Azeem Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 So you can't be white and poor ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 It was a dumb slip up but it was also a look at how we all know politicians work when it comes to what they need to say to appeal to certain groups. The idiot just forgot the code words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 So there’s been two rounds of presidential debates since I created this thread and there has been significant movement in the polls. Biden took a significant dip after debate 1 but has recovered a decent amount. Harris did the opposite. Waren has overtaken Sanders. The group beyond the first five candidates has fallen away, with Beto O’Rourke in particular dropping back into the pack, and now a big gap up to fifth placed Buttiieg. Hard to see anyone outside the top 5 winning the nomination at this point. Sooner or later the debates will be limited to those five I’d expect. Of those five, buttigieg is least likely to wi the nomination, and yet is the one I think old be most likely to beat trump due to posing the strongest contrast, as well as fairl incredible oratory skills and intellectual capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 Biden thinks he was VP during Parkland. Parkland was like a year after he left. He's fucking senile on top of having literally zero to offer on policy, and being a borderline paedo. How can the idea of him being nominated be entertained in the slightest besides centrist arrogance of the highest order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted August 22, 2019 Author Share Posted August 22, 2019 Warren has overtaken Sanders in second place in real clear politics all polling national average, and overtaken Biden in betting markets as the most likely nominee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted September 12, 2019 Author Share Posted September 12, 2019 Debate number 3 getting under way in the next few hours. From twenty last down to ten participants with every candidate together on the same stage. Unless anyone from Buttigieg downwards can really dominate the news cycle from this debate I think they are effectively out of the race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Harry said: Debate number 3 getting under way in the next few hours. From twenty last down to ten participants with every candidate together on the same stage. Unless anyone from Buttigieg downwards can really dominate the news cycle from this debate I think they are effectively out of the race. I'm just happy as fuck that it's not 2 stages with too many fucking candidates. Many of those other candidates had the same exact fucking policy positions as well too - I don't see what the point in those candidates are, other than they want to raise their own national image. Or they've got massive egos to feed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted September 13, 2019 Author Share Posted September 13, 2019 25 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: I'm just happy as fuck that it's not 2 stages with too many fucking candidates. Many of those other candidates had the same exact fucking policy positions as well too - I don't see what the point in those candidates are, other than they want to raise their own national image. Or they've got massive egos to feed. I think Castro, Booker, klobuchar, gabbard, yang and Gillibrand had points of differentiation that theoretically could have given them a platform to success. Swallwell I think got a good profile boost out of his run. All the like for like crusty white old dudes really were a waste of time and space and I don't think they've really got anything out of it in profile raising terms either.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted November 17, 2019 Author Share Posted November 17, 2019 Buttigieg surprising many with his polling in Iowa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 4, 2019 Author Share Posted December 4, 2019 Kamala Harris drops out. Surprising considering she's one of only 7 candidates of the 14 or more still running that had qualified for the next debate. Think she suffered from a lack of authenticity, and the comparisons of her to Obama unfortunately lead you to be disappointed due to really lacking the same authenticity and the same level of charisma that you get when you tune in for a brief moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted December 4, 2019 Share Posted December 4, 2019 8 hours ago, Harry said: Kamala Harris drops out. Surprising considering she's one of only 7 candidates of the 14 or more still running that had qualified for the next debate. Think she suffered from a lack of authenticity, and the comparisons of her to Obama unfortunately lead you to be disappointed due to really lacking the same authenticity and the same level of charisma that you get when you tune in for a brief moment. I think there's a lot that goes against Kamala Harris as a Presidential candidate for the democrats. Her record as DA for San Francisco and Attorney General of California don't paint her out as a champion of civil liberties like Obama was before he came into office, regardless of what she might say, and that track record of being a more a champion for the private prison industry despite her comments otherwise actually makes her a pretty unpopular candidate in the SF Bay Area where she held office before becoming a senator. I don't think she's quite as unpopular as Diane Feinstein, who only really received support from local democratic groups because it was a race against a republican and a democrat in her race - Harris was up against another Democrat. She