2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[The_Animus]

But here is something that can't be ignored:

Keep your eyes peeled.

Does anyone actually care about this? He should have just said there are more important issues and stuck to his primary message. Instead he's shooting himself in the foot.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Does anyone actually care about this? He should have just said there are more important issues and stuck to his primary message. Instead he's shooting himself in the foot.

This is how every debate on circumcision (and abortion, and a few other issues) should go.

Side A: do you think you have an argument we haven't heard before?

B: No. Do you have an argument we haven't heard before?

A: no. Okay, let's get lunch.

 

[acbytesla]

A couple of questions, if you don't mind:

-Why do you like Biden? As far as I know, he hasn't even said that he will run yet, so you don't even know what issues he will be running on.

I like a lot of the Democratic candidates. Biden is a genuine, relatable, likable guy. He knows how the system works having spent many years in Congress as well as the White House.
He's been promoting rebuilding US infrastructure for decades. I like that.

-Free college education. Why are you opposed to this?

I think it should be a lot cheaper for those that cannot afford it. But those that can afford it should pay.

I am not a huge fan of capitalism, but I'm thinking that even within the system of capitalism, a well educated workforce should be a good thing, right? If you want to maximize profit, you would want as many people who are knowledgeable in their fields as possible. So providing free higher education to anyone who wants it should be good for the bottom line? I mean, how could it not be?
Also, what if the guy or gal who could potentially find a cure for cancer, if they could afford a higher education, will be stuck working as burgerflippers because they did not have the money to go to college?

I believe an educated workforce is essential. But I don't think college the way it is structured necessarily provides this. I'd like to see more engineering, science and vocational schools. And more subsidies for those that cannot afford to attend those schools. But sorry, I don't believe spending taxpayers money for any kind of education is appropriate. If you want to go to college to study Proust, keggers and beer pong, prepare to pony up.

 

[Brainster]

As Mike Gravel once said in the 2008 debates, "I feel like a potted plant here..."



Am I on ignore?

Sorry, didn't see your post since it was near the bottom of the prior page.

 

[Craig4]

Yep, the Russian Troll Farms are making sure everyone has good .gif files to splatter all over the internet when Joe gets picked.

The 2020 campaign should produce even more LULZ than '16.

The Russians are a known now. I doubt they will be the same threat as 2016. We can plan for them now.

 

[Trebuchet]

Honestly, I never understood why she was this awful candidate. Particularly compared to Sanders, who was praising the Soviet Union's "prosperity" before they completely collapsed. She pulled off a wonderful convention, she left all three debates looking calm and rational while Dolt 45 sputtering in an ignorant rage. And all four events left her up in the polls. The only things I remember from the GOP convention was Melania's plagiarism, Ted Cruz refusing to endorse, and Laura Ingham's nazi salute.

No, what killed her was Comey's letter, lovingly handed to congressional Republicans, and the media's absolute refusal to discuss anything but her emails and how Dolt 45 supposedly knew how to thrill crowds.She looked poised, confident, and prepared, while Dolt 45 looked like exactly the destructive, hateful conman he...well, that he always has been.

For me, it was her personality, or more specifically, lack of it. Her husband is charismatic. Obama is charismatic. Hell, even Trump is more charismatic than she is.

 

[Travis]

-Free college education. Why are you opposed to this? I am not a huge fan of capitalism, but I'm thinking that even within the system of capitalism, a well educated workforce should be a good thing, right? If you want to maximize profit, you would want as many people who are knowledgeable in their fields as possible. So providing free higher education to anyone who wants it should be good for the bottom line? I mean, how could it not be?
Also, what if the guy or gal who could potentially find a cure for cancer, if they could afford a higher education, will be stuck working as burgerflippers because they did not have the money to go to college?

My own view is that the free college thing is mostly pandering to middle class white people. America's education system is broken in much more fundamental ways than college being too expensive (which it is). We have people in prison right now for the crime if trying to get their child into a better school than the the one that serves their address. And that is awful. It is atrocious that in the same city there will be one high school with a fully funded media arts program teaching kids how to use state of the art high definition video cameras and another high school where teachers have to buy pencils for their students out of their own pocket and the text books don't know if humans ever made it to the moon or not. Needless to say that to the students in the very poor school the issue of free college is entirely academic as they likely won't even finish high school and will instead end up in a privately funded, for profit prison as another victim of the nefarious school to prison pipeline.


Free college is fine but I think it should not take priority over fixing a system that sends way too many 16 year olds into a profit prison system on 50 year sentences for non violent drug charges.

 

[Brainster]

The Democrat's keep singing Dire Straits' most famous song, Money for Nothing:

Sen. Kamala Harris plans to call for a federal effort to boost teachers’ salaries Saturday, offering up the first new policy proposal of her 2020 presidential campaign on an issue that is roiling school districts across the country and is dear to a powerful Democratic constituency.

The plan, which Harris is slated to unveil while addressing a morning rally at Texas Southern University in Houston, would promise an unprecedented federal investment in teacher pay because of widespread concern that teaching, a female-dominated profession, is badly underpaid, according to a campaign aide who was not authorized to discuss the plan on the record.

So it's kind of a two-fer; sounds great to teachers, sounds great to feminists.

