2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[theprestige]

Now you are introducing severity as a factor? Just pulling things out of a hat.

Yeah, but the hat I'm pulling from is that sweet turban that Hammurabi has been rocking since 1754 BC, so no issues there.

Normally I'd say that proportionality of crime and punishment is an idea that needs no introduction, but I'll make an exception in this case this one time:

"Severity as a Factor in Crime and Punishment, this is BobTheCoward. Bob, this is Severity."

HTH. HAND!

 

[theprestige]

Severity has always been a factor in crime and punishment. That is so universal an opinion and practice that most people never feel the need to specify it, and properly assume that it is always implicit in the discussion. If you feel severity should not be a factor, then you need to make that explicit or people will (again, properly) assume otherwise.

And you didn't actually answer his query.

To be fair, I didn't direct any inquiry to Bob. But who knows? Maybe Belz... will have the same complaint.

 

[Belz...]

As long as we agree that different crimes have different severity, and that therefore their consequences should also have different severity, I don't see the problem.

Tell me what you believe is the correct approach to the questions raised, and why, and I'll tell you whether I agree, and why.

Not before you answer my question, here rephrased: If you are acting against society, why are you allowed in it?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Not before you answer my question, here rephrased: If you are acting against society, why are you allowed in it?

The ones in jail are the ones playing by the rules. The rule is do not murder, and if you do murder, go to prison.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I hope the Democratic candidates have a better debate than this one. Normal trolling is at least exciting to read, but this is like listening to people pretending to misunderstand a footnote in Kant in order to lure each other into a Socratic trap.

 

[theprestige]

Not before you answer my question, here rephrased: If you are acting against society, why are you allowed in it?

It's a stupid question. If you're stuck without an answer, then you're stuck. I'm not going to worry about trying to unstick you. Good luck.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I hope the Democratic candidates have a better debate than this one. Normal trolling is at least exciting to read, but this is like listening to people pretending to misunderstand a footnote in Kant in order to lure each other into a Socratic trap.

Admit it, you don't know what that means.

Sounds good though.

 

[theprestige]

I hope the Democratic candidates have a better debate than this one. Normal trolling is at least exciting to read, but this is like listening to people pretending to misunderstand a footnote in Kant in order to lure each other into a Socratic trap.

I've been thinking of it as the "Pseudo-Socratic Method".

 

[TragicMonkey]

More importantly, who amongst the Democrat potentials is hot? I can't decide about Yang, half the photos I've seen he looks cute, the other half he looks like he's hung over. Inslee isn't bad, I'd like to see him in a sweater. People talk about Beto but honestly I don't see it. He needs to moisturize and that childish haircut does nothing to deemphasize his skull which is apparently trying to flee his head. Biden looks boring. Buttigieg looks bland and a little Mormon but not in the sexy Mormon way. Ryan has evil eyes and a fake smile. There's a Frankenstein-faced guy whose name I forget. Gravel has aged well but at 104 he's over even my age limit. Bernie looks like a Dickens character who would be named Wildfeather or Galeblown. I'm not into ladies but Warren seems okay, although I wish fewer old ladies insisted on coloring their hair. Harris always looks illtempered to me. And that Globule woman too closely resembles every bad manager I ever had at retail jobs.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I just ordered the Hill transcripts to see what Biden actually said. I'll let people know what I find.

 

[carlitos]

More importantly, who amongst the Democrat potentials is hot? .

The bald mayor from Florida.

 

[Belz...]

It's a stupid question. If you're stuck without an answer, then you're stuck. I'm not going to worry about trying to unstick you. Good luck.

You're the one who brought up 'being against society'. If you agree that it was stupid, I'm happy to drop the whole thing.

 

[The Atheist]

I notice that the first item on the laundry list is Biden's support for the 1994 crime bill. Yet the writer fails to mention that Bernie also voted for the bill.

The Bernie should face the same scrutiny.