won pretty comfortably, and I imagine a big part of that was because Obama is incredibly popular in California and Obama endorsed her. It seems, though, that her popularity has waned here in California since becoming elected. She's had a few big TV moments when questioning Trump administration officials at confirmation hearings and judiciary hearings - but she's also had her California track record come under much more scrutiny as a result of her wider national appeal. And while Obama is popular in California, the private prison industry has really been a growing issue in California - because the Constitution literally states that people in prison can be used for slave labour (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_States), there's been issues where lobbyists for the prison industry have fought against changing the state's mandatory sentencing minimums and fought against reduced penalties for non-violent drug offenders. Because for them, more prisoners = more profit. It's led to overcrowding of prisons and a whole host of issues related to that - including violent offenders that have lower mandatory sentencing minimums being granted parole early to make room for new non-violent drug offenders... and then those violent convicts getting arrested again for violent crimes. One of her big issues is "criminal justice reform" and to me (and a lot of other people) it just rings hollow because she's been in a position where she could actively make a huge difference in criminal justice reform in the state with the most people and the biggest contributor to the US GDP. I have a hard time buying what she's selling when we've seen how she's acted before. And tbh, that feeling sort of carries over onto all her other policies... given that criminal justice is her area of expertise. You couple that with the fact that she's a junior senator in a time where over the last 3 years she's been in office... the Senate hasn't really done much to write home about. They got the Trump tax cuts through (which she didn't vote for and isn't something that'd be considered "good" for a democratic candidate) and that's basically it. So her legislative track record for the US government is virtually nil. This makes her track record on everything but the issue where I don't think her actions back up her words... miniscule. She can point to being one of the democrats who opposed confirming incompetent Trump cabinet members - but unfortunately for her, one that she did vote to confirm was Elaine Chao, who's tarred by being a part of GWB's administration and involved in a corruption scandal with funds being diverted to her husband (Mitch McConnel's) state. I think once again, like we saw with the last presidential election - we are seeing a divide between the DNC's preferred establishment candidates (which I'd say Biden and Harris are firmly a part of) and the base's preferred candidates that are more to the left than the DNC's preferred centrists. Personally, I don't see these establishment favourites like Biden and Harris having the same clout to enthuse more democratic voters to come to the polls (all my American friends who care about politics say: "democrat fall in love, republicans fall in line" in terms of how their bases actually turn up to vote). And I think if they want to go with a more moderate or centrist candidate, Buttigieg is the man to go with. He's got the authenticity you talk about and he's young enough to where he doesn't seem out of touch with a younger generation that feels left behind. But can Buttigieg win over swing votes... because he's gay and swing states have a loads of gay haters? The Obama voters that didn't turn up during the Trump election are the people that the DNC needs to be going after again. And if that means going a little more to the left than they feel comfortable with... they should embrace that rather than the country taking a further shift right by them backing a candidate that won't get the Obama voters to turn out. But it's a tough position for democrats because Trump has enough of his base in tact to win states that'll matter for the electoral college (which is an incredibly undemocratic system for a country that bullshits about freedom and democracy so much) - so a candidate that can get those Obama voters to actually turn up rather than stay at home is vital, but it also looks like they want to balance it with someone that the DNC centrist establishment can stomach (probably so they don't lose corporate lobby money entirely). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 On 05/12/2019 at 06:07, Dr. Gonzo said: I think there's a lot that goes against Kamala Harris as a Presidential candidate for the democrats. Her record as DA for San Francisco and Attorney General of California don't paint her out as a champion of civil liberties like Obama was before he came into office, regardless of what she might say, and that track record of being a more a champion for the private prison industry despite her comments otherwise actually makes her a pretty unpopular candidate in the SF Bay Area where she held office before becoming a senator. I don't think she's quite as unpopular as Diane Feinstein, who only really received support from local democratic groups because it was a race against a republican and a democrat in her race - Harris was up against another Democrat. She won pretty comfortably, and I imagine a big part of that was because Obama is incredibly popular in California and Obama endorsed her. It seems, though, that her popularity has waned here in California since becoming elected. She's had a few big TV moments when questioning Trump administration