Total posts: 4,222
-->
@ebuc
1} M. Bloomberg, 77, because,......1a} he is beholdend to no one, matches and exceeds Trumps peer economic basis and support.
so instead of taking bribes from rich people to use the government to benefit the rich, you want to cut out the middle man and just have the billionaires make the laws themselves? That is worse, not better.
1b} has necessary governing experience, of New York City,
he governed it badly. i mean stop and frisk alone guarantees he couldn't win a general election.
1c} more moderate than other canidates, and I believe that is a plus on democratic side
He really isn't. He is right wing economically and a left wing culture warrior. He is the worst of both sides.
2} Amy Klobuchar, 58, ---originally my first choice til Bloomberg got in-----....2c} moderate with senatorial experience, and less aggressive from a woman may play to men better,
but she doesn't stand for anything. She gets along with republicans and doesn't fight for anything. Those are not selling features. Those are huge handicaps.
2b} age is a plus,
why?
3} Biden, 76,........3a} experience outweighs most all else and he is male ---men like that in a president---,
again, his experience is bad. He has been wrong on most of the things he has fought for during his career.
.3b} age is negative and more so if his cognition gafs make him less charismatic,
this is way under selling it. His mind is going. He regularly can't remember what state he's in, names of people (including obama), or what his policies even are. He has mood swings where if he is questioned, even the slightest bit, he yells at people and insults them.
5} Pete Buttigieg, 37,
pete is an empty suit. he stands for nothing. He believes in nothing but his own career. He was pro medicare for all like 9 months ago. now he won't stop attacking it. He used to campaign against big dollar donors (when he didn't have any). How he is fully in favor of the rich buying politicians. He looks to be about as sleazy a politician as they come.
6} Steyer, 62,
lol has he ever cracked 1 or 2 percent?
8} Bernie gets honarable mention because of his popularity.
bernie is, by a wide margin, the best candidate. He has an energetic and diverse base. He has plans on how to fix the fundamental problems in america and not just slap a bandaid on it.
Popular vote did not get Hillary in
Hilary lost because she was a bad candidate who didn't speak to most people. She couldn't grow the base. She tried running a campaign like it was still the 90's and it blew up in her face. Berie DOES increase the base. The majority of the country isn't particularly happy with either the republican or the democratic establishment. That is why trump was able to crush the republicans running against him in 2016. Running a campaign about trying to go back to the obama years is a strategy doomed to fail. Obama's presidency set the groundwork for trump to rise. Trying to go back to that failure is not a winning strategy.
and his non-support of existing nuclear power plants ---people dont want get cold and will ruin the ecology long before they will worry about the the potential toxic negatives of nuclear power and its wastes etc.
Nuclear energy creates toxic waste that takes a very, very long time degrade. And if it isn't stored properly can kill alot of people. Why would you prioritize that over energy sources that don't create toxic waste?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
why do you think the Dems are not only delaying the trial, but they went for impeachment
They went for impeachment because trump has committed several crimes and abused his office, it is really simple. they delayed because the republicans announced they were going to rig the trial in the senate and not allow any evidence or witnesses to be called. Also really simple.
Let's get this straight. Trump is not a racist.
from illegally blocking black people from living in his buildings in the 80's, to calling for the death penalty for innocent black teens even after they had been exonerated by DNA evidence, to calling Mexicans rapists, he very, very much is. Has been for a long time.
Let's give gangs free $1000 dollars so they can buy guns and cocaine. Wow what a great idea!
lol only an right wing loon could look at a policy helping out american citizens and say "well a small percent won't use it right" and think that is a valid argument against the policy.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Are you honestly trying to make a case that the presuming guilt before innocence as the Meuller report did was a thing of value to the rabid left? Not even CNN is willing to regurgitate that talking point today.
Ok I give up. You are responding to nothing I am actually saying today. All you are doing is talking past me so that you can try to wedge in your talking points without actually listening to anything i say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
2/3 of all abortions would end if it was required to show the mother an ultrasound of the fetus.Basic biology response.
So your answer is that you want to take away their rights and try to emotionally manipulate them into doing what you want. That is really shitty.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Meanwhile, the 3 years of presuming Trump's guilt was of zero value to the rabid left.
Lol I wrote out a detailed reply to you. you responded to only 4 words and ignored the rest of what I said. You are making it pointless to talk to you.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
The fact that you think opening an investigation into an innocent person is a thing of value to Trump.
