Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Someone Has To Do It: US Elections 2020

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The continual talk of Clinton in an election that doesn't involve her simply goes to serve Trump with his preferred straw-man to attack.

    It also seems to me that Bernie supporters are the one's doing an awful lot more talking about Clinton than anyone else on the DNC side.

    Comment


      Originally posted by caja-dglh View Post
      The continual talk of Clinton in an election that doesn't involve her simply goes to serve Trump with his preferred straw-man to attack.

      It also seems to me that Bernie supporters are the one's doing an awful lot more talking about Clinton than anyone else on the DNC side.
      what all the people talking about Sanders' mythical behaviour in 2016.

      Comment


        Originally posted by caja-dglh View Post
        The continual talk of Clinton in an election that doesn't involve her simply goes to serve Trump with his preferred straw-man to attack.

        It also seems to me that Bernie supporters are the one's doing an awful lot more talking about Clinton than anyone else on the DNC side.
        Man, if you think the 2016 primary isn’t being relitigated on a daily basis, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. one frequently travelled by people whose job it is to do so!

        it has to be, tbh. If Sanders holds on to the 44% or whatever who voted for him, he probably becomes the nominee as I can’t see the field clearing out quickly enough not to allow him a sizeable lead in delegates. So we have to hear nonsense like how Warren and Sanders - who is discussing the fuggin’ Meidner plan, for pete’s sake - are EXACTLY the same (or even that Warren is to the left of Sanders, which is an astonishing claim about someone who was happily a Republican until 1996) and that the only reason you don’t prefer Warren is you’re a raging sexist bro. Often by people who make it clear they are doing just fine by the current system.

        This isnt to say Warren is bad but the “I will piss on your leg and tell you it’s raining” crowd is far more influential and loud than the Bernie Bro crowd is, and they’re leading people down another garden path.

        Comment


          There was the awful headline on Friday for a story where Sanders said that some people might prefer Warren over him because they feel it's time for a woman to be president and he understands that. The headline was roughly "Bernie says people only like Elizabeth Warren because she has ovaries"

          Comment


            There's a quite diabolical profile of Warren in the latest (in the UK, at any rate) New Yorker which basically snidely reports unnamed Wall Street democrat funders saying how this talk of a wealth tax is class war, without ever pushing back on the notion that this is exactly why Trump won, because Dems are encouraged to lower their sights from attacking gross avarice and inequality to simply 'having a conversation about what business can do'. It's utter horseshit. In the podcast, the writer says how she found the populism of Warren's stump speeches icky, and Trump-like. Fucking pricks.

            Comment


              That has been going on in a more surreptitious way since at least 2016.

              They are very concerned about Warren because they believe that she actually understands how the various systems work and can therefore design policies that will have a genuine detrimental effect on their personal wealth.

              Comment


                Right - so the charge 'this can't work/won't work' is less likely to stick with someone with Warren's chops on policymaking, so they have to go to the next level. I assume Biden is the go-to guy for the 'lets not doing anything to change anything' Wall St funders?

                Comment


                  Biden makes them comfortable, but they have other horses in the race if Biden falls.

                  Comment


                    Quite, they are the primary reason why Gillibrand is running and wouldn't be troubled by Booker.

                    Comment


                      https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/1143223047333318657

                      Comment


                        Not convinced that paying off the loans of the 10% and the people about to be in the 10% is a particularly good use of taxpayers money. I'm much more comfortable with Warren's position on this.

                        Comment


                          It's a very good idea,

                          Comment


                            It isn't just the ten percent though.

                            Student debt in this country is disproportionately held by people of colour, many of whom are either first generation tertiary students and/or matriculated at unaccredited institutions or trade schools.

                            Comment


                              But that's the thing about Warren's policy - it eliminates the debt for those who need it eliminated, but doesn't waste extra cash on the 10 percenters.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post
                                But that's the thing about Warren's policy - it eliminates the debt for those who need it eliminated, but doesn't waste extra cash on the 10 percenters.
                                What does that even mean?
                                The bankers bailout had no means test.

                                Comment


                                  What it means is that Warren's policy doesn't offer debt relief to those earning over 250k. I don't think those earning over 250k need the break. It's the kind of thing that probably should be means tested.

                                  Comment


                                    Ah, I very much agree with that.

                                    Comment


                                      Should a public healthcare system be means-tested?

                                      Comment


                                        I would say that it depends to a certain extent on the tax system.

                                        If one has a truly progressive tax system, then it doesn't make sense to means-test. There is more of an argument to do so if you have a system more like the current one here, but even then you run the risk of encouraging the hollowing out of the public system as the better off elect for private treatment.

                                        I don't see it as particularly similar to the student debt issue, in large part because the magnitude and predictability of the expenditures are much different, as is their recurrence over one's lifetime.

                                        Comment


                                          I like the Sanders/Jayapal/Ocasio-Cortez/Omar plan more because it's putting the ethics of a universal program on the table and says that as higher education should be for everyone, so should debt relief be available for everyone. It's paid for through a tax on Wall Street, so it's not as if the wealthiest Americans are gaming the system.

                                          Warren's plan is far too means tested for my liking, and because it comes out of the gate by saying that some people are more deserving than debt relief, it puts who deserves it more up for discussion and debate. Also, there's a cap on the amount of debt to be relieved even for people with the lowest incomes. I saw a figure somewhere that it doesn't even eliminate 50% of the amount of student loan debt held by all Americans.

                                          Democrats seem to love qualifying good ideas and programs and make a puzzle out of figuring out how much of a new program you could be eligible to receive, as if they're thinking in their minds about Republicans attacking them for doing a socialism, so they can say "no, see, all of these people over here wouldn't be getting anything!"

                                          Just make a universal program. It's the most simple and direct way to get voters to understand it.
                                          Last edited by Incandenza; 25-06-2019, 13:30.

                                          Comment


                                            Perhaps instead of writing off student debt as such, just make public colleges retroactively tuition-free.

                                            Seeing as most of the rich ass people attended private universities, they wouldn't benefit.

                                            Comment


                                              Good grief. This is dull even by the standards of these things. Time for an emergency beer.

                                              Comment


                                                Debate 1, then. What did we learn?

                                                Not a whole lot, I don't think. Except that the generic white men were all pretty much dull and pointless. I kept thinking, when hearing Tim Ryan or John Delaney: "Why are you even here?". Jay Inslee might be right about climate change, but he's about as charismatic and interesting as a dirty washcloth. O'Rourke spoke a lot, and it felt like the moderators were trying to throw him a bone, but he was incredibly unremarkable. De Blasio was, surprisingly, the least terrible of the low polling white dudes. But that was a very low bar.

                                                Julian Castro seems to have had some good press from last night, but I find that bizarre. He also seemed to struggle to put a sentence out without analysing it halfway through. Warren and Booker seemed the best of the bunch. I find Booker's Jersey accent offputting, and I don't really know why. I wanted Klobuchar to be more compelling, given her reputation, but she didn't seem to bring her prosecutorial A-game. I suspect Tulsi Gabbard would be an entertaining candidate to keep around, but she's obviously not going to win anything.

                                                Comment


                                                  I continue to be amazed that you watched it

                                                  Comment


                                                    It was on in my house (not my call). The best moment was when Gabbard owned your bloke from Ohio after he claimed the Taliban flew planes into our buildings on 9/11. It was a top-rope flying clothesline on him and - if this were a game show format - he would have been walked off that very second to go and hide in a hole until November 2020.

                                                    The bit I can't get over is all these 1% poll folk doing the "When I am President - x". It feels as plausible as my saying "when I am subbed on for Aguero in the Champions League final, I will..."

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X