Author Topic: 2020 POTUS Candidates  (Read 185145 times)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14861
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1800 on: January 01, 2020, 10:54:27 AM »
Also, after the spectacular failure of selecting a non-establishment candidate, a great many people are likely being pushed towards someone extremely aligned with the establishment.  (See the comments about Yang several posts up.)

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1801 on: January 01, 2020, 12:25:28 PM »
Although I don't agree with him on everything, Yang is very appealing to independent and non partisan voters who are looking for somebody who doesn't demonize the other side and is someone that can negotiate issues instead of just talking about issues election after election and not solving anything because they don't want to work with people that disagree with them.

That is quite a run-on sentence but I hope you can understand my point.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1802 on: January 01, 2020, 02:16:09 PM »
Also, after the spectacular failure of selecting a non-establishment candidate, a great many people are likely being pushed towards someone extremely aligned with the establishment.  (See the comments about Yang several posts up.)

I don't think establishment vs. non-establishment is a big factor:



Only a four percent spread there, and a high favorability regardless.   The other charts by @maizeman seem to indicate it's something else.  Disaffected voters and marginal Trump voters(13% spread and 6% spread, respectively).

Yang also doesn't speak like most politicians, he talks about meaningful issues and specific actions to remedy them(my questionable opinion).  More generally, I think Trump is laying this divisive bait since he can win in a mud pit, and many dems are grabbing onto this low hanging fruit(where they will probably lose).  Those Dems are also spending time and signal on denouncing Trump when they should be discussing changes.

I can imagine a debate between Yang and Trump that would end very badly for Trump.  I don't see this for other Dems.  There seems to be an appetite for a more reasonable and pragmatic conversation of political and economic issues and the main players aren't engaging on that territory. 

The downside to Yang is probably his Freedom dividend which is scary for many people; I am tentative about it myself.

Roland of Gilead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1977
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1803 on: January 01, 2020, 04:49:50 PM »

The downside to Yang is probably his Freedom dividend which is scary for many people; I am tentative about it myself.

I used to be concerned about the Freedom dividend but then realized it solves a lot of problems because people can apply it to their situation.   Feel like you need reparations?  Fine, here they are via the Freedom dividend.   Your job not paying you a living wage?  Here is a Freedom dividend to help.

It is $12,000 for about 150 million people or so, which works out to only $1.8 trilion per year.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1804 on: January 01, 2020, 05:06:17 PM »
Yang has a good sense of humor.  I like that.

If that freedom dividend ever went through, it would be quickly swallowed.  Unless a solution is found for health care, insurance (protection) would quickly swallow it.  That money would be low hanging fruit for the medical industry.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1805 on: January 01, 2020, 05:27:04 PM »
Yang has a good sense of humor.  I like that.

If that freedom dividend ever went through, it would be quickly swallowed.  Unless a solution is found for health care, insurance (protection) would quickly swallow it.  That money would be low hanging fruit for the medical industry.

I remember UBI being discussed on another thread on this forum quite a while back. Someone made a comment that what would stop that UBI dividend from becoming "the new zero". I tend to agree and haven't read anything or been able to rationalize otherwise. I think UBI would be inflationary and the economy would absorb that and make that the new normal and prices would go up.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2020, 05:31:52 PM by Daisy »

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1806 on: January 01, 2020, 05:29:09 PM »
As someone mentioned above, Yang seems reasonable and pragmatic which is a huge antidote in debating Trump. I just feel all these rabid anti-trump candidates would do horribly against him in a debate. Fight back with ideas not strong but empty bullying anti Trump words.

That's why my favorite candidates are Gabbard, Yang, and Sanders in that order.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1807 on: January 01, 2020, 05:45:52 PM »
Feel like you need reparations?  Fine, here they are via the Freedom dividend. 
Not sure if this would be accepted by people that demand reparations since it isn't explicit, but I otherwise agree.

Yang has a good sense of humor.  I like that.

If that freedom dividend ever went through, it would be quickly swallowed.  Unless a solution is found for health care, insurance (protection) would quickly swallow it.  That money would be low hanging fruit for the medical industry.