Of course it is. It honestly wouldn't matter to trump if Biden is guilty or not. The appearance of corruption would be enough to help trump win. Then he could campaign about how he is "fighting corruption" when he is, by far, the more corrupt candidate.
That is clearly placing value in the idea of presuming guilt before innocence. Something the rabid left has embraced for 3 years.
What exactly am I presuming? I have already laid out exactly what we know and why it proves trump abused his power. All you keep doing is throwing out talking points without actually responding to what I say.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's only a thing of value if Biden was corrupt. Trump didn't ask Ukraine to make shit up, as Schiff read off in his parody version. We have the transcript, he asked for an investigation which would only be a thing of value to Trump if Biden were corrupt.
That might be true if there had only ever been 1 conversation. But we already know that other people were talking to the ukranians too. The Ukranians were told they needed to make a public announcement that they were investigating Biden. That announcement was even scheduled. The only reason it didn't happen is because the whistle blower report became public. That announcement was the slander Trump was looking for. Just enough to credibly paint Biden as corrupt without any chance of a real investigation being done and clearing him. And it almost worked.
You don't still believe that there is value in presuming guilt before an investigation in America, do you?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. We know trump had a call with Ukraine where he asked them to investigate his political rival. We know that 90 minutes later the order to withhold the aid was made. We know people told the ukranians they needed to publicly announce an investigation of biden. We know they scheduled the announcement. The whistle blower report became public and the announcement was cancelled and the white house released the aid.
The investigation has been done. We know what trump did. He abused the power of this office to smear his political rival.
Trump's success over the last 3 years of Democrats assuming guilty until proven innocent proves there is no value in that.
Trump has committed numerous crimes in office. I have detailed some of them for you on multiple occasions.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Pelosi provided no evidence aid was withheld,
What? We know aid was withheld. No one denies that.
or that Ukraine thought aid was being withheld.
We have multiple witnesses who confirmed the Ukranians were told.
Schiff, Ciaramella, and Schiff's staff claimed to have evidence and never provided it.
What? People testified, under oath, in front of congressional committees.
The Senate WILL call those people up to testify.
What fantasy world are you living in? The republicans are fighting hard to prevent witnesses from testifying in the senate. The democrats are trying to force them to actually call witnesses and listen to evidence. They want to just rubber stamp a not guilty verdict because they are terrified of an actual trial.
Biden will be called up to explain why investigating him was a thing of value to Trump.
What does that even mean? It is a thing of value because he is a likely nominee to run against trump in the next election. Slandering him by suggesting he is corrupt would help trump steal the election. We already know that.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
A good point was made that Pelosi is committing a quid pro quo trying to influence the outcome of the Senate handling of the impeachment by withholding the articles.
Jesus, how many times do I have to explain what quid pro quo means. It is not a crime. If you have ever bought anything, traded anything etc you have engaged in a quid pro quo. It literally just means "this for that". The obsession with saying the words quid pro quo is a right wing talking point.
The reason trump committed a crime is because he was trading things using his elected office (military aid and a white house visit) in order to gain something of personal value (slander against a political rival). Pelosi using the articles as leverage to get a fair trial in the senate may be a quid pro quo, but it is in no way criminal or abusing her power.
McConnel is more than happy to see impeachment die when the clock runs out in a year.
He has already said that he wants to prevent a fair trial from occurring. He is desperate to avoid witnesses or evidence being brought forward. I'm sure he would be happy to make the whole thing go away. He isn't going to get what he wants though.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
This is not a response, in any way, to what I said. You showed an example where china is reducing tariffs on 1 specific item because they also had issues with swine flue.
I said that Trump's trade policies were hurting Americans, which they are. Whether or not they are also hurting Chinese people is not relevant to my point. Do you really think hurting chinese workers by hurting american workers is a positive step for america?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
One nice thing about this faux impeachment is that the investment markets are soaring as the crooked crony politicians in D.C Congress lose their stranglehold.
I feel like you have just completely stopped trying to actually make any sense. The investment markets don't give a shit about political infighting unless it directly involves them. And Trump very much is a crooked crony politician. So your point is kind of invalid on the face of it.
Millions of people fleeing socialist crony blue states like Cali, New York, Illinois, and taking their capital with them.
So states are doing really well, causing costs of living to rise. People then move to cheaper states. And you feel this is somehow evidence of a problem with socialism?
rump is enacting the economic policies that accelerate this migration. Economy outlook never looked so good for the average working Joe.
