Rdskns2000

Presidential Election:11/3/20- On to Iowa 2/3 & New Hampshire 2/11

Recommended Posts

I wonder if a Biden/Buttigieg could  1) work and 2) appeal to both moderate and liberal dems. 

 

Biden would definitely offset any losses from minority voters that Mayor Pete doesn't seem to have convinced. 

 

It's an interesting combination that I hadn't even considered...

Edited by The Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Evil Genius said:

I wonder if a Biden/Buttigieg could  1) work and 2) appeal to both moderate and liberal dems. 

 

 

 

 

too much glare and too many testicles

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jumbo said:

 

 

too much glare and too many testicles

 

Well I'd much prefer Warren from this group anyways...but it's not looking great right now for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Well I'd much prefer Warren from this group anyways...but it's not looking great right now for her.

 

She's not really a -14 from last month... more like a -3 or so, losing a couple points to Bernie and Buttigieg. Last month's Q poll was a ridiculous outlier for her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

I wonder if a Biden/Buttigieg could  1) work and 2) appeal to both moderate and liberal dems. 

 

Biden would definitely offset any losses from minority voters that Mayor Pete doesn't seem to have convinced. 

 

It's an interesting combination that I hadn't even considered...

Not sure we need two white dudes.  Also the left seems to really dislike both of them so that doesn’t seem helpful.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

I wonder if a Biden/Buttigieg could  1) work and 2) appeal to both moderate and liberal dems. 

 

Biden would definitely offset any losses from minority voters that Mayor Pete doesn't seem to have convinced. 

 

It's an interesting combination that I hadn't even considered...

No to all of that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw i find it hilarious that the two candidates who are "running in the wrong primary" according to the leftist populists are now now leading said primary. Hmmm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is part of me that is curious to discover if a homosexual male is more palatable to the American electorate than a straight female. I'm not sure if it would mean anything, but it's interesting. Mind you, if they go with the straight white grifter rapist male again over any of the other choices... well, that does mean something.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How am I supposed to feel that there are candidates that are so against M4A that its causing people to change their minds on if it's a good idea?

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

How am I supposed to feel that there are candidates that are so against M4A that its causing people to change their minds on if it's a good idea?

I want medicare for all but it absolutely has to abolish private insurance. 

 

I'll be furious if my taxes go up considerably to cover m4a but I don't qualify for it for whatever reason and I still have to pay an obscene amount of money for my private insurance. 

 

Bernie is the only candidate who is even willing to bring this up, the rest just dodge it because they dont want to lose the voters who want to keep their private insurance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, redskinss said:

I want medicare for all but it absolutely has to abolish private insurance. 

 

I'll be furious if my taxes go up considerably to cover m4a but I don't qualify for it for whatever reason and I still have to pay an obscene amount of money for my private insurance. 

 

Bernie is the only candidate who is even willing to bring this up, the rest just dodge it because they dont want to lose the voters who want to keep their private insurance. 

 

I'm lost for words on Warren now, and at this point, I'm with you on prioritizing what directly affects me over getting folks elected.  I tried that in 2016, I'm done, my insurance through my employer has more then doubled adding my wife to it. 

 

For anyone saying that's to be expected, I'd say I hate my employer based insurance and how much it costs.  They only gave me two choices, the other cheaper one had a deductible of $3000, that's three times what it was when I was by myself.  

 

This is BS.

 

I havent seen anyway in either the senate or house bill how you wouldnt be eligible for MFA if you're a US Citizen, and would recommend looking at the docs floating around on the tax plans to pay for this and how it directly affects you.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The author is also a huge asshole. Adopting the racially divisive rhetoric of your opposition is not a good strategy if your goal is to work towards ending racism. You can call out the bull**** of white people without broadly painting the identity as a problem itself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Well I'd much prefer Warren from this group anyways...but it's not looking great right now for her.

 

 

i like a lot about warren but---and i understand this is going out on a limb more than usual in these hard to predict times--- i think she's already done as far as actually having a real shot at the nomination....which i think she might have had a little earlier, somewhat surprisingly to me (not a slam on liz at all)

 

i know saying neither bernie nor liz will get this nomination is hardly advancing the conversation, and their running still of course is highly pertinent to everything regarding the democratic party, but the final stop nominee-wise is a dead end for them...their relevance and real impact is the same as bernie's in 2016----moving the party closer to what gets labeled the more progressive agendas

 

 

now this latest deal with pete that sounded bad for him at first---the root article by harriot---may actually become a foot in the door to expand his acceptability to more black voters by nature of how he handled it and the positive reactions that's getting all around....it was interesting to me to see rev al give pete a whole pile of kudos for how al thinks pete is addressing these very real (as al expreed it) blind spots he has shown in his grasp  of and dialogues about the relevant issues around long term structural racism across social and govt institutions....pete obviously has a long way to go, but this might be a very opportune event that he can build on positively

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, No Excuses said:

The author is also a huge asshole. Adopting the racially divisive rhetoric of your opposition is not a good strategy if your goal is to work towards ending racism. You can call out the bull**** of white people without broadly painting the identity as a problem itself.

 

 

interesting...your take on the author seems the polar opposite to a number well known widely respected public political figures of color who really praise him as a writer and an intellect...i have read only 3-4 pieces of his actual work and don't have a dog in any fight on this, but your reaction just struck me in such stark contrast to virtually every other i've heard/seen so far

 

i like the pont you're making beyond that, though i like giving "whitey" the business pretty regularly for several reasons and while it may be a form of appropriation, i like to take that liberty as a terminally caucasian guy to make certain points in certain ways....not saying it's a completely logical/rational position, but i do it cuz i think it serves a positive in the end, given the way many people's emotions work...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing has changed my mind that Trump wins the electoral college, even as he loses the popular vote by 5 to 15 million.  Even though it's early, I have this feeling Dems won't be united. Whoever the nominee is, won't have the full support.

 

Bloomberg got in because he's banking on a contested convention that goes beyond the first ballot. 

 

The Dems allocate their delegates proportionally.  So, if 3 to 5 candidates rack up delegates; No one will get a the required delegates to get the nomination and we got a contested convention. If the No one wins on the first ballot, I think the delegates are free to vote for whomever they want. Also, super delegates can vote after the first round.

 

If that happens, no way Dems are united.

 

Stay tuned.

Edited by Rdskns2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buttigeig's interaction with The Root's Michael Harriot reminds me a bit of his interview with a skeptical Charlemagne Tha God a month or so ago:

 

He gets asked tough questions about his time in South Bend by CtG starting about 6:30:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.