The GOP is practically ignoring Warren. I take that as a sign that she either poses no threat to win the nomination or they are hoping she can take the lead and somehow win.
Completely agree. They want her to be the nominee. They probably see her as a second-rate Hillary who will be easier to tie to socialism than Hillary was, has less resources (both financial and personal connections) than Hillary, and isn’t married to a popular former president like Hillary.
Wow do these 2 comments nail it. The GOP would LOVE Warren as the nominee.
Warren will be crucified by trump and he will be able to drag her down to his level by eviscerating her for her dishonesty.
She really needs to stop lying before she drags the party down.
This is sarcasm, right?
Sarcasm??? I totally agree with this. Being a Republican leaning voter this is absolutely what is wished for. If Biden is the guy the Dem’s have a chance this time around. All the others, especially Warren make it a landslide. The Dem’s will have their first Socialist President in 8-12 years when all the kids who were brought up by Snowflakes get their first chance to vote.
Warren beats tRump in polling....or did you mean a Dem landslide?
It's early and I think anyone needs to be up by 5+ points come election day in a national poll to mitigate the EC variable. And state polling, while useful, seems to be a little less reliable. I'm worried tbh. Trump has a floor of support. He probably has a ceiling too, so they compensate by suppressing votes.
I think I'm good now....his 38% won't budge but the independents aren't going to vote for him again regardless of who the Dem is.
I wouldn't take too much comfort from independents because alot of them are Libertarians which is just a fancy word for Republican.
I'd estimate trump support at 42% and if 6% dont vote or vote third party, Trump is at 44.7% (42/94= 44.7).
44.7 is pretty darn close to what trump got last time and that's with zero "opposition research" to generate "lock her up" chants or something similar.
Given the inherent right leaning EC bias, I'm with mr1 , very concerned about 4 more years. And I didnt even get into perceived sociast policies.
What is going to be telling are the Iowa caucuses, NH primary followed by Super Tuesday. Liz and Pete have excellent ground games in Iowa and NH but does it translate to Super Tuesday and in particular, southern and Midwest states? Me thinks not but I won’t be surprised if Joe finishes second or third in Iowa and NH and rebounds in the south and mid west. It’s still waaaaay too early.
What is going to be telling are the Iowa caucuses, NH primary followed by Super Tuesday. Liz and Pete have excellent ground games in Iowa and NH but does it translate to Super Tuesday and in particular, southern and Midwest states? Me thinks not but I won’t be surprised if Joe finishes second or third in Iowa and NH and rebounds in the south and mid west. It’s still waaaaay too early.
I expect Joe to finish 3rd or 4th in Iowa. But I think that's okay. He needs to get into the South and Midwest, where his strength will be. The other wild card is the impeachment trial. If it starts in January, Warren, Booker, Bernie, Kamala and Amy will all have to be DC for the trial which will take weeks. That will be very bad for them.
What is going to be telling are the Iowa caucuses, NH primary followed by Super Tuesday. Liz and Pete have excellent ground games in Iowa and NH but does it translate to Super Tuesday and in particular, southern and Midwest states? Me thinks not but I won’t be surprised if Joe finishes second or third in Iowa and NH and rebounds in the south and mid west. It’s still waaaaay too early.
I expect Joe to finish 3rd or 4th in Iowa. But I think that's okay. He needs to get into the South and Midwest, where his strength will be. The other wild card is the impeachment trial. If it starts in January, Warren, Booker, Bernie, Kamala and Amy will all have to be DC for the trial which will take weeks. That will be very bad for them.
That's a good point. That would probably be a dream come true for Buttigieg.
'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
I know she doesn't see a path to victory which is great, but I wish she'd just STFU already. Last week she goes after Tulsi. This week she's back in the news again. How about she just goes back to hawking books on tour? Enough of her distractions and bullshit. She's irrelevant.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
I know she doesn't see a path to victory which is great, but I wish she'd just STFU already. Last week she goes after Tulsi. This week she's back in the news again. How about she just goes back to hawking books on tour? Enough of her distractions and bullshit. She's irrelevant.
I wouldn't be surprised if she had a fake oval office where she pretends to be president like Al Gore does in the South Park video game.