Trump's trade wars are making things worse for many people. The economy is doing well in spite of him, not because of him. I mean really, what policies do you think he has enacted that are causing things to get better?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
At the end of the day, McConnell is just going to allow Pelosi to destroy herself.
What? It's like you aren't even responding to me at all any more.
Pelosi has one year, and McConnell can wait.
Again, What? are you even trying to make sense?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
That's silly. De Facto there is no trial as Pelosi chooses to hold the Articles.
That's the point. If the republicans are going to refuse to allow any evidence and just immediately push to say "nothing to see here" then why send them the articles?
Pelosi is worried about the witnesses that "might" be called that were barred in the House kangaroo court.
What does that even mean? It is McConnell blocking witnesses from being called. The Dems want witnesses to be called.
Republicans win either way as polling of independents in swing states shows Trump already winning 2020 and the House is already lost.
unless you have some facts to back that up, I am just going to ignore it as a delusional fantasy.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Pelosi is the REAL battered housewife here, not Zelensky.Beleaguered Pelosi won't press charges if she thinks a trial might upset the status quo.
I honestly don't know what you are trying to say. Pelosi won't send the charges to the senate if the republicans are going to engage in a corrupt non-trial.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
First, she says Trump is an existential threat that must be immediately removed or the country will be destroyed, then she says "eh, no rush."
When did she say "no rush"? McConnell has announced the trial will be rigged and corrupt. Sending the articles to them right now would serve no purpose. If holding onto them can get him to agree to have an actual trial, then waiting would definitely be the right move. And if he won't allow a fair trial, then it doesn't matter if she ever sends them.
First, she says it's a solemn moment, she prays for Trump, and there should be no applause, then a few days later magically she says she has a "spring in her step" and orders the media to cover something other than impeachment. Whatevs.
lol so republicans attack dems for being "do nothing" and being obsessed with impeachment. But when they move on and try to do other things republicans attack them for not being focused on impeachment. Just like when they were criticizing them for having a "secret impeachment" during the inquiry and the republicans wanted public access, then when it was opened to the public they complained that dems were opening it just to attack the president. That is some impressive cognitive dissonance.
2020 is going to flip the house whether she passes articles to the Senate or not. There's no path forward for Pelosi, and she knows it.
What? why would you think that? Trump's approval rating is still under water. Every head to head shows most dem candidates beating him. There is no reason to think the republicans will do well in 2020.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Whoever was reporting on false assumptions. Journalists, especially in non-opinion pieces, should need to have pretty good evidence before bashing a kid.
humans are fallible, they make mistakes. They saw a video that showed something. They reported on it. They were wrong. When they realized they were wrong they stopped. The attacks on Greta don't even pretend that she has done something wrong, they are just personal attacks.
Why did they report the way they did on something that they didn't even understand. Wearing a MAGA hat isn't a crime, but to them, it was.
They thought they did understand. They had a video of it. They didn't attack him for the hat. they attacked because it looked like he was instigating violence.
The climate is always changing. It has since we have had climates. The earth has been warming up since the last ice age.
True. The climate shifts very slowly all the time. That is not the issue. The climate is shifting much quickly than it ever has. And it started during the industrial revolution when we started polluting.
There are no extra serious storms than there used to be.
yes there are. Where i live we have had floods worse than we have had in decades back to back. Storms are getting worse and more frequent.
She is an alarmist whose policy positions would destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs and she is basing what she says on evidence that is far from settled. She, of her own volition, is making herself a public figure. Nick had no intention of being thrown into national scrutiny.
And if people were attacking her policy positions i would have no issue. But they aren't. The people attacking her have little to no evidence that she is wrong, so they attack her personally. That is morally reprehensible.
I totally agree. But I haven't seen anyone attack the substance of her point. I have seen people attack her intelligence, her looks, her maturity, her "anger problems" etc.And those types of attacks are unacceptable.
I see you say that. But the president is one of the people doing it. I am guessing you haven't decided to vote democrat, so that is just a talking point. You will accept him, and others, doing terrible things.
I am still unconvinced of the 'incoming catastrophe". I would like to have some more renewable energy because I don't like pollution, but this call for massive government overreach seems more like a plot to increase the size of the government more than anything.
That would be a conspiracy theory.
Humans have adapted to climate change for their entire existence. How will this be any different?
Previous shifts in climate have caused mass starvation and death. Humans are extremely reliant on things happening as we expect them to. Even minor changes could kill millions of people. And we are causing it to happen much faster. There is very good cause to be concerned.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
THERe would be no progress unless mcconell tactics worked
what does that even mean? There could be no progress without an asshole blocking everything?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
as usual Ethang. I think you are nuts and have no interest in engaging with you.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Also, Mitch Mcconnel is great at his job, in the age of polarization, he wins
So in an age where polarization is one of the worst problems, he is the worst of them all. So he somehow wins? I mean he is making america a worse place.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Is it? Trump denies that withholding the aid had anything to do with getting the Ukrainians to investigate Biden. He insists that he was only interested in fighting corruption in some general, altruistic sense. He also insists the Ukrainians didn't even know the aid was being withheld. All of that is lies. And if people testify under oath, then those lies will be revealed.I doubt that. The facts of what happened are fairly well known. The question is more about whether or not it's illegal and/or impeachable, and if so, is impeachment a good idea?
If a real impeachment trial were to take place, more incriminating evidence will come out. It would look really bad for trump and McConnell can't allow that.
Only Trump and his most ardent defenders refuse to admit that what Trump did was wrong.
fox news argues that literally every day. And they have managed to convince a reasonably large segment of the population.
Personally, I think the Democrats are barking up the wrong tree. A far better charge for impeachment would target the national emergency declaration over the border wall. The Constitution makes it extremely clear that only Congress has the power to appropriate funds, so that action was a blatant abuse and overreach of executive power. If I had the power to do so, I would impeach Trump over that. It wouldn't be popular, but such a blatant abuse being allowed sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents.
I don't really disagree. What trump did with Ukraine was illegal and abuse of power. But he abuses his power so regularly and in so publicly that trying to pin down 1 specific example to impeach him for is difficult. I mean he has breached the emoluments clause pretty much constantly but his base simply doesn't care.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
I would probably agree, but it would be impeachment in name only, since they would take no action on it in that scenario.
McConnell has already basically announced there won't be any action. They won't allow witnesses or evidence to be examined. If the senate is going to refuse to actually hold a real trial, then there is no value in sending the articles of impeachment to them. They will just immediately announce "nothing to see here" and try to make it all go away.
They are so afraid of what witnesses may say they will just prevent any witnesses from speaking. For example we just found out that the 1st official request to hold up the aid was 90 minutes after trump's call with the ukranian president where he asked for them to dig up dirt on Biden. That 1st email also made it clear they wanted it kept quiet, showing they knew what they were doing was wrong.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
The answer is yes. Once the house votes in favor of articles of impeachment, the president has been impeached. this has already happened.One question I have is that, if the articles of impeachment aren't sent to the Senate, has Trump actually been impeached?
The senate is a separate phase that is supposed to be akin to a trial. But since the jury (the senators) have already declared they are going to co-ordinate with the defendant, we will see when/if the articles are sent to them.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
There is a strong possibility Pelosi won't even pass the articles to the Senate.
Several members of the senate have already announced their verdict without having seen or heard the evidence. The leader of the senate is saying he is going to co-ordinate with the president's lawyers and that they won't allow any witnesses. That is like the foreman of a jury saying they will coordinate with the defense attorney.
Trump has already been impeached, if the trial is going to be rigged from the outset, I have no issue with the articles not being sent to the senate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
A fetus is a human being as science confirms.
lol science does not confirm that. A fetus is human in the same sense that a cancerous tumor is human. It is alive and made up of human cells. But it is not a person.
If you don't believe a fetus is a person, then why do you oppose 3rd trimester abortions?
Life is complicated. We need a dividing between cluster of cells of a person. It obviously isn't at conception. So it needs to be at some point between there and birth. I don't pretend to know exactly where that line needs to be. But I would argue it is before the 3rd trimester.
If you don't want the kid, it's what adoption is for.
If you don't want to go through a long, painful, difficult, expensive and potentially life threatening medical condition against your will then you shouldn't have to. A woman should have the right to decide if she wants to. You should not have the ability to tell her she doesn't have rights.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
What is your stance on abortion?
A fetus is not a person. It does not, and should not, have the legal protections a person has. I do oppose 3rd trimester abortions. But before that, a woman should be allowed to have one if she wants. Any attempts to prevent her from getting one should be illegal.
There is no reason to overturn Roe V Wade.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
The growth rate may slow. If you import more workers and they hold a job, it adds to GDP. But, welfare expenditures are sometimes very high. Immigrant-led households accept welfare at a 51% rate. A lot of them take more than they give, so keeping the money and spending it on ourselves has potential to increase standard of living.