I remember UBI being discussed on another thread on this forum quite a while back. Someone made a comment that what would stop that UBI dividend from becoming "the new zero". I tend to agree and haven't read anything or been able to rationalize otherwise. I think UBI would be inflationary and the economy would absorb that and make that the new normal and prices would go up.

I don't think anything can become the "new zero" due to the way zero works mathematically.  Anything greater than zero will never be zero, although I agree it could be easily soaked up in some type of inflation.

What I like about Yang is that he doesn't seem to have an agenda behind his ideas, and that makes me trust him more.  And he makes a strong case that automation and AI are already here, and behave like a curve, so it's reasonable to want to instate a UBI now.  I've been pretty opposed to UBI before but he makes a good case.

And there's an interesting psychological element to it: paying people to not be incarcerated, to not immigrate illegally... It reminds me of Jordan Peterson's ideas about how the individual is sovereign and this is the hallmark of western society.  The magna Carta, the US constitution etc established this.  And it could be argued that paying people to be lawful citizens is an investment in the same way that civil rights are an investment. 

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1808 on: January 02, 2020, 07:32:37 AM »
Castro is out, fwiw.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1809 on: January 02, 2020, 07:46:15 AM »
Yang is getting some flack over his definition of Medicare For All.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/03/politics/andrew-yang-medicare-for-all-private-insurance/index.html

He is co-opting the label.  He is a practical man and his plan would probably be an improvement over what we have now.

Many of these candidates want to move towards true medicare for all.  They wish to do it incrementally.  Is it better to cut the dog's tail off a piece at a time or do it all at once. 

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1810 on: January 02, 2020, 08:20:29 AM »

Lolololololol.

The answer to Donald Trump is not to double down on the "let's elect an outsider with no political experience" model.

Why not?  The insiders with political experience haven't been real impressive.   Yang could bring some fresh ideas to the table and he might listen to advisers who are specialized in various aspects of political decision making unlike Trump.

Sanders brought in "new ideas" (relative to the "establishment") in 2016 and many are now baseline Democratic positions - Medicare for All (where we've at least made the public option the moderate position), $15 minimum wage, massive investments to combat climate change (whether that's the GND or otherwise), etc.

What evidence is there that any other candidate would not listen to advisers who are specialized in various aspects of political decision making?  What evidence is there that Yang *would* do that?

I get that Yang started out as a joke candidate, or to put it nicely, his campaign was centered around one idea - UBI.  He's not the first to champion UBI (they are testing it out in Stockton, CA, I believe - maybe another city in CA), but perhaps the first to seriously advocate for it in a Presidential race.  But here's a major concern for me - when has Yang showed the ability to get things done like this in the past?  Even Tom Steyer, who has no public office experience, has a decade or so of at least investing in and advocating for liberal/progressive causes.  What was Yang doing prior to 2017?  In his resume, what give you the confidence he'll actually be true to his word, be able to implement UBI, or lead the country well?

https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1212074000584564737

Yang says he's for "the spirit of" virtually every progressive policy being proposed this election cycle, but then comes up with some weird or vague reasoning why it wouldn't be realistic or isn't good, and then pivots to say, "just pass UBI instead."  He's not a serious candidate because we actually have to take and fight big pharma to try and solve outrageous medical costs that cause bankruptcies for so many, we're going to have to take on the fossil fuel industry and have government intervention if we want to enact substantial measures on climate, etc. etc.  Consistently saying, "I like this, but my UBI plan is better" makes you a joke candidate.  Does he have any other solutions for anything besides "Pass UBI?"  Maybe some serious policy experts will actually research if UBI is really a magic unicorn, capable of solving virtually every problem the country faces.  But because there hasn't been that research - at least not to the extent where there is overwhelming buy-in from economists, environmentalists, etc. - it has been a very easy crutch for Yang to use, because it's been neither proven nor disproven to do what he claims it would do.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4134
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1811 on: January 02, 2020, 03:59:27 PM »
Yang is getting some flack over his definition of Medicare For All.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/03/politics/andrew-yang-medicare-for-all-private-insurance/index.html

He is co-opting the label.  He is a practical man and his plan would probably be an improvement over what we have now.

Many of these candidates want to move towards true medicare for all.  They wish to do it incrementally.  Is it better to cut the dog's tail off a piece at a time or do it all at once.

I'm curious what "true medicare for all" means to you, pecunia? This point of conflict/debate seems to come up a lot these past few months and it seems like everyone has a slightly different perspective. Nothing wrong with that.

People have talked about Medicare for All for a number of years and the most recent of several proposed bills with that name is one from Sanders which included not only access to public health insurance for all americans (like older americans can now get on Medicare), but also a ban on private insurance (unlike current Medicare).

Yang's plan for "medicare for all" does not include a private insurance ban, so some folks have been saying he's being misleading by trying to co-opt the name of the Sanders bill without adopting all the policies in the bill just because the name "Medicare for all" polls well.

What is interesting is that if you dig into the poll numbers 55% of americans and 67% of medicare for all supporters assume they'd be able to keep their private health insurance under a Medicare for All plan. So it looks like more americans and particularly more medicare for all supporters are using Yang's definition of the phrase "medicare for all" and not Sanders' definition.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1812 on: January 02, 2020, 04:16:39 PM »
Yang is getting some flack over his definition of Medicare For All.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/03/politics/andrew-yang-medicare-for-all-private-insurance/index.html

He is co-opting the label.  He is a practical man and his plan would probably be an improvement over what we have now.

Many of these candidates want to move towards true medicare for all.  They wish to do it incrementally.  Is it better to cut the dog's tail off a piece at a time or do it all at once.

I'm curious what "true medicare for all" means to you, pecunia? This point of conflict/debate seems to come up a lot these past few months and it seems like everyone has a slightly different perspective. Nothing wrong with that.

People have talked about Medicare for All for a number of years and the most recent of several proposed bills with that name is one from Sanders which included not only access to public health insurance for all americans (like older americans can now get on Medicare), but also a ban on private insurance (unlike current Medicare).

Yang's plan for "medicare for all" does not include a private insurance ban, so some folks have been saying he's being misleading by trying to co-opt the name of the Sanders bill without adopting all the policies in the bill just because the name "Medicare for all" polls well.

What is interesting is that if you dig into the poll numbers 55% of americans and 67% of medicare for all supporters assume they'd be able to keep their private health insurance under a Medicare for All plan. So it looks like more americans and particularly more medicare for all supporters are using Yang's definition of the phrase "medicare for all" and not Sanders' definition.

I scrolled through Yang's "medicare-for-all" plan. There's nothing in it that is remotely anything "medicare-for-all". There's no public option, no expanding the age for medicare, no socialized medicine, no single-payer. He only has a list of some ideas that might bring down healthcare costs. So if M4A isn't any of those things, then is M4A just whatever the politician wants it to be? M4A by definition might need to actually include something about "expanding medicare"?

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1813 on: January 02, 2020, 04:17:00 PM »
The way I understand it is the health insurance companies would be eliminated.  It would be government run.  Would it be the way to go?  Probably.  Will it go that way?  Probably not.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4134
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1814 on: January 02, 2020, 04:43:30 PM »
Seems I may be out of date or misinformed about which candidates are proposing what with regards to healthcare.

Yes, FIPurpose, I agree a plan called medicare for all should indeed involve expanding medicare.

I just don't agree it needs to include unrelated part of the Sanders bill with the same name (like the ban on private options).

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1815 on: January 02, 2020, 05:27:45 PM »
Even if the Democrats win the presidency and manage to gain 4 to 6 Senate seats to have the majority, a Medicare 4 All that eliminates private insurance is never going to pass the Senate.
Centrist Democrats will never vote for that.
So unless a candidate can come up with a glidepath plan that expands Obamacare, and offers a public option, then that candidate is being dishonest.

A Universal Basic Income bill is also never going to pass the Senate.


pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1816 on: January 03, 2020, 08:13:49 AM »
Politics is the art of compromise.  They may not replace the health insurers, but I think inertia is now on the side so that they will be substantially weakened.  Seems like an opportunity to improve a highly inefficient system with multiple layers of duplicated bureaucracy as there are many insurers.  It won't happen overnight.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4134
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1817 on: January 03, 2020, 08:21:36 AM »
Fundraising numbers for October-December are out for most of the remaining candidates:

Sanders $34.5M
Buttigieg $24.7M
Biden $22.7M
Warren $21.2M
Yang $16.5M
Klobuchar $11.4M
Gabbard $3.4M

Booker still hasn't announced his number.
The way Castro and Williamson "announced" was to drop out and fire all their campaign staff but not officially drop out, respectively.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1818 on: January 03, 2020, 08:27:35 AM »
The 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses will take place on Monday, February 3, 2020, as the first nominating contest in the Democratic Party presidential primaries for the 2020 presidential election.

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4130
  • Age: 28
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1819 on: January 03, 2020, 08:47:30 AM »
Fundraising numbers for October-December are out for most of the remaining candidates:

Sanders $34.5M
Buttigieg $24.7M
Biden $22.7M
Warren $21.2M
Yang $16.5M
Klobuchar $11.4M
Gabbard $3.4M

Booker still hasn't announced his number.
The way Castro and Williamson "announced" was to drop out and fire all their campaign staff but not officially drop out, respectively.

Not shown: Klobuchar had a 137% increase, and Warren had a 14% decline Q3->Q4 (21.2M total in Q4).

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4134
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1820 on: January 03, 2020, 09:18:28 AM »
Wow! I'm told that traditionally Q4 is supposed to be a lower fundraising quarter than Q3. Holidays mean donors have less disposable income remaining to play around with. Of the seven candidates with numbers out, including the six almost certain to be the highest fundraisers, all but one saw double digit increases in fundraising. The big increases for Yang and Klobuchar in particular would seem to indicate there are a lot of people who are very unhappy with just the current "top four" choices and want some alternative to those folks.

Unfortunately it has now been 51 (52?) days since a DNC approved qualifying poll of any of the early states (IA, NH, NV, SC), so who makes the next debate is likely to be primarily determined by candidate's standing polls taken in early November, before the December debate, before the November debate, before Harris dropped out, and before the president was impeached.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1821 on: January 03, 2020, 09:57:42 AM »
Who is giving all this money to Mr. Biden?

I've looked on You Tube for rallies that he may be having.  I see Yang.  I see Bernie.  I do not see the large gatherings clamoring for him to become president.  The old adage of "follow the money!" applies to these folks.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1822 on: January 03, 2020, 10:16:47 AM »
Who is giving all this money to Mr. Biden?

I've looked on You Tube for rallies that he may be having.  I see Yang.  I see Bernie.  I do not see the large gatherings clamoring for him to become president.  The old adage of "follow the money!" applies to these folks.

https://youtu.be/oysFCNPg0DA

Samuel

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1823 on: January 03, 2020, 10:55:04 AM »
Who is giving all this money to Mr. Biden?

I've looked on You Tube for rallies that he may be having.  I see Yang.  I see Bernie.  I do not see the large gatherings clamoring for him to become president.  The old adage of "follow the money!" applies to these folks.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont-let-crowd-sizes-mislead-you/

Essentially: Polls are a much better measurement of actual support than crowd size. Rally crowds are self selecting (often for reasons other than strong support, such as curiosity) and aren't representative of the party as a whole. Democratic rally goers skew towards the more liberal, affluent well off*, and enthusiastic parts of the party.

*As in able to go to a rally instead of work. The truly affluent the candidates chase as donors probably don't go to rallies much either.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2020, 12:21:56 PM by Samuel »

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1824 on: January 03, 2020, 12:42:23 PM »
I don't think Sanders or Biden will win against Trump.  Warren probably can't either.  Buttigieg I know little about but he seems mostly reasonable from what I've heard.  Not sure if he has the charisma though.


Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4803
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1825 on: January 03, 2020, 12:47:32 PM »
I don't think Sanders or Biden will win against Trump.  Warren probably can't either.  Buttigieg I know little about but he seems mostly reasonable from what I've heard.  Not sure if he has the charisma though.

I feel like Sanders or Biden are the most likely to win against him.

That said, neither of them is my favorite candidate.

Ugh. I just freaking hate this. The idea that we could get four more years of this (and honestly, I've been convinced we will for a while), even though pretty much all of the Democratic candidates are far better choices, makes me so sad and sick.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2273
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1826 on: January 03, 2020, 12:52:45 PM »
I am very skeptical that the more socially conservative, religious elements of the Dem base will turn out in force for an out gay white guy, whereas it would highly motivate the socially conservative GOP opposition. I seriously doubt Pete could win.

OurTown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1206
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1827 on: January 03, 2020, 12:56:19 PM »
Spoiler alert:  Biden will be the nominee and Biden will win.  I know how disappointing it was in Nov. 2016, but in reality DT drew an inside strait.  It's not likely to be repeated. 

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1828 on: January 03, 2020, 12:57:31 PM »
I feel like Sanders or Biden are the most likely to win against him.

Really?  Why?  I feel like moderates will consider Biden and Trump to be cut from the same cloth, and the incumbent has an advantage.  Sanders is an outlier out of the three but didn't he already have a heart attack?  Are Americans still buying what he's selling, anyway?  He had his chance(or not, thanks DNC!) in 2016 and I think people are over him.  I could be wrong though!  Out of the Dem frontrunners he probably has the best chances.  (This is all entirely my sentimental opinion, btw). 

Maybe someone could spell out the platform differences between Trump and Biden for me...

Quote
Ugh. I just freaking hate this. The idea that we could get four more years of this (and honestly, I've been convinced we will for a while), even though pretty much all of the Democratic candidates are far better choices, makes me so sad and sick.
The Dems need to roll their good ideas into one person; right now it seems they are fragmented across undesirable candidates.  It's an issue of vote splitting imo.

DaMa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1829 on: January 03, 2020, 01:11:32 PM »
I made my very first donation this year.  I'm cheap, so this was a big step for me.  Anyone but Trump 2020!

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1830 on: January 04, 2020, 07:51:38 AM »

- SNIP -

Really?  Why?  I feel like moderates will consider Biden and Trump to be cut from the same cloth, and the incumbent has an advantage.  Sanders is an outlier out of the three but didn't he already have a heart attack?  Are Americans still buying what he's selling, anyway?  He had his chance(or not, thanks DNC!) in 2016 and I think people are over him.  I could be wrong though!  Out of the Dem frontrunners he probably has the best chances.  (This is all entirely my sentimental opinion, btw). 

Maybe someone could spell out the platform differences between Trump and Biden for me...

- SNIP -


I don't think people are "over him."  He spouts the same rhetoric time after time and yet no one seems to have a valid answer for much of his complaints.  His constant barking about the pharmaceutical industry has helped shed light on some of their foul practices that would have largely been ignored.  People who need insulin, for example, are being vastly over charged in this country.  This is wrong and if it is typical of what the drug industry does it should change.  Without crusaders like old Bernie, it will never happen.  Everyone should be able to receive health care when sick.  It's a moral thing.  Stealing the futures of the dreamers and those who racked up college debt is a dubious practice at best and changes should be made.  The future of this country depends on training young people.  It's a prudent investment and the right thing to do.  As far as the minimum wage, people are living in cars because of it.

https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/dow-jones-recovers-after-345-point-drop-defense-stocks-soar/

See above - Might be nice to get someone in there that will use the carrot (diplomacy) rather than the stick when dealing with foreign nations.  It also might be good to have a guy in there that more than likely won't lie to you like some of the GOP boys of recent years.  You know, all these wars might be costing you money when the borrowed debt comes due.  Lots of governments have overextended themselves and caused pain for their people that lasted years.  Endless wars are one cause of it.

I guess I'm buying what people like him are selling.  I've got to admit that old fart is irritating to listen to.   

Differences between Trump and Biden.  Come On - The Donald is a one of a kind.  He'll get his own chapter in the history books. 

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1831 on: January 08, 2020, 07:22:15 AM »
Buttigieg is the male Hillary.
If he wins the Dem primary, he WILL be the butt of jokes, judging from what I hear in my workplace.
We're talking worse than Ross Perot ears jokes.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4880
  • Location: Avalon
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1832 on: January 08, 2020, 07:35:23 AM »
Buttigieg is the male Hillary.
If he wins the Dem primary, he WILL be the butt of jokes, judging from what I hear in my workplace.
We're talking worse than Ross Perot ears jokes.
Anyone who's not a straight white male has been the butt of jokes by straight white males, whether they are running for President or not.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14861
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1833 on: January 08, 2020, 07:39:39 AM »
Can you imagine the unspeakable horror of having a president who is the butt of jokes?

Good thing that has never happened before, and never will in the future.  :P


DaMa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1834 on: January 08, 2020, 04:53:49 PM »
That made me laugh.  My first political memory is singing, "My peanut has a first name, it's J-I-M-M-Y" to the Oscar Mayer tune.  I was in 1st grade. 

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1835 on: January 08, 2020, 05:30:52 PM »

- SNIP -

Really?  Why?  I feel like moderates will consider Biden and Trump to be cut from the same cloth, and the incumbent has an advantage.  Sanders is an outlier out of the three but didn't he already have a heart attack?  Are Americans still buying what he's selling, anyway?  He had his chance(or not, thanks DNC!) in 2016 and I think people are over him.  I could be wrong though!  Out of the Dem frontrunners he probably has the best chances.  (This is all entirely my sentimental opinion, btw). 

Maybe someone could spell out the platform differences between Trump and Biden for me...

- SNIP -


I don't think people are "over him."  He spouts the same rhetoric time after time and yet no one seems to have a valid answer for much of his complaints.  His constant barking about the pharmaceutical industry has helped shed light on some of their foul practices that would have largely been ignored.  People who need insulin, for example, are being vastly over charged in this country.  This is wrong and if it is typical of what the drug industry does it should change.  Without crusaders like old Bernie, it will never happen.  Everyone should be able to receive health care when sick.  It's a moral thing.  Stealing the futures of the dreamers and those who racked up college debt is a dubious practice at best and changes should be made.  The future of this country depends on training young people.  It's a prudent investment and the right thing to do.  As far as the minimum wage, people are living in cars because of it.

https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/dow-jones-recovers-after-345-point-drop-defense-stocks-soar/

See above - Might be nice to get someone in there that will use the carrot (diplomacy) rather than the stick when dealing with foreign nations.  It also might be good to have a guy in there that more than likely won't lie to you like some of the GOP boys of recent years.  You know, all these wars might be costing you money when the borrowed debt comes due.  Lots of governments have overextended themselves and caused pain for their people that lasted years.  Endless wars are one cause of it.

I guess I'm buying what people like him are selling.  I've got to admit that old fart is irritating to listen to.   

Differences between Trump and Biden.  Come On - The Donald is a one of a kind.  He'll get his own chapter in the history books.

Fair enough.  It seems hard to pin down the sentiment for the dems but it's not like I'm really looking for it, to be honest.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1422
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1836 on: January 08, 2020, 05:47:57 PM »
So,....you guys think this latest thing with Trump and Iran will

enamor him in the eyes of voters  or

be looked at with disfavor in the eyes of voters or

be viewed with indifference?

I would think all those Democratic candidates would be over this like flies on you know what on a hot day.


maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4134
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1837 on: January 08, 2020, 06:05:08 PM »
If it ends here, I think it is neutral to modestly beneficial to Trump.

The american people spent a day being told Trump's decision was going to lead us to war, and that Bush and Obama both had the chance to kill this guy but didn't because they knew it would lead to war with Iran. Contrast that with the way it's now being portrayed on local media where I live. It's being spun as Iran intentionally launching missiles they knew wouldn't kill americans, just to save face without continuing to escalate. 1) That may not be true 2) Even if it is true I think that indicates that we got really lucky this time.

But I don't think the average swing voter is thinking about distributions of probable outcomes though. My guess is they'll interpret it as "Trump stood up to Iran when people said not to and he turned out to be right."

Someone please convince me I'm looking at this wrong though.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1838 on: January 08, 2020, 07:55:06 PM »
That made me laugh.  My first political memory is singing, "My peanut has a first name, it's J-I-M-M-Y" to the Oscar Mayer tune.  I was in 1st grade.

That is very cute.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1839 on: January 08, 2020, 07:56:41 PM »
If it ends here, I think it is neutral to modestly beneficial to Trump.

The american people spent a day being told Trump's decision was going to lead us to war, and that Bush and Obama both had the chance to kill this guy but didn't because they knew it would lead to war with Iran. Contrast that with the way it's now being portrayed on local media where I live. It's being spun as Iran intentionally launching missiles they knew wouldn't kill americans, just to save face without continuing to escalate. 1) That may not be true 2) Even if it is true I think that indicates that we got really lucky this time.

But I don't think the average swing voter is thinking about distributions of probable outcomes though. My guess is they'll interpret it as "Trump stood up to Iran when people said not to and he turned out to be right."

Someone please convince me I'm looking at this wrong though.

I think that view is correct. We took out a bad guy/terrorist and Iran bombed some empty buildings.  We definitely got the better of this exchange, and if that's all there is to it, the world has one less terrorist leader. Big win.

YttriumNitrate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 774
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1840 on: January 08, 2020, 08:21:19 PM »
So,....you guys think this latest thing with Trump and Iran will enamor him in the eyes of voters  or be looked at with disfavor in the eyes of voters or be viewed with indifference?
I would think all those Democratic candidates would be over this like flies on you know what on a hot day.

Obviously a lot will depend on the next few days and whether things escalate further. Assuming that things play out similar to the situation with North Korea last year, my take is that it will be fairly positive for Trump. Whoever is the Democratic nominee will likely try to portray Trump as a madman on foreign policy, but if the dealings with North Korea and Iran turn out the same, it will be difficult to make those allegations stick.

One interesting thing is the comparison of Trump's decision to call off a retaliatory strike on a facility that would have killed ~150 operators, maintenance personnel and security guards (i.e., regular blue collar Iranians), and his decision to take out a general (the 1%er). With the right spin/perspective, I could see this strategy resonating with many Obama-Trump voters.

Daisy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1841 on: January 08, 2020, 08:49:09 PM »
I am pro peace and I don't care who gets the credit for it. If this leads to peace with Iran I will be happy.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1512
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1842 on: January 08, 2020, 09:14:21 PM »
I think the Iranian government came out the big winner here. They are getting the US out of Iraq, removed limits on their nuclear program, and got the Iranian people (previously massively protesting against the government) to rally behind them. Win-win-win for them. For us? not so much.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1512
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1843 on: January 08, 2020, 09:16:01 PM »
Came here to share this article with you, written by one of the few fiscal conservatives left in the Republican Party.
Quote
I am a Republican who has never voted for a Democrat in a presidential election. But I share Democratsí concerns that our system is rigged to favor the wealthy and powerful over working families. I am tired of a loophole-ridden tax code that advantages investors over workers. I am tired of spending trillions in taxpayer money on health care and education only to see private profiteering of those programs as consumer costs continue to escalate. I regret to admit that I also voted negative in 2016, casting a protest vote for the Libertarian Party ticket because I didnít think Clinton or Trump were really committed to change. I would prefer not to do so again.
I like Buttigieg and would be happy to endorse him . . . 20 years from now, after he has proved himself. ​Today, however, he is not ready, and I have a sickening fear that much of his impressive fundraising is driven by the moneyed interests who profit from the current system and think his lack of experience will lead to a preservation of the status quo.

Democrats need to decide whether they just want to beat Trump or whether they want a credible candidate who has the vision, commitment and proven skills to truly reform our government. They have plenty of experienced candidates to choose from. Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren stand out as two candidates with strong records of public achievement.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-am-a-republican-and-i-hope-the-democrats-pick-a-candidate-i-can-vote-for/2020/01/08/3cbb0e5c-3171-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1844 on: January 08, 2020, 10:05:55 PM »
If it ends here, I think it is neutral to modestly beneficial to Trump.

The american people spent a day being told Trump's decision was going to lead us to war, and that Bush and Obama both had the chance to kill this guy but didn't because they knew it would lead to war with Iran. Contrast that with the way it's now being portrayed on local media where I live. It's being spun as Iran intentionally launching missiles they knew wouldn't kill americans, just to save face without continuing to escalate. 1) That may not be true 2) Even if it is true I think that indicates that we got really lucky this time.

But I don't think the average swing voter is thinking about distributions of probable outcomes though. My guess is they'll interpret it as "Trump stood up to Iran when people said not to and he turned out to be right."

Someone please convince me I'm looking at this wrong though.

I think you basically have this right. I lean more towards this turning out neutral.

Soleimani wasn't liked, but was also completely unknown to American voters. (Heck, I follow politics and had never heard of him)
I think even many Trump supporters find this a bit war mongerish, however, it looks like Iran will just not retaliate.

Someone told Trump that this could be his Osama bin Ladin or Saddam Hussein. It's not. No one knows this guy. There's no political win here. In fact, long term this gives Iran a huge win. I believe it will come out that Soleimani was on a Peace mission, and the US will have just run an assassination for really no reason at all. Everyone coming out of White House briefings are all saying that they had absolutely no intel on Soleimani planning anything.

The only thing it's showing me is that they do first and think later. Rand Paul and Mike Lee seem to be on board with a new War Powers Act. And this may attract a few GOP senators to reconsider their impeachment vote.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4803
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1845 on: January 09, 2020, 06:14:17 AM »
I am pro peace and I don't care who gets the credit for it. If this leads to peace with Iran I will be happy.

Killing someone isnít peace.

Missile strikes are not peace.

Youíve already got less peace than you had before.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1846 on: January 09, 2020, 07:22:16 AM »
You have to look at who got killed, Kris.  Solemeni has killed many others.  He wasn't an innocent lamb.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/why-administration-claims-that-soleimani-killed-hundreds-americans/

There wasn't peace beforehand.  We might be moving towards peace after.  Of course, it's always complicated.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4803
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1847 on: January 09, 2020, 07:30:51 AM »
You have to look at who got killed, Kris.  Solemeni has killed many others.  He wasn't an innocent lamb.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/why-administration-claims-that-soleimani-killed-hundreds-americans/

There wasn't peace beforehand.  We might be moving towards peace after.  Of course, it's always complicated.

KBecks, I know he killed people.

But hey, thanks for the article.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4880
  • Location: Avalon
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1848 on: January 09, 2020, 07:44:57 AM »
You have to look at who got killed, Kris.  Solemeni has killed many others.  He wasn't an innocent lamb.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/why-administration-claims-that-soleimani-killed-hundreds-americans/

There wasn't peace beforehand.  We might be moving towards peace after.  Of course, it's always complicated.

Do tell, the General who replaced Soleimani, is he less complicit in Iran's actions and will he have different policies in the future?  Because another way to look at this is that Trump and the USA have unlawfully killed the representative of a foreign government for no discernable change in that government's policy and at the cost of no longer themselves being able to call themselves "innocent lambs".

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14861
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #1849 on: January 09, 2020, 08:18:12 AM »
You have to look at who got killed, Kris.  Solemeni has killed many others.  He wasn't an innocent lamb.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/08/why-administration-claims-that-soleimani-killed-hundreds-americans/

There wasn't peace beforehand.  We might be moving towards peace after.  Of course, it's always complicated.

As a pro-peace with Iran type of person, what did you think about Trump pulling out of the nuclear arms deal that Iran was abiding by, and then instituting illegal sanctions on the country?