Corey Booker has floated something different:

The topic is frequently raised on the campaign trail. At a recent event in Ottumwa, Iowa, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey went into some detail about new investments he wanted to make in public schools and teachers. He called for helping teachers by retiring their college debt, boosting funding special education funding and overhauling the tax system so teachers pay less.

I can't imagine the highlighted part passing constitutional muster.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Why?
There are plenty of ways to give a certain type of professions more options for tax breaks - just ask lawyers.

 

[SezMe]

Mayor Pete (everybody calls him that because his last name is Buttigieg) gives an interview to Esquire. The guy is world-class at evading questions:

No, the question is utterly asinine ...

What's the single best plank in the congressional version of the Green New Deal and the single worst plank?

... because there is no "plank" in that document. I've read it. It spells out guiding principles and goals for a green new deal. There are no "planks" in it. So Pete is correct to refuse to answer the question, although he could have done a better job of saying why.

And you're wrong to assert he's evading the question because it's an ignorant question.

 

[Belz...]

CNN is getting silly with proclaiming a new candidate the "Hot" one every day.

Isn't that SOP all the time, though?

 

[Belz...]

Money for Nothing:

As opposed to free tax cuts?

 

[Mumbles]

For me, it was her personality, or more specifically, lack of it. Her husband is charismatic. Obama is charismatic. Hell, even Trump is more charismatic than she is.

I've never understood why people consider a spiteful, greedy, bigoted ignoramus is "charismatic", while a friendly, warm woman who literally just laughs off bitter tirades is lacking personality, but that's me. Hell, even Dolt 45's presidential portrait has him straining like he's in the middle of taking a dump - while Obama, GWB, Clinton, GHWB, and Reagen just look relaxed, with confident smiles.

Then again, this may also be why I find the women of the current dem field more charismatic than the guys (Biden hasn't announced yet, I'll note). Sanders is a curmudgeon, Booker is just corny, and O'Rourke has a "How do you do, fellow kids?" vibe. Warren and Harris strike me as, in their own ways, far more friendly and confident.

Luckily, I have over a year to move past that and compare their policy platforms

 

[WilliamSeger]

I've never understood why people consider a spiteful, greedy, bigoted ignoramus is "charismatic", while a friendly, warm woman who literally just laughs off bitter tirades is lacking personality, but that's me. Hell, even Dolt 45's presidential portrait has him straining like he's in the middle of taking a dump - while Obama, GWB, Clinton, GHWB, and Reagen just look relaxed, with confident smiles.

Then again, this may also be why I find the women of the current dem field more charismatic than the guys (Biden hasn't announced yet, I'll note). Sanders is a curmudgeon, Booker is just corny, and O'Rourke has a "How do you do, fellow kids?" vibe. Warren and Harris strike me as, in their own ways, far more friendly and confident.

Luckily, I have over a year to move past that and compare their policy platforms

Watching a Trump speech is like watching someone masturbate in public, so "charisma" is the last word I would use to describe it. Even if you don't find his self-obsession obnoxious, it's beyond me how anyone could believe that such a totally self-obsessed, self-serving, lying demagogue would work in the their best interests.

Trumpers seem be in denial about one thing: "Not Trump" will be a huge issue in 2020.

 

[acbytesla]

The Democrat's keep singing Dire Straits' most famous song, Money for Nothing:

So it's kind of a two-fer; sounds great to teachers, sounds great to feminists.

Corey Booker has floated something different:

I can't imagine the highlighted part passing constitutional muster.

I, I don't see how you
1. can call increasing teacher pay 'money for nothing.'
2. Or that providing tax credits for teaching not meeting 'constitutional muster'. You do understand that tax credits and exemptions have been provided for decades for different kinds of income and expenditures? How would this be any different than taxing investment income at a different rate than wage income? Or giving tax credits for solar panels or home insulation?

Feel free to enlighten me.

 

[Belz...]

I've never understood why people consider a spiteful, greedy, bigoted ignoramus is "charismatic", while a friendly, warm woman who literally just laughs off bitter tirades is lacking personality, but that's me.

I don't know. Charisma has, perhaps, little to do with what someone laughs off or what they know or are bigoted about.

 

[theprestige]

I, I don't see how you

1. can call increasing teacher pay 'money for nothing.'





Feel free to enlighten me.

Look at where the US ranks in education spending. Look at where the US ranks in education outcomes.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Look at where the US ranks in education spending. Look at where the US ranks in education outcomes.

Why education spending? I thought we were talking about teacher pay.

 

[theprestige]

Why education spending? I thought we were talking about teacher pay.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. It looks like you're saying that teacher pay isn't education spending, but it's hard to tell with that question mark at the end.

 

[Brainster]

I, I don't see how you
1. can call increasing teacher pay 'money for nothing

It's a cynical giveaway to a particular segment of the Democrats' base.

2. Or that providing tax credits for teaching not meeting 'constitutional muster'. You do understand that tax credits and exemptions have been provided for decades for different kinds of income and expenditures? How would this be any different than taxing investment income at a different income than wage income? Or giving tax credits for solar panels or home insulation?

Feel free to enlighten me.

It's pretty simple. You can tax different kinds of income differently. You can set up tax credits for particular expenditures that the government sees as socially beneficial. But you cannot tax different kinds of people differently.