That;s a bit like saying if I don't buy gas for my car I have more money. But then you can't get to work to make more money. In the short term that might have some positive side effects. But you are going to push the economy into recession and ultimately screw over everyone.
Just in general, I think immigrants should have to live here for 5-10 years before receiving benefits, as that solves both problems.
Oh, so people should just come to america, live and in poverty and squalor because you don't think they should get to eat or have some place to live. America is a nation of immigrants. You are almost certainly descended from immigrants. I will never understand why some people continue to see immigrants as a threat or burden.
I don't see how immigration is a distraction. They compete for jobs and they are willing to accept less money than native-born citizens. So, either we need to be willing to accept less ourselves or we don't get a job. That is another factor for wages not rising.
I never denied it was a factor. But it is a small one. Immigrants don't decide what labor is worth, billionaires do. So blaming them while not targeting the oligarchs causing the problem is ridiculous.
I don't think Trump is some kind of savior. He is better than the average Republican, probably. I was so pissed when he appointed John Bolton, though. Glad he was thrown out quickly.
Pompeo isn't any better. Trump has filled his cabinet with people who are desperate to start some new wars. Trump himself has admitted he was minutes away from starting a war with Iran before calling it off last minute.
I don't particularly care for the usual "tax cuts" Republicans do. Spending cuts need to come before tax cuts every time. But unfortunately you can't win elections promising to take away peoples' free stuff. So, about half of Republicans vote for tax cuts with no intention of balancing the budget.
America's tax rates have been falling for decades. There are definitely problems of money being misspent. But the rich have systematically undermined america's tax system. They have lobbied hard to avoid paying taxes and it has been working. That is also a very large factor in america's budget problems.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I think abortion will eventually be banned because the rates for it are falling and contraception is more widely available. It was ultimately technology that ended slavery and it will be technology that ends abortion.
you are kind of arguing against yourself. If technology is making abortions less common and less necessary, then there would be even less reason to overturn Roe v Wade. There are always going to be cases where an abortion is the best option.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Maybe our economy would slow, but I bet our quality of life would increase. When you stop letting in public charges, you can spend more on your people already here.
Why? There is no reason to think a shrinking economy would somehow improve the standard of living.
Well, you are partially correct, but you are focusing on the wrong issue. Rich people and large corporations lobby for mass immigration/open borders-like policies. This hurts the wages of people here and working conditions. Labor is the largest cost for most businesses and they want to reduce it any way they can. So, letting in a million immigrants every year will depress wages by limiting the bargaining power of native-born workers. This helps the rich's bottom line and screws working-class Americans.
again, this is a distraction. Unemployment remains low even with immigration. Wages remain low because big corporations do shitty things like destroying unions, keeping the minimum wage down, etc.
I prefer him over a lot of Republicans because a lot of them are garbage neo-con sellouts. You see that whenever a big bill comes in that could challenge an interest group and they fold immediately. Lots of Democrats do this, too. The only good thing about Bernie in my opinion is that he doesn't appear to be bought.
Agreed. most "mainstream" republicans and democrats are virtually the same party. The want to make the rich richer and sell out the working class. But if you think trump isn't doing the same thing you are mistaken. The minute he got elected he filled the government positions with same corrupt people. He gave massive tax cuts to the rich driving up the deficit. They will then use that deficit to argue that spending on programs that help regular people need to be cut.
Created:
Posted in:
I can see how things like that are disrespectful. The difference is whose culture you are trashing. I was born and raised in a christian household. I went to church every week. I have seen how terrible Christianity is. I have every right to trash my culture and religion if I want to.
But attacking the culture and religion of other people is where you run into problems. It's like black rappers being allowed to say the N word but white people can't. They can disparage their own group, you can't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
so wealthy individuals like athletes and entertainers aren't the problem? because I think they are WAY over paid. If they negotiate their salaries only a company who has the resources could hire them which is one of the incredibly wealthy companies you speak of right? How can you have one and not the other?
They are a symptom of the problem. But they are another distraction. Mainstream media outlets want everyone to focus on "the other". It's celebrities' fault. It's immigrants' fault. It's that other political party's fault. etc. It is all intended to keep people from really taking a look at the system and seeing that is has been stacked to reward a tiny fraction of society while screwing over everyone else.
medicare for all could be the one time that the government didn't waste money, over pay for everything because people found ways to take advantage, and there won't be horrible unintended consequences, it is possible, just like life on other planets.
There is always waste. The current system is massively wasteful. Trillions are spent on stupid things like drugs that have a 100,000% markup and on byzantine insurance systems that don't make any sense but waste huge amounts of time and money. Pretending like private systems are somehow not wasteful is a fantasy. But at least if the government is providing the care, then the goal is to help people. When private companies are doing it the goal is suck as much money out of them as possible.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Where did you hear that? I'm pretty sure that is a lie.If the President has been impeached by the House, which he has been. And the Senate doesn't remove Trump from office, according to what I have read Trumps first term in office is nullified and he can run as President for two more terms.
Created:
-->
@Imabench
By not ever holding a high level position like Senator or Governor or Attorney General, Buttigieg has effectively not done anything outrageously questionable in the time he has been in politics since he has never held a position of high importance.
Disagree. He worked at McKinsey for several years. They are basically an amoral company that will take money from anyone (from dictators to grocery stores) and help them figure out who to fire, what prices they can jack up etc. Working at McKinsey and not having and still defending status quo economics means he has shown he wants to be part of the problem.
He also fired the only black police chief of his city in a scandal where a group of corrupt cops were scheming to get that chief fired. He hasn't really addressed that at all. His campaign lied about having support from black people when several of the high profile people were clear they weren't endorsing him.
The problem isn't that he doesn't have any scandals, the problem is that mainstream media outlets refuse to cover them.
Pete has been sliding for about 2 weeks now. Last night's performance will only speed his decent most likely.
Created:
-->
@David
Yeah, therein lies the problem.
Pete has multiple problems.
1) He doesn't really have any relevant experience either running a campaign or governing. He got elected as mayor of a small city. He has no experience in managing anything bigger than a city. Everyone else running is much more experienced. That is a significant problem, as amy klobochar pointed out.
2) he is incredibly 2 faced. less than a year ago he was a supporter of medicare for all (or so he swore). Now he wont stop attacking it. He started the campaign as a progressive(ish). Then started collecting money is those big donor fundraisers (such as the wine cave) and now he is trying out flank biden on the right.
3) he doesn't really appeal to much of the populace. He has a core group of well off white people who sort of like him, but they would be just as happy with klobachar or Kamela or any of the other corporatist candidates.
The only reason he really started rising in the polls is that outlets like MSNBC and CNN kept giving him glowing coverage and refusing to cover or even ask him about his scandals. Now that he got high enough in the polls to be seen as some kind of threat, he got smacked down hard.
Created:
-->
@David
Pete and warren's support is primarily upper middle class white people. They don't want divisiveness. They don't want anyone rocking the boat or changing anything in any significant way. They want to occasionally donate money to poor people, but never actually fix the system that makes them poor because that system keeps these people in the upper middle class.
Pete had virtually no chance of winning before this debate. If it's possible, his chances are even worse now. He has no support among black people or Hispanics. He has very little support among young people or the working class. He is a liar, a hypocrite and has nothing to offer. He is likely done. But i'm sure he will continue to struggle on for awhile.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
when 400 people own more than 150 million people, they are definitely still proles.When the proles have something to defend, you can no longer call them proles. They are people with capital.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Pro athletes and entertainment people imo a way overpaid but it's a demand thing, no different than any product, they are the product and the companies who employ them wouldn't pay them what they do if they didn't believe they, in turn would make more money. The companies that you hate are no different.
strongly disagree. Athletes are employees. they do not decide their own salary. they negotiate for their salary. CEOs do not negoiate for their salary (in many cases). Their salary is determined by a board they often appointed, are the chair of etc. Athletes and CEOs are in no way similar.
Unions had their day in the sun and they blew it with their own greed, it's sad really because the idea of how a union should work is a good one.
Some unions had corrupt people, just like some countries (or companies) had corrupt people. Billionaires used those bad examples as a scapegoat to crush unions in america. The problem is not the unions, the problem is the billionaires.
Bernie has made a lot of money just writing books, that doesn't really employ many people, not really, shouldn't he have been taxed at like 60%? Let's be real, someone else actually did the work for him.
I don't believe he has ever said he should be exempt from the tax rate. If he raised the tax rate I am sure he would be happy to pay the appropriate taxes on his book sales.
If there is a non leftist article about these healthcare schemes lowering costs I'll read them.
the problem is that the right wing articles hide the facts behind their twisted interpretation. For example a right wing think tank released a study saying that medicare for all would cost like 30 trillion dollars and they used that as evidence that it was impossible to implement. They glossed over the fact that the current system is estimated that it will cost more than that. So continuing as America is right now would be more expensive that medicare for all. But they hide behind the 30 trillion dollar figure to pretend like it is somehow unaffordable. Even though america is already paying that.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
A true Marxist socialist is against the illegal immigration that destroys unionized labor.
Sanders is not a Marxist socialist, nor are any democratic candidates.
Also, a Marxist socialist would argue that the proletariat is a worldwide class, therefore the idea that you should protect the proletariat in one country at the expense of the proletariat in a different country would be abhorrent.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
fair enough. I will acknowledge that the tone of his message on immigration has changed at the very least. However, "open borders" is definitely a right wing talking point. There are no democratic candidates that do now now, or ever have (as far as I know) advocate for open borders. So the question he was being asked was stupid.
But you are right that his tone in discussing it is much more negative in this clip than he appears to show today.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I don't know about "smashed unions" as much as the corrupt ones turned people away from them or bankrupted the companies.
I don't pretend that all unions are perfect, they're not. Anywhere there is money and power there is room for corruption. But the facts remain that unionized workers make more and have better benefits than non unionized workers. Companies know that and hate that. So they have spent decades crushing unions and paying off politicians to help them do it.
aren't many employers having to increase starting pay etc because they don't have enough workers?
not really no. The buying power of workers has been stagnant for decades while the rich have been getting ever richer.
funnel wealth upwards, so you think people who start companies to make money, make more money is somehow wrong? these aren't charities.
I don't pretend that they are. And they should be rewarded for that. But making hundreds, or thousands, or hundreds of thousands of times more than the average worker is insane. Workers' wages are not improving. They have been stagnant for decades. But the owners and the share holders of those companies are getting richer at a record pace.
ah yes the rise of costs, how much will costs go up with the socialist entitlements the democrat candidates are promising?
they wont. they will go down.
hell they even admitted taxes will increase but that's ok, they will have programs to make more people dependant and those who already are, even more dependant on government handouts, great idea that will fix the problems LOL, not.
taxes will go up, that is true. but health insurance costs, co-pays, deductibles etc will all be eliminated. The average person will save a large amount of money while getting better service. but no one is pretending it is free.
what is the make ends meet? they can't afford high speed internet? cable tv? I'll bet there's a lot of Vensualians who'd love to be poor in the U.S.
this is a common distraction the right likes to make. America already has socialist policies (free schools, roads etc). So does canada and most of Europe. Pretending that being like the rest of the modern world will turn the US into Venezuela is a lie that the billionaire owners of fox news want you to believe.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
If we stopped these waves and had periods of little to no immigration, that would be true that they could shop around for jobs.. If we stopped these waves and had periods of little to no immigration, that would be true that they could shop around for jobs.
If america stopped taking in immigrants it's economy would slow if not stop growing entirely. America is a nation of immigrants with a negative birth to death rate.
But this does seem to be contrary to some of your previous rhetoric on some similar topics. You say that these people can just shop around for different jobs that will pay them better, but then you also say that we need all of this government regulation or else everyone will be paid slave wages.
people can shop around all they want, if no company is willing to pay more, then it is entirely irrelevant. Immigration does have an effect on wages. But it is largely a red herring. Politicians and billionaires use it as a distraction because it is much easier to blame some foreigner than you don't know than to pin the blame where it really belongs. Billionaires and politicians have set up the economic system to massively reward the rich and suck the wealth out of the working class.
Aww come on, man. Gotta ruin all the fun :/I will admit, the 4th of July speech where his teleprompter stalled was funny. Talked about storming air force bases during the Revolutionary War or something to that regard.
sorry. He does use a lot of populist rhetoric. I can see why alot of people would like him over some asshole like the standard republican. But you can't deny he goes off on unhinged rants. There is an entire industry based around trying to interpret what he says because no one can really tell what he means .
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Sanders used to have the same immigration policy as this famous socialist
please provide sources for this. I would be happy to look at the information. What some random other person thinks is kind of irrelevant.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
lmfao. I would totally be down with president Biden just so we could have some incoherent fireside chats like that.
lol it would make for some interesting television. But having watched trump's speeches, I have had enough of presidents who don't make any sense.
