I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
and I don't care if people make mistakes. GWB was fun to make fun of, but he wasn't losing his mind. he was just kind of....funny to listen to. Biden seems like he's having trouble differentiating between events. I personally care if the POTUS is in cognitive decline.
and I don't care if people make mistakes. GWB was fun to make fun of, but he wasn't losing his mind. he was just kind of....funny to listen to. Biden seems like he's having trouble differentiating between events. I personally care if the POTUS is in cognitive decline.
Especially starting out with such a low level of cognitive ability to begin with!
Seriously though - Biden is concerning. I'm beginning to feel like I did during the Republican primaries in 2016....all these candidates and this is what we got? I still would prefer Pete or Amy...I had resigned myself to Biden...now I'm concerned if Biden continues this Bernie or Warren are going to win. I'd take Warren over Biden every day and just hope all those plans she has get changed or thrown away.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
and I don't care if people make mistakes. GWB was fun to make fun of, but he wasn't losing his mind. he was just kind of....funny to listen to. Biden seems like he's having trouble differentiating between events. I personally care if the POTUS is in cognitive decline.
Especially starting out with such a low level of cognitive ability to begin with!
Seriously though - Biden is concerning. I'm beginning to feel like I did during the Republican primaries in 2016....all these candidates and this is what we got? I still would prefer Pete or Amy...I had resigned myself to Biden...now I'm concerned if Biden continues this Bernie or Warren are going to win. I'd take Warren over Biden every day and just hope all those plans she has get changed or thrown away.
Right so you're lowering your bar to what you hope will happen policy wise. My priority is political philosophy
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
He nails morality for you? Creep.
Only using your ongoing interpretation, always in the most perverted possible light. I don't, for one second, think Biden is a creep.
and I don't care if people make mistakes. GWB was fun to make fun of, but he wasn't losing his mind. he was just kind of....funny to listen to. Biden seems like he's having trouble differentiating between events. I personally care if the POTUS is in cognitive decline.
Especially starting out with such a low level of cognitive ability to begin with!
Seriously though - Biden is concerning. I'm beginning to feel like I did during the Republican primaries in 2016....all these candidates and this is what we got? I still would prefer Pete or Amy...I had resigned myself to Biden...now I'm concerned if Biden continues this Bernie or Warren are going to win. I'd take Warren over Biden every day and just hope all those plans she has get changed or thrown away.
Right so you're lowering your bar to what you hope will happen policy wise. My priority is political philosophy
Yes. I wasn't saying you are doing anything wrong by lowering the bar...my point was for me, the current president has lowered the bar tremendously.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
He nails morality for you? Creep.
Only using your ongoing interpretation, always in the most perverted possible light. I don't, for one second, think Biden is a creep.
You haven't been paying attention then. You seem in a very bad mood for a Friday, perhaps I'm reading it wrong.
hippiemom = goodness
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
Joe may continue to embellish all the stories he likes about the bravery and courage of other people as far as I'm concerned. That's what he did. It sure is refreshing from a soul-eater who tells us daily how great and awesome and genius he thinks he is. :P
Joe may continue to embellish all the stories he likes about the bravery and courage of other people as far as I'm concerned. That's what he did. It sure is refreshing from a soul-eater who tells us daily how great and awesome and genius he thinks he is. :P
Both delusional. Being less delusional than trump is hardly a life goal.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
Joe may continue to embellish all the stories he likes about the bravery and courage of other people as far as I'm concerned. That's what he did. It sure is refreshing from a soul-eater who tells us daily how great and awesome and genius he thinks he is. :P
Both delusional. Being less delusional than trump is hardly a life goal.
Joe may continue to embellish all the stories he likes about the bravery and courage of other people as far as I'm concerned. That's what he did. It sure is refreshing from a soul-eater who tells us daily how great and awesome and genius he thinks he is. :P
Both delusional. Being less delusional than trump is hardly a life goal.
LOL
Yes, yuk yuk, yuk both are the same. Are you a Bon Jovi and Tool fan?
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
He nails morality for you? Creep.
Only using your ongoing interpretation, always in the most perverted possible light. I don't, for one second, think Biden is a creep.
You haven't been paying attention then. You seem in a very bad mood for a Friday, perhaps I'm reading it wrong.
I have been paying attention. You just seem hell bent on perpetuating a specific narrative that paints him in a specific light and claims to know his frame of mind, which you don't. Biden has never been accused of any compromising behavior in a private setting. All of his touchy feely-ness is out in the public and it has happened with men and women. It's my belief, and I don't think I'm on an island here, is that it's benevolent and paternal, not creepy. If he was a creep, wouldn't there have been accusations of bad behavior in private, at this point in his life that have trailed people like Trump and Bill Clinton? One would think. But no, no one has to my knowledge. Therefore your ongoing accusation has little credibility to me.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
Bar lowered...biden still barely hits the bar.
Hardly.. only inasmuch as I am lowering it by not voting for an imaginary candidate not on the ballot. He nails it on policy and morality for me. His gaffes are consistent throughout his career, so who cares. Seems like the bar is perfect for the available options.
He nails morality for you? Creep.
Only using your ongoing interpretation, always in the most perverted possible light. I don't, for one second, think Biden is a creep.
You haven't been paying attention then. You seem in a very bad mood for a Friday, perhaps I'm reading it wrong.
I have been paying attention. You just seem hell bent on perpetuating a specific narrative that paints him in a specific light and claims to know his frame of mind, which you don't. Biden has never been accused of any compromising behavior in a private setting. All of his touchy feely-ness is out in the public and it has happened with men and women. It's my belief, and I don't think I'm on an island here, is that it's benevolent and paternal, not creepy. If he was a creep, wouldn't there have been accusations of bad behavior in private, at this point in his life that have trailed people like Trump and Bill Clinton? One would think. But no, no one has to my knowledge. Therefore your ongoing accusation has little credibility to me.
I was watching an interview and the news-person mentioned how people were lining up to get hugs from Joe Biden at his event...a very nice and positive mention. The person she was interviewing brought up something about him being accused of misbehavior. I just don't see it. I agree about it being more paternal and just Joe's way...he's very empathetic. I don't think people would be lining up for hugs if he was doing that out of creepiness. I don't know if he'll end up being the nominee but if he isn't, I don't believe it'll be because of that narrative being spread about him. He's been through a lot in his life and so have other people...that's really being shared out there with him.
I’m honestly shocked at the explaining away Biden’s weird behavior. But everyone has their own opinions. That has always been a huge negative for me.
His cognitive decline and continued gaffes are another.
Dont get me wrong, he still beats trump on both those by a mile so he would get my vote, but he is not a great candidate IMO by any stretch. Heck - id vote for Hillary over Joe, and I’m no big fan if Hillary.
im coming very close to deciding to support a woman candidate in the primary though. It would be a very nice response to Trump. Whereas Biden is just a human form of trump...someone with some morals, but not too much. Some heart. And some mental ability left, but not too much.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
I’m honestly shocked at the explaining away Biden’s weird behavior. But everyone has their own opinions. That has always been a huge negative for me.
His cognitive decline and continued gaffes are another.
Dont get me wrong, he still beats trump on both those by a mile so he would get my vote, but he is not a great candidate IMO by any stretch. Heck - id vote for Hillary over Joe, and I’m no big fan if Hillary.
im coming very close to deciding to support a woman candidate in the primary though. It would be a very nice response to Trump. Whereas Biden is just a human form of trump...someone with some morals, but not too much. Some heart. And some mental ability left, but not too much.
Bidens slow performance out of the gate is concerning and he must up his game in the fall. But he can learn how to make his misstatements cuddly and cute like Reagan could, that might be an interesting strategy.
The big problem the dems have is candidates 2 and 3 are running on a socialist platform and general elections are determined by swing states in the middle or southern portions of this country. Not a good recipe.
Bernie has the ability to argue the merits of his healthcare policy and tie it into his other policies such as being PRO union. But I still dont think a socialist can defeat and incumbent US president in a decent economy.
Warren is very concerning, as I stated in my last post. Her "they'll call us socialists no matter what" is weak and lazy.
Her dna test decision and inability to counter trumps Pocahontas attacks should concern every democrat. He boxed her right into an apology and Harris Booker should be trying to decimate her in the next debates on this point.
It's not whether a candidate is electable but rather can they counter an aggressive opponent who has a stellar killer instinct.
