t you present it? What you do present is evidence for something other than the claim in question.
 
In tonight's Dem debate, Pete kept targeting Warren, but Klobuchar seemed to be targeting Pete.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
It’s odd, this evidence I wish didn’t exist... why can’t you present it? What you do present is evidence for something other than the claim in question.
Click to expand...


LOL! You have no evidence to the contrary, either.

Disagree? Go ahead: Tell me what kind of evidence you would even find acceptable.














.....waiting......
 
Now they are arguing about healthcare again.

It's going to cost 30 trillion!

Nobody argues the logical items, issues. Say x doctors treat 50 million Americans each year for 20 years and 30 trillion. It is going to cost us the same amt for us to pay for it whether it is Medicare for all or a bunch of insurance companies. Except the bill will be 30 trillion plus 20% if we use the insurance companies.

So there is no benefit from the insurance companies.

The healthcare providers would be private in both cases.

ADD
The 30 trillion involves 10 years
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...r-all-bernie-sanders-32-trillion-cost-voxcare
 
Last edited:
Klobuchar and Steyer came out on top, IMO.

Yang wasn't bad but his whole campaign isn't realistic.

Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, Biden blew it bitching about each other. Sanders and Warren just kept repeating their campaign speeches, Warren a little more than Sanders. Canned answers don't enlighten the voters.
 
Ziggurat said:
His report never claims that they changed the outcome of the election. So no, it's not real evidence of the claim that they did. See how that works?
Click to expand...

*squeak* *squeak* You need to grease the wheels on your goalposts. Your claim was not "changed the outcome" but "tilted the election". Are you by any chance related to Sarah Sanders?
 
Ziggurat said:
It’s odd, this evidence I wish didn’t exist... why can’t you present it? What you do present is evidence for something other than the claim in question.
Click to expand...

As soon as you can figure out what your claim is, I'm sure some relevant evidence will be available for you to ignore.
 
Ziggurat said:
You don’t seem to understand where the burden of proof is when someone makes a claim.
Click to expand...


You seem to be demanding the sort of evidence that is logically impossible to obtain. Again I ask: What sort of evidence would be acceptable to you? Is that too difficult a question?
 
Ziggurat said:
It’s odd, this evidence I wish didn’t exist... why can’t you present it? What you do present is evidence for something other than the claim in question.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

My apologies, then, for misunderstanding your redefinition of some number of terms without specifying that you were doing so.
 
It's pretty ridiculous for Pete to claim he's some swing state champion because he was elected Mayor in "Mike Pence's" Indiana.

Pete ran for statewide election and got wrecked. Lost by 20 points. Pete's appeal ends at the city limits of South Bend.

South Bend is a college town. It's an enclave of liberalism in any otherwise very conservative state. It's like Austin in Texas, or the college towns in NC. The electoral successes in these liberal enclaves says very little about the rest of the state.

There is no reason to believe that Pete will appeal to conservative voters with his brand of technocratic liberalism.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
It's pretty ridiculous for Pete to claim he's some swing state champion because he was elected Mayor in "Mike Pence's" Indiana.

Pete ran for statewide election and got wrecked. Lost by 20 points. Pete's appeal ends at the city limits of South Bend.

South Bend is a college town. It's an enclave of liberalism in any otherwise very conservative state. It's like Austin in Texas, or the college towns in NC. The electoral successes in these liberal enclaves says very little about the rest of the state.

There is no reason to believe that Pete will appeal to conservative voters with his brand of technocratic liberalism.
Click to expand...

I think Buttgieg's appeal stops at the entrance of his Whine Cave.

Yes, yes, I know the context and that the wine cave business is really unfair as a real criticism. And yet it'll stick. "Wine cave", fairly or not, is Buttgieg's version of the Dean Scream or the Dukakis Tank. It's the ornamental angel atop the gravestone of his chance for the candidacy.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I think Buttgieg's appeal stops at the entrance of his Whine Cave.

Yes, yes, I know the context and that the wine cave business is really unfair as a real criticism. And yet it'll stick. "Wine cave", fairly or not, is Buttgieg's version of the Dean Scream or the Dukakis Tank. It's the ornamental angel atop the gravestone of his chance for the candidacy.
Click to expand...

Maybe Pete would rather talk about one of his wealthy bundlers, Steve Patton. Patton is best known for being the city of Chicago attorney that fought to suppress the police murder video of Laquan McDonald.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/pete-buttigieg-chicago-attorney-fundraiser/index.html

I'm starting to think that candidates shouldn't be out grubbing for donations from the wealthy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom