The Democratic Candidates

Hi!

cincybearcat said:

So a back to Dem candidates. Is Joe Biden a moderate or liberal?

I think he’s moderately liberal.

Hi!

Biden/Bernie 2020

Halifax2TheMax

cincybearcat said:

So a back to Dem candidates. Is Joe Biden a moderate or liberal?

Liberal moderate.

F Me In The Brain

Please make it someone who will beat The Grand WiZaed Trump

mickeyrat

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Spiritual_Chaos

A Trump analysis of the primary:

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1122297979405205505

Spiritual_Chaos

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

mickeyrat

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

other than streaming content Amazon doesnt produce anything.

edit correction. Kindle's and Fire Sticks.

from what small business partner were those stolen from?

Spiritual_Chaos

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

other than streaming content Amazon doesnt produce anything.

edit correction. Kindle's and Fire Sticks.

from what small business partner were those stolen from?

It was in some interview she did she talked about something... I don't know, shouldn't have posted because of the fuzziness of it all.

benjs

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

other than streaming content Amazon doesnt produce anything.

edit correction. Kindle's and Fire Sticks.

from what small business partner were those stolen from?

They produce (or at least have outsourced the production of) numerous other products - just search AmazonBasics on Amazon and you may be surprised how much you'll find, and in how many product categories as well. 

Warren's premise seems to be "you can't run a marketplace then use the data from it to become a successful competitor", and I disagree. I don't really understand where and when her objection kicks in - is the objection the use of data to optimize? Is it the entering the markets they learn about through offering services to clients (aka marketplace sellers)? Is it the doing it better than their clients? In my opinion (and I'm pretty sure the law's too) if you run a marketplace and people choose to participate in it, that's your ecosystem, and that data is yours to access so long as consumer privacy is respected to the degree the law demands.

It'll be interesting to see if the masses agree with this concept or not.

Spiritual_Chaos

Hi! said:

Biden/Bernie 2020

Wanna see some Bernie/Warren VS Biden/Pete tag team action.

BIDEN: America is a feather flowing through the sky over our grand landscape where we...

WARREN: Lets make life fare for normal folks!

PETE: Speaking of fare, when I was serving in Afghanistan - no one asked if I was fare, or if I was gay, all they cared about...

WARREN: Bernie: Finish him! !

* Bernie rips Petes spine out with his bare hands*

mickeyrat

benjs said:

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

other than streaming content Amazon doesnt produce anything.

edit correction. Kindle's and Fire Sticks.

from what small business partner were those stolen from?

They produce (or at least have outsourced the production of) numerous other products - just search AmazonBasics on Amazon and you may be surprised how much you'll find, and in how many product categories as well. 

Warren's premise seems to be "you can't run a marketplace then use the data from it to become a successful competitor", and I disagree. I don't really understand where and when her objection kicks in - is the objection the use of data to optimize? Is it the entering the markets they learn about through offering services to clients (aka marketplace sellers)? Is it the doing it better than their clients? In my opinion (and I'm pretty sure the law's too) if you run a marketplace and people choose to participate in it, that's your ecosystem, and that data is yours to access so long as consumer privacy is respected to the degree the law demands.

It'll be interesting to see if the masses agree with this concept or not.

where she may have a point is if Amazon were to boot those partners off the platform.

where her point isnt made personally, amazon basics isnt a place I look to make a purchase......

benjs

mickeyrat said:

benjs said:

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Warren lost me at breaking up amazon.  Dumbest idea in a long time. Biden 2020

You don't have to agree, but she hardly sounds dumb in her argument for it: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/23/elizabeth-warren-amazon-google-big-tech-break-up-town-hall-vpx.cnn

I think the platform argument is off base.  It's instructive that she chose fb, Google and Amazon,  and left off Apple who is the closest to the legal definition of a monopoly.  Amazon is the furthest. 

She didn't leave out Apple. She included Apple by name in that video. She speaks specifically about Amazon in detail because the person who asked the question was specifically asking about Amazon.

Ok.  In the original announcement many weeks ago,  she didn't mention apple.  Their platform is much closer to a monopoly than Google,  but neither fit the definition in either search or the apps.  

Amazon isn't even close.  There are plenty of choices in platform retail. They also don't conspire on prices.  

and they have a great many sellers doing direct to consumer selling/shipping.

Warren has talked about this though. If I remember her correctly there are cases where if products have been sold through Amazon with great success - Amazon will release their own product and kill the other sellers business. 

other than streaming content Amazon doesnt produce anything.

edit correction. Kindle's and Fire Sticks.

from what small business partner were those stolen from?

They produce (or at least have outsourced the production of) numerous other products - just search AmazonBasics on Amazon and you may be surprised how much you'll find, and in how many product categories as well. 

Warren's premise seems to be "you can't run a marketplace then use the data from it to become a successful competitor", and I disagree. I don't really understand where and when her objection kicks in - is the objection the use of data to optimize? Is it the entering the markets they learn about through offering services to clients (aka marketplace sellers)? Is it the doing it better than their clients? In my opinion (and I'm pretty sure the law's too) if you run a marketplace and people choose to participate in it, that's your ecosystem, and that data is yours to access so long as consumer privacy is respected to the degree the law demands.

It'll be interesting to see if the masses agree with this concept or not.

where she may have a point is if Amazon were to boot those partners off the platform.

where her point isnt made personally, amazon basics isnt a place I look to make a purchase......

But that's the thing - as far as I know they aren't being booted off, however Amazon is known to reach out to the manufacturers of these products and make their own deals with them, where they can commit to way larger quantities. They get the economies of scale, white label them into AmazonBasics product, and the positioning of the original product becomes more difficult. Unfortunate for the original distributor, sure, but still kosher in my eyes.

It's interesting to me to watch the objections to purposeful data collection and Amazon's acting on those analytics. As a retailer, if someone told me I couldn't access or mine the orders my clients had placed with me, I'd shrug and keep doing it - that's how we hone our craft and deliver better service (which, believe it or not, is something honestly and authentically done by businesses with data). For Amazon, when they sell their services to marketplace sellers, if the terms and conditions permit it, I don't see on what grounds Warren states the learning or the competing shouldn't occur. 

On your last point - they're good value products, and if I had a choice between two products I'm almost certain are the same but with different stickers and price tags on them (and the same buying experience) - most would elect for the cheaper Amazon one. 

Meltdown99

Amazon is also going to be offering prime members 1 day shipping guaranteed.  

cincybearcat

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Hi! said:

Biden/Bernie 2020

Wanna see some Bernie/Warren VS Biden/Pete tag team action.

BIDEN: America is a feather flowing through the sky over our grand landscape where we...

WARREN: Lets make life fare for normal folks!

PETE: Speaking of fare, when I was serving in Afghanistan - no one asked if I was fare, or if I was gay, all they cared about...

WARREN: Bernie: Finish him! !

* Bernie rips Petes spine out with his bare hands*

I was going to correct your spelling of fair...but then realized when taking Bernie and Warren using fare is more appropriate as they want to charge more for everything. 

Plus i figured it was just a typo

mrussel1

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

my2hands said:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/25/18282870/joe-biden-criminal-justice-war-on-drugs-mass-incarceration

All i said was, very simply, Joe Biden is not, and has never been a liberal or considered a liberal. He is a moderate, and has always been a moderate, and will always be a moderate.

Feel free to parse and debate whatever you want for the next 5 pages, to call him a liberal is incorrect

Saw someone describe him as a Status Quo Warrior.

The problem is you're both wrong.  He's been liberal in his social positions his whole career.  Now the degrees to each varies,  but to think of him as not a career social liberal is factually wrong. Research his rating from the NRA, NEA, NARAL, etc. He is absolutely moderate on many economic positions,  which is reflective of his state.  

I'm not wrong, and i'm not going to debate it. Biden is a moderate Democrat, and is not a liberal.

What does it even matter?

What matters is using votes and positions from 30 years ago as a cudgel against him today,, which is what's happening.  And not holding Bernie,  the other candidate from the same period, to the same. 

It's intellectually dishonest on the front side of the sentence and hypocritical on the back half.  I expect nothing less than social media twits who post intentional deceptions on Twitter, but I will still call it out and challenge it.  

mrussel1

dignin said:

oftenreading said:

cincybearcat said:

oftenreading said:

my2hands said:

oftenreading said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

BTW - your second paragraph is way overstated and blows up what could have been a pretty good argument.  

If I got a nickel every time I did that to myself. 

Anyways, the only difference between a liberal and a cannibal is that cannibals don't eat their friends and family. I've heard.

Haha, that's a good joke, and seems to be true this year.  Although, it seems to be the progressives.  Biden would be considered a liberal I think, under today's nomenclature.  

Ahhhhhh, not really.... Joe is a moderate.... nobody considers him a liberal, and they shouldn't... he is s solid moderare dem.... the iraq war vote being near the top of the list and the crime bill, etc......

I would not consider Joe to be a liberal or progressive, which i feel are the same thing

See this is a perfect example of the lack of historical perspective when evaluating people's positions.  The Crime Bill was not considered a 'conservative/liberal' demarcation point when it came to pass.  The cities were ravaged by crime and the leaders in the black community, including the majority of the Congressional Black Caucus, supported the bill.  You can't judge their vote by what we know today, 30 friggin' years later, with the benefit of hindsight.  And don't forget the Violence Against Women Act was a subset.  I guess Biden should have voted against that?

Oh and FYI, Sanders voted for it too.  I guess he's a moderate.    

Dude why are you freaking out? Did i say being a moderate was a bad thing? Joe Biden is a moderate and has never been considered a liberal, not in the 80's, 90's, or 2000's... that's not good, thats not bad, thats just who he is... you support the guy because he's a fucking moderate and you want to lecture me? you act like you just learned who Joe Biden is? Lol

Lighten up

Where did you get that he’s freaking out? No freaking is apparent to me. Just information, which maybe you don’t like. 

Last sentence is exhibit A

Some people on here always have to throw a jab or try to talk slick, like this unnecessary condescending remark. 

Nope, you’re incorrect. Mrussell was not freaking out, he was providing information. Maybe you didn’t like that information, but that doesn’t mean he was freaking out, and it also doesn’t mean that people that point that out are condescending to you. 
 

Oh c’mon. You went back to the original argument instead of dealing with your snide remark. You know you were making a snide remark, own it. Man - lots of people continue to do this sort of thing and never own it. 

Nope. It’s a factual remark, like I just said. Doesn’t matter what you think of it. 
 

It's always the same two who are the victims here. Best to ignore and steer clear of the drama.

On topic, Warren is one of the smartest people to ever run for President (contrary to some opinions here). The US would be extremely fortunate to have her as their leader at this time.

I agree she's very smart.  That's why some of these arguments are disappointing to me.  I feel like she is targeting certain companies as a populist position rather a realistic one. 

josevolution

https://twitter.com/mmflint/status/1122485919301423104?s=21
I tend to agree ..

cincybearcat

mrussel1 said:

dignin said:

oftenreading said:

cincybearcat said:

oftenreading said:

my2hands said:

oftenreading said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

BTW - your second paragraph is way overstated and blows up what could have been a pretty good argument.  

If I got a nickel every time I did that to myself. 

Anyways, the only difference between a liberal and a cannibal is that cannibals don't eat their friends and family. I've heard.

Haha, that's a good joke, and seems to be true this year.  Although, it seems to be the progressives.  Biden would be considered a liberal I think, under today's nomenclature.  

Ahhhhhh, not really.... Joe is a moderate.... nobody considers him a liberal, and they shouldn't... he is s solid moderare dem.... the iraq war vote being near the top of the list and the crime bill, etc......

I would not consider Joe to be a liberal or progressive, which i feel are the same thing

See this is a perfect example of the lack of historical perspective when evaluating people's positions.  The Crime Bill was not considered a 'conservative/liberal' demarcation point when it came to pass.  The cities were ravaged by crime and the leaders in the black community, including the majority of the Congressional Black Caucus, supported the bill.  You can't judge their vote by what we know today, 30 friggin' years later, with the benefit of hindsight.  And don't forget the Violence Against Women Act was a subset.  I guess Biden should have voted against that?

Oh and FYI, Sanders voted for it too.  I guess he's a moderate.    

Dude why are you freaking out? Did i say being a moderate was a bad thing? Joe Biden is a moderate and has never been considered a liberal, not in the 80's, 90's, or 2000's... that's not good, thats not bad, thats just who he is... you support the guy because he's a fucking moderate and you want to lecture me? you act like you just learned who Joe Biden is? Lol

Lighten up

Where did you get that he’s freaking out? No freaking is apparent to me. Just information, which maybe you don’t like. 

Last sentence is exhibit A

Some people on here always have to throw a jab or try to talk slick, like this unnecessary condescending remark. 

Nope, you’re incorrect. Mrussell was not freaking out, he was providing information. Maybe you didn’t like that information, but that doesn’t mean he was freaking out, and it also doesn’t mean that people that point that out are condescending to you. 
 

Oh c’mon. You went back to the original argument instead of dealing with your snide remark. You know you were making a snide remark, own it. Man - lots of people continue to do this sort of thing and never own it. 

Nope. It’s a factual remark, like I just said. Doesn’t matter what you think of it. 
 

It's always the same two who are the victims here. Best to ignore and steer clear of the drama.

On topic, Warren is one of the smartest people to ever run for President (contrary to some opinions here). The US would be extremely fortunate to have her as their leader at this time.

I agree she's very smart.  That's why some of these arguments are disappointing to me.  I feel like she is targeting certain companies as a populist position rather a realistic one. 

Re:Warren. I’ve said about her in the past that she is a moron. That was lazy. She isn’t stupid at all. She is very intelligent and I appreciate her focusing on policy...I just disagree with her a lot on policy.

Oh and hey digin! Happy to see you too!

OnWis97

I think Warren might be the smartest person in the field.  And she’s doing what the Dems are accused of not doing; talking policy.

Of course, neither of those things really help someone get elected.