Bernie has proven he can while Warren's performance is very troubling. The general election will not be decided by primary voters.
What works in the polls now will not a year from now.
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
mrussel, I didn't think Lex meant the god statement literally at all (that was said tongue in cheek). I did mean what I said about shirking our personal accountabilities and justifying complacency or nefarious actions based on words accepted as gospel.
I see your point though on M4A - optically that's got to be near impossible to sell as anything other than socialist.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
mrussel, I didn't think Lex meant the god statement literally at all (that was said tongue in cheek). I did mean what I said about shirking our personal accountabilities and justifying complacency or nefarious actions based on words accepted as gospel.
I see your point though on M4A - optically that's got to be near impossible to sell as anything other than socialist.
I really want her to do well. I hope she's coalescing the left and then will move center. Time will tell.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,798
edited September 2019
countering anything trump says as far as labrling is a losing proposition. no one has done it yet. so why waste the time. they'll be seen as even weaker in the face of that.
never wrestle with a pig comes to mind......
instead sell us on your ideas. instead of the juvenile tit for tat bullshit he will NEED you to engage in.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
mrussel, I didn't think Lex meant the god statement literally at all (that was said tongue in cheek). I did mean what I said about shirking our personal accountabilities and justifying complacency or nefarious actions based on words accepted as gospel.
I see your point though on M4A - optically that's got to be near impossible to sell as anything other than socialist.
I really want her to do well. I hope she's coalescing the left and then will move center. Time will tell.
I think if Bernie were to quit the race right now and announce himself to be Warren's running mate, they'd have a serious shot at both primaries and general. Ever since last debate I still can't shake the gut feeling that this is what they're planning. It looks like they have a non-aggression pact, there's alignment on many policies (and no vocal smears of the other's policy where they diverge), similar principled decision-making style, etc. It seems like it would be a conveniently easy pivot, but that's totally supposition on my part.
Edit: if they did this, I wonder if they'd be able to cohesively divide and conquer and send Bernie out to the lefties while Warren earns the trust of centrists.
Post edited by benjs on
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
Comments
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Not ideal, obviously, but far better than our current circumstance.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Seriously though - Biden is concerning. I'm beginning to feel like I did during the Republican primaries in 2016....all these candidates and this is what we got? I still would prefer Pete or Amy...I had resigned myself to Biden...now I'm concerned if Biden continues this Bernie or Warren are going to win. I'd take Warren over Biden every day and just hope all those plans she has get changed or thrown away.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
His cognitive decline and continued gaffes are another.
Dont get me wrong, he still beats trump on both those by a mile so he would get my vote, but he is not a great candidate IMO by any stretch. Heck - id vote for Hillary over Joe, and I’m no big fan if Hillary.
im coming very close to deciding to support a woman candidate in the primary though. It would be a very nice response to Trump. Whereas Biden is just a human form of trump...someone with some morals, but not too much. Some heart. And some mental ability left, but not too much.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal.
...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Bidens slow performance out of the gate is concerning and he must up his game in the fall. But he can learn how to make his misstatements cuddly and cute like Reagan could, that might be an interesting strategy.
The big problem the dems have is candidates 2 and 3 are running on a socialist platform and general elections are determined by swing states in the middle or southern portions of this country. Not a good recipe.
Bernie has the ability to argue the merits of his healthcare policy and tie it into his other policies such as being PRO union. But I still dont think a socialist can defeat and incumbent US president in a decent economy.
Warren is very concerning, as I stated in my last post. Her "they'll call us socialists no matter what" is weak and lazy.
Her dna test decision and inability to counter trumps Pocahontas attacks should concern every democrat. He boxed her right into an apology and Harris Booker should be trying to decimate her in the next debates on this point.
It's not whether a candidate is electable but rather can they counter an aggressive opponent who has a stellar killer instinct.
Bernie has proven he can while Warren's performance is very troubling. The general election will not be decided by primary voters.
What works in the polls now will not a year from now.
I see your point though on M4A - optically that's got to be near impossible to sell as anything other than socialist.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Edit: if they did this, I wonder if they'd be able to cohesively divide and conquer and send Bernie out to the lefties while Warren earns the trust of centrists.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022