I would have to go back and check, but I though Bernie's issue was that in the guest worker plan, it is bad for native workers, such as through wage decreases. That would be something that would apply to immigration of similar types of workers.
guest workers essentially get deported at the end of their employment. So they don't get a raise, they usually don't get any additional compensation at all. you just get rid of them and bring in another temp to do it. This lets you keep wages low because your workers aren't going to be staying. They also have their visa held by their employer. So if they ask for something their employer can literally have them deported. This is very different from immigration because immigrants have permanency. If their employer is shit, they can leave and find another job or go on strike.
I am not discounting the idea that perhaps bernie had the same opinion on both the guest worker program and immigration in general. It is possible. But TheRealNihilist never provided any evidence of that. I would be open to looking at additional evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
That would require forethought and planning.
I didn't intend to imply that 1 person designed the economy. A group of people did it over decades. They smashed unions, they suppressed wages, they outsourced jobs to 3rd world countries to save a buck etc.
All these actions together created the economy we have now. And it is designed to funnel wealth upwards.
If you look at the people who have overcome extreme adversity due to illness, accident etc, didn't quit but kept trying how can you have much empathy for someone unwilling to work and work hard to better their lives?
I see this sort of example used alot, but it is a red herring. For every "lazy" poor person there are a dozen hard working ones who can't get ahead because costs are rising faster than wages. It's alot easier to blame poor people than it is to actually address the underlying reasons they are poor because the rich and powerful people do not want anyone doing that. So neither the republicans or most democrats will go anywhere near it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
My religion being made fun of is not something I enjoy watching at leisure.
you don't know what the name is and didn't see it. What is the point of talking about it when you clearly don't really know anything about it?
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
TheRealNihilist made an entire thread about the immigration flip about a week ago.
And I refuted his point. TheRealNihilist showed a clip of bernie talking about 1 specific policy (the guest worker program) and tried to argue that this showed his opinion about immigration in general. His argument was at best a biased misinterpretation of what bernie was saying. Bernie never talked about his opinion about immigration in the clip he provided. I asked him to show other evidence and he declined to do so.
I liked the corn pop story, personally. Truly inspiring. Apparently his leg hair used to be blond.
lol and kids used to like to play with it I hear.
Created:
Posted in:
The problem is that they don't actually want to solve the problem. They see the symptom of the problem, people living in poverty, and they know that is bad. So they put bandaid solutions in place to try to cover up the problem and deal with the worst of it. But they simply don't have the ability or the will to acknowledge that the underlying problem is how the economy has been designed. There is a reason why the economy is growing, the rich are getting massively richer and the financial situation of the poor and middle class is not improving.
The war on poverty has been a bad joke. It is a way for politicians to claim they are trying to help the poor while helping the rich squeeze all the money out of them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Don't know the name of it because I don't watch the make fun of religion crap
So your argument is that a thing exists, but you have no idea what the name is and didn't watch it? that seems like a silly argument.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Sanders has been consistent in his beliefsExcept immigration.
I have never seen evidence of that. please provide a source.
Lol, pretty sure I heard his team's strategy was to keep him out of the spotlight, at least at the start. Didn't want him losing his early lead.
Agreed. They are trying to keep him out of the news as much as possible so when people think of him they remember him as he was, like when he kicked palin's ass in a debate in 2008. But Joe is not the man he was 11 years ago. He can barely string sentences together and if anyone questions him at all he snaps.
Created:
Biden doesn't actually do many events with voters anyway. And when he does he often tells them to vote for someone else or just calls them fat. I don't think being off the campaign trail is a bad thing for biden. The more he can hide how terrible he is, the better it will be for him.
I believe McConnell has refused to allow any witnesses to be called (sounds like a fair trial). So it is unlikely Joe or Hunter will be called.
I don't think Warren is likely to come back either way. This election is largely about being authentic and people trusting that you mean what you say. Biden's ideas are stupid and wouldn't fix anything, but he authentically believes in them. Sanders has been consistent in his beliefs for decades so he is pretty unassailable there.
Warren on the other is trying to balance being a progressive with being a centrist. The result is that neither group should really trust her.
But to get back to your main point of the impeachment's effects, I don't think the republicans will allow this to drag on for long. McConnell wants this over as fast as possible. They don't want to risk allowing testimony to be entered because they know trump is guilty and can't risk exposing more evidence against him. They want to wrap this up and get on to an "innocent" victory lap.
Created:
He is going to be impeached.He most likely won't be removed by the Senate because they are too afraid. But he still has to live with being the 3rd president in history to be impeached.
And who knows, maybe the senate will surprise us.
Created: