Democratic caucuses and primaries

[theprestige]

By the time the current generation figures out that it's the Senate, not the Presidency, that controls the nation at the federal level, a whole new generation of callow youths will be storming the polls with their naive belief that it's the President, and not the Senate, that really matters.

 

[lobosrul5]

By the time the current generation figures out that it's the Senate, not the Presidency, that controls the nation at the federal level, a whole new generation of callow youths will be storming the polls with their naive belief that it's the President, and not the Senate, that really matters.

Its both. And when they are at odds with one another, not a hell of a lot can get done. Treaties and judicial/executive appointments cannot be done without both. I wonder if the Senate will even confirm Sanders' cabinet nominees, if he were to be elected.

 

[Ziggurat]

Just out of interest, the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak does provide an opportunity to mention childhood vaccinations. According to my Google, parents have to pay to have their children vaccinated for childhood diseases. Is this correct?

In general, no. There may be a few edge case exceptions, but most people in the US don't need to pay for childhood vaccinations.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Deleted, Wrong thread.

 

[carlitos]

At $15 per hour in South Bend you could probably buy a McMansion.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

At $15 per hour in South Bend you could probably buy a McMansion.

$15/hr is $31,200 a year. This is a paltry wage in any part of the country and a poverty wage is all but the lowest cost of living areas.

Edit; This was a silly thing to say, given what Carlitos has posted below.

 

[carlitos]

$15/hr is $31,200 a year. This is a paltry wage in any part of the country and a poverty wage is all but the lowest cost of living areas.

$15 per hour is a poverty wage? In South Bend? That's ridiculous.

2020 Federal Poverty Level (FPL) Guidelines
The 2020 Federal Poverty Level (FPL) guidelines are dependent on the number of people in your household and where you live (Alaska and Hawaii differ from the other 48 states + DC). The guidelines are as follows:

Family Size: |48 Contiguous States & D.C.:| Alaska:| Hawaii:
1| $12,760| $15,950| $14,680
2| $17,240| $21,550| $19,830
3| $21,720| $27,150| $24,980
4| $26,200| $32,750| $30,130

Cost of living table:

COST OF LIVING| South Bend| Indiana| USA
Overall| 68.4| 82.1| 100

In other words, if you're living single in South Bend making $15 per hour, you are grossing 2.5 times the poverty index. Adjusted for Cost of Living, make that nearly 4 times.

I found a 4 bedroom McMansion lite for $215,000 in South Bend. With a mortgage of $1152, that would give a $15-per-hour full-time worker a debt-to-income ratio of 50% if they didn't have any student loans. They could stretch and just swing it, and with a dual income household it would be totally doable.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

$15 per hour is a poverty wage? In South Bend? That's ridiculous.

Family Size: |48 Contiguous States & D.C.:| Alaska:| Hawaii:
1| $12,760| $15,950| $14,680
2| $17,240| $21,550| $19,830
3| $21,720| $27,150| $24,980
4| $26,200| $32,750| $30,130

Cost of living table:

COST OF LIVING| South Bend| Indiana| USA
Overall| 68.4| 82.1| 100

In other words, if you're living single in South Bend making $15 per hour, you are grossing 2.5 times the poverty index. Adjusted for Cost of Living, make that nearly 4 times.

I found a 4 bedroom McMansion lite for $215,000 in South Bend. With a mortgage of $1152, that would give a $15-per-hour full-time worker a debt-to-income ratio of 50% if they didn't have any student loans. They could stretch and just swing it, and with a dual income household it would be totally doable.

I retract my comment.

A two income family at $15 could probably make it work. Hard to imagine a single person being able to save enough for money down, qualify for a mortgage at that debt level, and still cover insurance and taxes, but a single person probably isn't buying a 4 bedroom house.

$15 an hour would probably be a pretty decent living for many non-metro areas. Of course, these areas are probably least likely to acquiesce to these demands.

 

[carlitos]

Thank you. I was admittedly being hyperbolic, but Indiana is a pretty cheap place to live.

That's why the federal minimum wage isn't ever going to work as a living wage, unless we want to create incentives for people to leave large cities to seek work.

 

[Segnosaur]

Another thing to keep in mind... A recession is coming. (Not suggesting any sort of great predictive powers here, but recessions do happen every decade or so, and the current expansion has gone on for quite some time.) I would much rather have a republican in the white house when a recession hits than a Democrat.

Worst case scenario: Democrats wins the presidency, economy crashes (even if its just due to bad timing, rather than anything the president does), voters sour on the Democrats, and we end up with a one-term president followed by more republicans.

Worst case, Trump wins. Ginsburg and Breyer die. We'll have a stacked SCOTUS for many decades to come.

Yes, that would be worse. I was referring specifically to a worst-case scenario if Trump loses and a Democrat (such as Sanders) wins.

Of course, even if the Democrats take the white house and manage to place a couple of judges on the supreme court... if they end up with a 1-term president, followed by a multi-term republican president, it could end up being worse for them. Granted, they might have dodged a bullet over Ginsburg, but if the next republican gets 8 years (and the democrats get only 4) that means more chances to stack the courts.

 

[Kestrel]

Just out of interest, the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak does provide an opportunity to mention childhood vaccinations. According to my Google, parents have to pay to have their children vaccinated for childhood diseases. Is this correct?

Some immunizations are available at no charge with any Affordable Care Act policy. I do not know if all recommend childhood immunizations are free.

Annual flu shots are free under most insurance policies.

 

[Segnosaur]

Odds of the Dems getting to even 50 seats in the Senate this election are damn near 0. So, nothing is going to happen. Not sure what that means for 2022 exactly.

True, the chance of them taking the senate is very low. Not impossible though.

According to Wikipedia, it looks like the best opportunity is to take:

- Arizona (the current Senator, McSally, was appointed to the position, after losing another senate race, so its not like she has a lot of public support. Plus, it looks like she's trailing her opponent in the polls)

- Maine (Collins currently has the worst approval ratings in the senate, and she is trailing her main Democratic challenger in the polls)

- North Carolina (The current Republican, Tillis, won last time in a very tight race, and currently has fairly low approval ratings. And although the state leans republican, its not an extreme situation, like Texas)

- Colorado (his victory last time was very tight, and the state does have a very slight Democratic tilt.)

Of course, the Democrats also have to defend Alabama, where Jones barely squeaked by last time (thanks in part to the Republicans nominating a very poor challenger.)

Still, a sweep of all the 4 seats mentioned above (as well as a successful defense of Alabama) would flip the Senate. Realistically I don't think it will happen, but its not completely outside the realm of possibility.

 

[dudalb]

True, the chance of them taking the senate is very low. Not impossible though.

According to Wikipedia, it looks like the best opportunity is to take:

- Arizona (the current Senator, McSally, was appointed to the position, after losing another senate race, so its not like she has a lot of public support. Plus, it looks like she's trailing her opponent in the polls)

- Maine (Collins currently has the worst approval ratings in the senate, and she is trailing her main Democratic challenger in the polls)

- North Carolina (The current Republican, Tillis, won last time in a very tight race, and currently has fairly low approval ratings. And although the state leans republican, its not an extreme situation, like Texas)

- Colorado (his victory last time was very tight, and the state does have a very slight Democratic tilt.)

Of course, the Democrats also have to defend Alabama, where Jones barely squeaked by last time (thanks in part to the Republicans nominating a very poor challenger.)

Still, a sweep of all the 4 seats mentioned above (as well as a successful defense of Alabama) would flip the Senate. Realistically I don't think it will happen, but its not completely outside the realm of possibility.

I think, if Sanders is nominated, the Dems should forget about the Senate, and worry about keeping the House...

 

[theprestige]

I think, if Sanders is nominated, the Dems should forget about the Senate, and worry about keeping the House...

The really smart play would be to phone in the presidential race, and focus on flipping the Senate. The DNC should have gone straight for a brokered convention, and selected the candidate with the best chance of helping down-ticket races, especially for Senators. President Trump with a Democrat legislature would be a very different beast from President Sanders with a Republican Senate and a Democrat House.

 

[Trebuchet]

I wonder if the Senate will even confirm Sanders' cabinet nominees, if he were to be elected.

I don't wonder at all. They won't, if Mitchy is still in charge. And that applies to any Dem President, not just Bernie.

Fortunately, Trump has set a wonderful precedent with his many "acting" appointees. Too bad that doesn't apply to judges.

 

[angrysoba]

I think, if Sanders is nominated, the Dems should forget about the Senate, and worry about keeping the House...

Huh? Why would nominating Sanders mean forgetting about the Senate? Why not try to win all the races they are competing in? Surely Bloomberg’s money must be good for something.

 

[dudalb]

Huh? Why would nominating Sanders mean forgetting about the Senate? Why not try to win all the races they are competing in? Surely Bloomberg’s money must be good for something.

Uh, if Sanders is nominated, the Dems might well lose the house in November

 

[d4m10n]

Anyone else watching the debate?

[emoji91][emoji91][emoji91]

 

[angrysoba]

Uh, if Sanders is nominated, the Dems might well lose the house in November

That could happen whoever they nominate. Surely. Also, surely their electoral strategy should be to win as many seats as possible in both houses regardless of who is the nominee.

 

[angrysoba]

Anyone else watching the debate?

[emoji91][emoji91][emoji91]

The debate is rigged against Bernie. Even the people asking the questions are moderators. Why no radicalizers, huh?