I know she doesn't see a path to victory which is great, but I wish she'd just STFU already. Last week she goes after Tulsi. This week she's back in the news again. How about she just goes back to hawking books on tour? Enough of her distractions and bullshit. She's irrelevant.
I wouldn't be surprised if she had a fake oval office where she pretends to be president like Al Gore does in the South Park video game.
Probably true!
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I'm talking about her wealth tax. the amount of people who have a household income of $50M is pretty minuscule, as is the amount it would affect them.
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I'm talking about her wealth tax. the amount of people who have a household income of $50M is pretty minuscule, as is the amount it would affect them.
I feel like she's used that tax to pay for half the stuff she has proposed, so to me, right now it's fairly meaningless. It feels like a way to demonize the rich. I couple that with Bernie's declaration that billionaires should not exist, which is dangerous rhetoric to me. I think the obvious result of this tax will be a massive capital flight from the US, making the money not even subject to capital gains or any other type of current progressive tax. But I feel like you're separating this specific tax from teh rest of her proposals. I don't think you can do that. When you vote for the person, you're voting for all of the proposals on the table, including M4A.
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I'm talking about her wealth tax. the amount of people who have a household income of $50M is pretty minuscule, as is the amount it would affect them.
I feel like she's used that tax to pay for half the stuff she has proposed, so to me, right now it's fairly meaningless. It feels like a way to demonize the rich. I couple that with Bernie's declaration that billionaires should not exist, which is dangerous rhetoric to me. I think the obvious result of this tax will be a massive capital flight from the US, making the money not even subject to capital gains or any other type of current progressive tax. But I feel like you're separating this specific tax from teh rest of her proposals. I don't think you can do that. When you vote for the person, you're voting for all of the proposals on the table, including M4A.
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I'm talking about her wealth tax. the amount of people who have a household income of $50M is pretty minuscule, as is the amount it would affect them.
I feel like she's used that tax to pay for half the stuff she has proposed, so to me, right now it's fairly meaningless. It feels like a way to demonize the rich. I couple that with Bernie's declaration that billionaires should not exist, which is dangerous rhetoric to me. I think the obvious result of this tax will be a massive capital flight from the US, making the money not even subject to capital gains or any other type of current progressive tax. But I feel like you're separating this specific tax from teh rest of her proposals. I don't think you can do that. When you vote for the person, you're voting for all of the proposals on the table, including M4A.
i can't talk about specific issues? news to me.
That's not a personal shot. My point is that you're saying "I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.". But we're not voting on this issue. We're voting on the aggregation of her policies and this is just one of them.
The GOP is practically ignoring Warren. I take that as a sign that she either poses no threat to win the nomination or they are hoping she can take the lead and somehow win.
Completely agree. They want her to be the nominee. They probably see her as a second-rate Hillary who will be easier to tie to socialism than Hillary was, has less resources (both financial and personal connections) than Hillary, and isn’t married to a popular former president like Hillary.
Wow do these 2 comments nail it. The GOP would LOVE Warren as the nominee.
Warren will be crucified by trump and he will be able to drag her down to his level by eviscerating her for her dishonesty.
She really needs to stop lying before she drags the party down.
This is sarcasm, right?
Sarcasm??? I totally agree with this. Being a Republican leaning voter this is absolutely what is wished for. If Biden is the guy the Dem’s have a chance this time around. All the others, especially Warren make it a landslide. The Dem’s will have their first Socialist President in 8-12 years when all the kids who were brought up by Snowflakes get their first chance to vote.
Hey look, another Republican telling democrats who their nominee should be.
Hahahaha this is funny. This is kinda how I feel about this when I’m looking at the candidates. But I really am going to vote for one....but it feels weird as I know I’m not the target audience in a Democratic Party primary.
Well, you're not Sanders or Warren's target at least. I feel like when Pete, Joe or Amy speak, I'm connecting with their ideas. I figured you'd be aligned with some of their policies.
As an aside, I get very confused about the snowflake analogy. Aren't trump supporters nearly all white? Aren't republicans the party with the "purity test?"
Anyway, I'm a bit disappointed with Amy. I thought she'd be the perfect candidate. But I do not get the sense she is getting twenty thousand to roar in approval when she speaks. It's a shame trump turned politics into a PJ arena show but here we are.
Pete is da man. He comes across as extremely smart and well spoken with a good mix of polite yet forceful when needed. Unfortunately he is very young, and I'm not sure middle America is ready for the image of him passionately celebrating a victory with his husband, yet. I say 2036 the USA will be ready.
And good old Joe. He should be da man, but listen up, folks, he is so darn rusty. Still.
So then we're left with Bernie and Liz, who would be perfect if we were voting for the PM of Canada or Norway. But Ohio voters are a far cry away from those countries.
I don't get why people are so fucking scared of taxing a minuscule percentage of society who have gobs of it to be taxed and won't even notice.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
M4A is not a tiny % of the population, it will have to be almost all of the current tax paying population. For the other ones that are "wealth tax" or "wall street tax", well for one lots of normal people trade stocks either directly or through the movement of their 401(k) assets. It's not clear to me whether those are in scope or not. There's also a skepticism (at least by me) that these programs will be limited in payment to just that 1%. I don't know that the math works.
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
I'm talking about her wealth tax. the amount of people who have a household income of $50M is pretty minuscule, as is the amount it would affect them.
I feel like she's used that tax to pay for half the stuff she has proposed, so to me, right now it's fairly meaningless. It feels like a way to demonize the rich. I couple that with Bernie's declaration that billionaires should not exist, which is dangerous rhetoric to me. I think the obvious result of this tax will be a massive capital flight from the US, making the money not even subject to capital gains or any other type of current progressive tax. But I feel like you're separating this specific tax from teh rest of her proposals. I don't think you can do that. When you vote for the person, you're voting for all of the proposals on the table, including M4A.
I'm not afraid of the tax itself I'm afraid ideas like that create more republican presidents.
I believe the USA is behind many other nation that have more adequate safety nets.
But expecting to convert the current care system to M4A in one step is not practical nor realistic. And a majority of voters have never asked for that.
I think warren has about $8 trillion in new govt programs she is campaigning for. That almost certainly will get us more trump not more govt.
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
www.headstonesband.com
I wouldn't take too much comfort from independents because alot of them are Libertarians which is just a fancy word for Republican.
I'd estimate trump support at 42% and if 6% dont vote or vote third party, Trump is at 44.7% (42/94= 44.7).
44.7 is pretty darn close to what trump got last time and that's with zero "opposition research" to generate "lock her up" chants or something similar.
Given the inherent right leaning EC bias, I'm with mr1 , very concerned about 4 more years. And I didnt even get into perceived sociast policies.
Warren Leads Biden in Latest Quinnipiac Poll
https://fortune.com/2019/10/24/warren-biden-latest-quinnipiac-poll/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The other wild card is the impeachment trial. If it starts in January, Warren, Booker, Bernie, Kamala and Amy will all have to be DC for the trial which will take weeks. That will be very bad for them.
Warren and Sanders race to out-left each other — and moderates are terrified
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
True Story.
people have no fucking idea what real socialism is.
www.headstonesband.com
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
www.headstonesband.com
Maybe just run as an Independent.
www.headstonesband.com
She appears to be all in on running for president.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Hillary Clinton has said she'd consider 2020 race if she thought she could win: report
I know she doesn't see a path to victory which is great, but I wish she'd just STFU already. Last week she goes after Tulsi. This week she's back in the news again. How about she just goes back to hawking books on tour? Enough of her distractions and bullshit. She's irrelevant.Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Last, I'm completely against waiving student loans and making all college free. That's about the least progressive idea that I've seen from a Democrat in a long, long time.
www.headstonesband.com
But I feel like you're separating this specific tax from teh rest of her proposals. I don't think you can do that. When you vote for the person, you're voting for all of the proposals on the table, including M4A.
www.headstonesband.com
I'm not afraid of the tax itself I'm afraid ideas like that create more republican presidents.
I believe the USA is behind many other nation that have more adequate safety nets.
But expecting to convert the current care system to M4A in one step is not practical nor realistic. And a majority of voters have never asked for that.
I think warren has about $8 trillion in new govt programs she is campaigning for. That almost certainly will get us more trump not more govt.