Biden probably won't get nominated, but if he did, I bet the author of this article won't waste any time publishing a new piece dismissing exactly the criticisms of Biden that he raises here.

They also missed the bus big-time.

The issue that should be taking all the oxygen over Biden is Ukraine.

More importantly, who amongst the Democrat potentials is hot?

That's an excellent point, and one I haven't heard much mention of in Hillary's reasons for losing. No matter how clever or accomplished she was, she looks like a frumpy old woman. She reminded me of a biology teacher I had a thousand years ago whose name among the kids was Crowbar.

Looks are critical to any political campaign.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The bald mayor from Florida.

I'd never heard of him until now. But you're right, he's fairly hot.

 

[theprestige]

You're the one who brought up 'being against society'. If you agree that it was stupid, I'm happy to drop the whole thing.

Your question was stupid. I think the principle I articulated is entirely reasonable. But it looks like we've reached the end of this particular line. Until next time, Belz...

 

[TragicMonkey]

That's an excellent point, and one I haven't heard much mention of in Hillary's reasons for losing. No matter how clever or accomplished she was, she looks like a frumpy old woman. She reminded me of a biology teacher I had a thousand years ago whose name among the kids was Crowbar.

Looks are critical to any political campaign.

You're crazy. Clinton's quite attractive for a woman of her years. Some of her outfits were mistakes, though. I think she should have tried to look more English county than American business. I bet she'd look good in a tweed jacket over an off-ivory blouse with moderate frills. Definitely stick to earth tones and neutrals, the bright primary colors are too young for her.

 

[theprestige]

The issue that should be taking all the oxygen over Biden is Ukraine.

After making such a big deal about Manafort interfering in the Ukraine, I don't think they can call out Biden on that point.

 

[Brainster]

Kamala Harris comes under fire (sorry) for owning a gun:

"I am a gun owner," Harris said while campaigning in Iowa, "and I own a gun for probably the reason a lot of people do — for personal safety." The campaign aide, whom CNN did not name, scrambled to explain that the senator's handgun was purchased years ago and is locked up.

Harris justified owning the gun by pointing out that "I was a career prosecutor."

 

[Venom]

Just as petty: After that Fox town hall, both conservatives and Sanders opponents in the Democratic Party tried to "expose" Bernie Sanders as a millionaire.

QUESTION: Senator Sanders, thank you for being here. Your tax returns recently revealed that you are, in fact, a millionaire. How would you respond to concerns that your financial status undermines your authority as someone who has railed against millionaires and billionaires?

SANDERS: OK. Well, that's a good question. And here it is, all right? You ready to have me plead guilty. I plead guilty to have written a book which was an international best-seller, OK? And when you write a book that makes it to the top of the New York Times best-seller list, you make money. And I made money. I suspect that in a couple of years my salary will go back to $173,000, which is what a member of Congress gets.

But I think your question should ask, well, now that you wrote a book, you made money, is that going to mean that you change your policies? Well, you're looking at somebody who not only voted against Trump's disastrous tax plan -- 83 percent of the benefits going to the top 1 percent -- but I have and will continue in this campaign to fight for progressive taxation.

That old, wrinkly, hypocritical, no-good socialist! welfare capitalist!

 

[Delvo]

Biden...

In the Democrats' previous brilliant performance at losing with a winning hand, they faced a sexual harasser who at least claimed to also be a sexual assaulter because he thought that was something to "brag" about, so they carefully targeted that specific issue by sending Bill Clinton's prime enabler against him. After seeing how that worked, do they really think it's a better idea to put him up against not merely an enabler but literally a fellow sexual harasser/assaulter this time... particularly one whose history of groping & pawing is easily observable public knowledge rather than just a claim, but who still wouldn't even admit that it was what it was & tried to weasel out of it with obvious lies about how they were all grieving over one thing or another and just couldn't make it through without a not-at-all-hug-like "hug" from a complete stranger?

It just doesn't seem possible to be that stupid.