officials at confirmation hearings and judiciary hearings - but she's also had her California track record come under much more scrutiny as a result of her wider national appeal. And while Obama is popular in California, the private prison industry has really been a growing issue in California - because the Constitution literally states that people in prison can be used for slave labour (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_States), there's been issues where lobbyists for the prison industry have fought against changing the state's mandatory sentencing minimums and fought against reduced penalties for non-violent drug offenders. Because for them, more prisoners = more profit. It's led to overcrowding of prisons and a whole host of issues related to that - including violent offenders that have lower mandatory sentencing minimums being granted parole early to make room for new non-violent drug offenders... and then those violent convicts getting arrested again for violent crimes. One of her big issues is "criminal justice reform" and to me (and a lot of other people) it just rings hollow because she's been in a position where she could actively make a huge difference in criminal justice reform in the state with the most people and the biggest contributor to the US GDP. I have a hard time buying what she's selling when we've seen how she's acted before. And tbh, that feeling sort of carries over onto all her other policies... given that criminal justice is her area of expertise. You couple that with the fact that she's a junior senator in a time where over the last 3 years she's been in office... the Senate hasn't really done much to write home about. They got the Trump tax cuts through (which she didn't vote for and isn't something that'd be considered "good" for a democratic candidate) and that's basically it. So her legislative track record for the US government is virtually nil. This makes her track record on everything but the issue where I don't think her actions back up her words... miniscule. She can point to being one of the democrats who opposed confirming incompetent Trump cabinet members - but unfortunately for her, one that she did vote to confirm was Elaine Chao, who's tarred by being a part of GWB's administration and involved in a corruption scandal with funds being diverted to her husband (Mitch McConnel's) state. I think once again, like we saw with the last presidential election - we are seeing a divide between the DNC's preferred establishment candidates (which I'd say Biden and Harris are firmly a part of) and the base's preferred candidates that are more to the left than the DNC's preferred centrists. Personally, I don't see these establishment favourites like Biden and Harris having the same clout to enthuse more democratic voters to come to the polls (all my American friends who care about politics say: "democrat fall in love, republicans fall in line" in terms of how their bases actually turn up to vote). And I think if they want to go with a more moderate or centrist candidate, Buttigieg is the man to go with. He's got the authenticity you talk about and he's young enough to where he doesn't seem out of touch with a younger generation that feels left behind. But can Buttigieg win over swing votes... because he's gay and swing states have a loads of gay haters? The Obama voters that didn't turn up during the Trump election are the people that the DNC needs to be going after again. And if that means going a little more to the left than they feel comfortable with... they should embrace that rather than the country taking a further shift right by them backing a candidate that won't get the Obama voters to turn out. But it's a tough position for democrats because Trump has enough of his base in tact to win states that'll matter for the electoral college (which is an incredibly undemocratic system for a country that bullshits about freedom and democracy so much) - so a candidate that can get those Obama voters to actually turn up rather than stay at home is vital, but it also looks like they want to balance it with someone that the DNC centrist establishment can stomach (probably so they don't lose corporate lobby money entirely). Yeah I think it's a tough sell for her however she will get some major prominence cross examining trump in his senate impeachment hearing. She could be the star of the show in January... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 Very effective commercial. Biden looks much better competing against trump than he does against Warren and Buttigieg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 13 minutes ago, Harry said: Yeah I think it's a tough sell for her however she will get some major prominence cross examining trump in his senate impeachment hearing. She could be the star of the show in January... Yeah, considering what's going to happen in the senate is basically a trial and looking at her track record as a prosecutor, she will definitely be making him squirm. A lot of senators (and congressmen) on both sides are actually former prosecutors with high conviction records. So there's a lot of opportunity to see some of these people get grilled by people who are very good at grilling people. 19 minutes ago, Harry said: Very effective commercial. Biden looks much better competing against trump than he does against Warren and Buttigieg Tbf, I'd expect any of the Democratic candidates, except Tulsi Gabbard and the other lady who believes in positive energy crystals, to have a much easier time putting out strong messaging against Trump rather than who they're competing with now. All of the primary losers, barring Gabbard, will be endorsing whoever wins the contest & it's obviously also easier to attack someone who's basically a cartoon villain than people you just have political differences with, but ultimately will end up supporting if you're not the candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Yeah, considering what's going to happen in the senate is basically a trial and looking at her track record as a prosecutor, she will definitely be making him squirm. A lot of senators (and congressmen) on both sides are actually former prosecutors with high conviction records. So there's a lot of opportunity to see some of these people get grilled by people who are very good at grilling people. Tbf, I'd expect any of the Democratic candidates, except Tulsi Gabbard and the other lady who believes in positive energy crystals, to have a much easier time putting out strong messaging against Trump rather than who they're competing with now. All of the primary losers, barring Gabbard, will be endorsing whoever wins the contest & it's obviously also easier to attack someone who's basically a cartoon villain than people you just have political differences with, but ultimately will end up supporting if you're not the candidate. I'm not so sure honestly because most of the candidates don't have that presidential voice and talking big game against trump really highlights that and it comes off as unconvincing. That ad and the angle it's taken has a much higher degree of authority coming from Biden. That said I totally agree with you on Buttigieg. I've had a man crush on him since I first heard him speak words. I'd love to see him take on trump in a campaign because his intellect is next level, and his message is a polar opposite to trump. The contrast of those two on a debate stage would be profound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, Harry said: That said I totally agree with you on Buttigieg. I've had a man crush on him since I first heard him speak words. I'd love to see him take on trump in a campaign because his intellect is next level, and his message is a polar opposite to trump. The contrast of those two on a debate stage would be profound. From a purely entertainment standpoint, I'd love Buttigieg to be a VP nominee (also partially because I don't think he's got a hope in hell of being the actual nominee). An articulate and educated gay man against a bible-thumping moronic homophobe (that is hilariously less of a "good Christian" than the gay man)... it just sounds entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowabunga Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 4 hours ago, Harry said: Yeah I think it's a tough sell for her however she will get some major prominence cross examining trump in his senate impeachment hearing. She could be the star of the show in January... Quitting the race early, relatively untainted, she also could be up for a VP ticket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Kowabunga said: Quitting the race early, relatively untainted, she also could be up for a VP ticket. Given the 7 people qualified for the December debate are all white an African American VP candidate seems pretty likely in which case it can only really be Harris, Booker or Brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted December 7, 2019 Share Posted December 7, 2019 22 hours ago, Harry said: Given the 7 people qualified for the December debate are all white an African American VP candidate seems pretty likely in which case it can only really be Harris, Booker or Brown. Out of those 3, it’d definitely be Harris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 7, 2019 Author Share Posted December 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Out of those 3, it’d definitely be Harris. Why do you say that? It wouldn't depend who the nominee is? Warren? Klobuchar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted December 7, 2019 Share Posted December 7, 2019 16 minutes ago, Harry said: Why do you say that? It wouldn't spend who the nominee is? Warren? Klobuchar? I don’t think Klobuchar has a hope in hell tbh, but I guess there hasn’t been a single primary so all of this notion of who a front runner is at this point is all just guess work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 7, 2019 Author Share Posted December 7, 2019 35 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: I don’t think Klobuchar has a hope in hell tbh, but I guess there hasn’t been a single primary so all of this notion of who a front runner is at this point is all just guess work. Agreed. Although there are alot of people holding off on endorsing anyone and the field is pretty split so could break in a few different directions. I suspect Harris has planned to land that vp slot and banking on Biden to win. He almost surely standing for one term only so would make her presumptive nominee in 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God is Haaland Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 Buttigieg and Sanders with 10 delegates each atm. Who here #TeamBernie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 5, 2020 Author Share Posted February 5, 2020 Not me. I do believe America needs to move significantly in his direction but a Sanders primary win would basically guarantee trump 4 more years. His stance on Medicare for all and his timeline for implementation, his strongly anti business stances and tax increases combined with expensive policy measures..... He'd either deliver an extremely sharp recession or be isolated from Congress and be the most isolated and impotent president in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.