The Democratic Candidates
Comments
-
It's the older voters that are socially conservative in the party.mcgruff10 said:
I never knew the African American community was homophobic. Interesting.cincybearcat said:
I have no data...but it wouldn't surprise me that if the African american community wasn't as homophobic as it is, Mayor Pete would be doing a lot better. I think he is likely "that" candidate. But we will miss out on him cause even a large portion of the democratic voters don't like it when a guy loves another guy. But I guess I haven't seen any recent data...have to go look.OnWis97 said:
I tend to agree with McGruff 1) there's no Obama in the mix and 2) it's amazing that there can't be one every cycle...it's amazing that Obama's practically a once-in-a-generation candidate.cincybearcat said:
I’d feel good voting for Pete or Amy. Someone else could stand out between now and Election Day. But as of now those are the only 2 that could get me to the polls based on them and not their opponentmcgruff10 said:
True but do any of them really stand out to you? I mean i absolutely loved Obama as a candidate. I was excited and proud to vote for him. These candidates? Yeah not too much. It was the same feeling for Hillary, I voted for her but I wasn't overly excited to think of her as the president.Gern Blansten said:
Disagree....any of them would be better than tRump.mcgruff10 said:The more I read and watch the more I realize that all the dem candidates are pretty damn shitty. Where is the next Obama? A country of 300 million plus and this is the best we have?
As a politically engaged person, yeah, you can vote for Amy. I'm from her state and she's smart and capable. But she's not going to bring people to the polls like Obama did. You mention Pete...he's the most Obama-like among them, but I don't think he quite has the appeal to the sometimes-apolitical that Obama did.
But to McGruff's point, most of them seem to be stumbling their way through and just as likely to turn people off as pull them in.
I feel like there was a time when Biden was actually kinda sharp-tongued and would have run up the score in the debates with a dolt like Trump. Well, if so, those days seem to be behind him.0 -
Pete’s a pro, I love him, not going to work, especially as vp.
Anything can happen, but as of right now its
1.)Biden
2,3)Warren/BernieDetroit 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
0 -
As a outsider viewer from another country, I have to say that for me if I were to vote for anyone it would be warren. I know the running joke about her a plan for everything but damm don't you want someone who know the issues.I look at her track record and I have to say that she has always been on the side of the poor and middle class.0
-
The other thing about her (that I'm not as sure about Bernie) is that she'll adjust quickly to reality; that the really crazy ideas will never happen. The Democratic Party is not going to try to end checks and balances to make the President feel validated like another party is currently doing.fife said:As a outsider viewer from another country, I have to say that for me if I were to vote for anyone it would be warren. I know the running joke about her a plan for everything but damm don't you want someone who know the issues.I look at her track record and I have to say that she has always been on the side of the poor and middle class.
In short, she won't follow through on the promises that scare Americans. But she's still capable and should be effective.1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
There are many exciting democratic candidates, most I would be happy to vote for. All I would vote for (if I could) over Trump, because I'm not an idiot. Warren being my favourite.
As I read through this thread I don't understand where all the negativity is coming from.
Post edited by dignin on0 -
Its concerning to me that free/affordable healthcare and education are things that "scare americans"0
-
Couldn't you effectively lower the prices by allowing people to buy into Medicare, creating true competition for private insurers, without blowing up the whole system?Lerxst1992 said:mcgruff10 said:Pretty crazy to think:
While Trump’s $267 billion is bad, the Democrats’ plans are worse. We counted $297 billion proposed by Biden, $690 billion from Buttigieg, $3.8 trillion from Warren, $4 trillion from Sanders and $4.3 trillion from Harris. That would double what the entire federal government spends now.
https://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2019/07/31/free-stuff-n2550923?fbclid=IwAR2mDPL1ppxW1SxG5wCKCP46VVRPdlJcrnluYyr6jAnXOMZSFe1IlX6mhD4
Here's the video just in case you don't feel like reading today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5odA8Gsmzs
Its actually even trickier than the wonky debates this week.
MFA is not free and will not include massive govt spending or an enormous tax
The trick is converting a sizable portion of the economy, what employers pay for healthcare, directly to worker salaries salaries. Pay us instead of our insurers.
If Bernie or Liz could do that, and then account for the lowering of the actual cost to provide care, the impact on our taxes would be minimal in theory
The reason I love Bernie but dont support him is he has done a terrible job communicating this. Too many Americans have a false perception on cost and I'll blame bernie for that because he has been talking about MFA healthcare the longest.
Forcing employers to turn money saved through employer matches into salary increases to net the cost to neutral for the inevitable tax increases feels much more difficult.
My biggest concern is quality of care if private hospitals turn into government entities. We have government hospitals in this country and the care is terrible, wait times atrocious, etc. The VA is awful.0 -
-
I'm with you on #1. To me that is the most disappointing thing. Biden at the top of his game is their best chance to win. He's clearly not at the top of his game.cincybearcat said:
I’m more concerned.The Juggler said:I'm less confident about these democrats' chances than I was a month ago.
Mostly because
1) I now think Biden is a terrible candidate. Never liked the guy but thought he could win. He seems tired and like he doesn’t want to be there.
2) Dems keep moving left, which is away from me and moderates. So even if they win, I’m not going to like the result.
3) it seems like it’s a Biden/Sanders/Warren race at the moment at that is about as bad as it could get for me.
#3--Harris is definitely in that mix. I know wha the polls say, but my money is on her to win the nomination at this point. And I believe she can beat Trump too....though just would be more difficult than a top of his game Biden.
But yeah, overall, pretty disappointing if you're a moderate. They barely spent any time talking about the voters they need to win those most important 12-15 states last night.www.myspace.com0 -
I believe Warren and Sanders are talking to those people.The Juggler said:cincybearcat said:
I’m more concerned.The Juggler said:I'm less confident about these democrats' chances than I was a month ago.
Mostly because
1) I now think Biden is a terrible candidate. Never liked the guy but thought he could win. He seems tired and like he doesn’t want to be there.
2) Dems keep moving left, which is away from me and moderates. So even if they win, I’m not going to like the result.
3) it seems like it’s a Biden/Sanders/Warren race at the moment at that is about as bad as it could get for me.
But yeah, overall, pretty disappointing if you're a moderate. They barely spent any time talking about the voters they need to win those most important 12-15 states last night.
But I do agree, if you are a moderate, the shift in the Democratic party would be disappointing.0 -
It is. They are eating their own instead of focusing on the most important aspect - beating Trump. I understand they're each trying to differentiate themselves but the last 2 nights were nothing but Dems shooting each other, and last night was a total assault on Obama. I thought I was watching the GOP debates at times.mcgruff10 said:
Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who served as the first White House chief to Obama, said Democratic presidential candidates were being extraordinarily short-sighted and wrong-headed by assailing the Obama administration's record, rather than trying to build upon it.
This is exactly the problem. Obama was popular and while there are parts of his legacy that weren't necessarily stellar, the Dems need to run on a "return to normalcy" which we experienced in the Obama era, rather than talk about all of the horrible things the Dems did under Obama/Biden. Trump must be super happy about the past couple of nights."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
Agreed.jeffbr said:
It is. They are eating their own instead of focusing on the most important aspect - beating Trump. I understand they're each trying to differentiate themselves but the last 2 nights were nothing but Dems shooting each other, and last night was a total assault on Obama. I thought I was watching the GOP debates at times.mcgruff10 said:
Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who served as the first White House chief to Obama, said Democratic presidential candidates were being extraordinarily short-sighted and wrong-headed by assailing the Obama administration's record, rather than trying to build upon it.
This is exactly the problem. Obama was popular and while there are parts of his legacy that weren't necessarily stellar, the Dems need to run on a "return to normalcy" which we experienced in the Obama era, rather than talk about all of the horrible things the Dems did under Obama/Biden. Trump must be super happy about the past couple of nights.
Part of the problem is the way the DNC set these debates up to have a bunch of lesser tier candidates who have zero shots of winning going up against the ones who actually do. Fucking DeBlasio was just tossing grenades during his two debates. Fuck him. He sucks.
Everyone would have been much better served seen Biden go up against Sanders, Warrnen, Harris, Buttigegehappoiueggie, and maybe a couple others during his two debates.Post edited by The Juggler onwww.myspace.com0 -
Deblasio is such a pos.I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0
-
My big concern with Harris is that she is good at the sneak attack, but can't take it. Tulsi Gabbard slapped Harris down a few pegs last night in my estimation. Harris was flustered and did a lot of finger wagging. People aren't generally into that kind of thing. I was a Biden/Harris fan prior to the 1st debates. After Harris' shitty behavior I'm not a fan. And I still think Biden will recover from this. He is shaking off the rust and I think we'll see him move up again, especially once the clown car has fewer clowns in it. Gabbard's stock has risen with me, and I would get behind a Biden / Gabbard ticket. All that being said, no matter what, I'll be voting for the Dem that gets the nomination. Every single one of them would be a huge step up from what we have now.The Juggler said:
I'm with you on #1. To me that is the most disappointing thing. Biden at the top of his game is their best chance to win. He's clearly not at the top of his game.cincybearcat said:
I’m more concerned.The Juggler said:I'm less confident about these democrats' chances than I was a month ago.
Mostly because
1) I now think Biden is a terrible candidate. Never liked the guy but thought he could win. He seems tired and like he doesn’t want to be there.
2) Dems keep moving left, which is away from me and moderates. So even if they win, I’m not going to like the result.
3) it seems like it’s a Biden/Sanders/Warren race at the moment at that is about as bad as it could get for me.
#3--Harris is definitely in that mix. I know wha the polls say, but my money is on her to win the nomination at this point. And I believe she can beat Trump too....though just would be more difficult than a top of his game Biden.
But yeah, overall, pretty disappointing if you're a moderate. They barely spent any time talking about the voters they need to win those most important 12-15 states last night."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
This. Plus the debate format basically pitted them against each other, which was entirely counterproductive. Perhaps they need a more town hall style debate where they can answer questions about themselves and their platforms and policy ideas, rather than setting the candidates up to blow the heads off their opponents.The Juggler said:
Agreed.jeffbr said:
It is. They are eating their own instead of focusing on the most important aspect - beating Trump. I understand they're each trying to differentiate themselves but the last 2 nights were nothing but Dems shooting each other, and last night was a total assault on Obama. I thought I was watching the GOP debates at times.mcgruff10 said:
Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who served as the first White House chief to Obama, said Democratic presidential candidates were being extraordinarily short-sighted and wrong-headed by assailing the Obama administration's record, rather than trying to build upon it.
This is exactly the problem. Obama was popular and while there are parts of his legacy that weren't necessarily stellar, the Dems need to run on a "return to normalcy" which we experienced in the Obama era, rather than talk about all of the horrible things the Dems did under Obama/Biden. Trump must be super happy about the past couple of nights.
Part of the problem is the way the DNC set these debates up to have a bunch of lesser tier candidates who have zero shots of winning going up against the ones who actually do. Fucking DeBlasio was just tossing grenades during his two debates. Fuck him. He sucks.
Everyone would have been much better served seen Biden go up against Sanders, Warrnen, Harris, Buttigegehappoiueggie, and maybe a couple others during his two debates."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
Harris did not have a very good night last night. I agree. I still like her though. That attack might help her improve...
Gabbard did hit her hard. But I would not be surprised if she turns out to be Jill Stein 2.0 and runs as an independent. I'm weary of her. Anyone who cannot condemn Assad is not okay in my book no matter how much they exceed debate expectations..www.myspace.com0 -
Why would anyone in their right mind want to prostitute themselves and their ideals for all the money that's required to be successful and have every minute of their life from birth to present investigated, inspected and dissected and splayed across all forms of media for scrutiny? The process prevents "good" people from running. Obama was so squeaky clean that it threw the repubs for a total loop in 2008 as they had basically no opposition research material on him and fully expected Hillary, where they had binders full ready to go, to win the nomination. The best they could do was "birtherism" and Reverend Wright. And when that didn't work, it morphed into Muslim and ISIS. And coming for your guns and destroying 'Murica. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.OnWis97 said:
I tend to agree with McGruff 1) there's no Obama in the mix and 2) it's amazing that there can't be one every cycle...it's amazing that Obama's practically a once-in-a-generation candidate.cincybearcat said:
I’d feel good voting for Pete or Amy. Someone else could stand out between now and Election Day. But as of now those are the only 2 that could get me to the polls based on them and not their opponentmcgruff10 said:
True but do any of them really stand out to you? I mean i absolutely loved Obama as a candidate. I was excited and proud to vote for him. These candidates? Yeah not too much. It was the same feeling for Hillary, I voted for her but I wasn't overly excited to think of her as the president.Gern Blansten said:
Disagree....any of them would be better than tRump.mcgruff10 said:The more I read and watch the more I realize that all the dem candidates are pretty damn shitty. Where is the next Obama? A country of 300 million plus and this is the best we have?
As a politically engaged person, yeah, you can vote for Amy. I'm from her state and she's smart and capable. But she's not going to bring people to the polls like Obama did. You mention Pete...he's the most Obama-like among them, but I don't think he quite has the appeal to the sometimes-apolitical that Obama did.
But to McGruff's point, most of them seem to be stumbling their way through and just as likely to turn people off as pull them in.
I feel like there was a time when Biden was actually kinda sharp-tongued and would have run up the score in the debates with a dolt like Trump. Well, if so, those days seem to be behind him.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
fife said:As a outsider viewer from another country, I have to say that for me if I were to vote for anyone it would be warren. I know the running joke about her a plan for everything but damm don't you want someone who know the issues.I look at her track record and I have to say that she has always been on the side of the poor and middle class.
In an american general elections republicans make everyone hate those folks and make Democrats look like socialists. In this country we like to blame the poor for being poor.0 -
Yes. I think we have agreed on that in the past.mrussel1 said:
Couldn't you effectively lower the prices by allowing people to buy into Medicare, creating true competition for private insurers, without blowing up the whole system?Lerxst1992 said:mcgruff10 said:Pretty crazy to think:
While Trump’s $267 billion is bad, the Democrats’ plans are worse. We counted $297 billion proposed by Biden, $690 billion from Buttigieg, $3.8 trillion from Warren, $4 trillion from Sanders and $4.3 trillion from Harris. That would double what the entire federal government spends now.
https://townhall.com/columnists/johnstossel/2019/07/31/free-stuff-n2550923?fbclid=IwAR2mDPL1ppxW1SxG5wCKCP46VVRPdlJcrnluYyr6jAnXOMZSFe1IlX6mhD4
Here's the video just in case you don't feel like reading today:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5odA8Gsmzs
Its actually even trickier than the wonky debates this week.
MFA is not free and will not include massive govt spending or an enormous tax
The trick is converting a sizable portion of the economy, what employers pay for healthcare, directly to worker salaries salaries. Pay us instead of our insurers.
If Bernie or Liz could do that, and then account for the lowering of the actual cost to provide care, the impact on our taxes would be minimal in theory
The reason I love Bernie but dont support him is he has done a terrible job communicating this. Too many Americans have a false perception on cost and I'll blame bernie for that because he has been talking about MFA healthcare the longest.
Forcing employers to turn money saved through employer matches into salary increases to net the cost to neutral for the inevitable tax increases feels much more difficult.
My biggest concern is quality of care if private hospitals turn into government entities. We have government hospitals in this country and the care is terrible, wait times atrocious, etc. The VA is awful.
I was attempting to point out though I love Bernie (but want Biden to win), I blame him for not getting a decent explanation of MFA funding.
My concern is there's alot of passion coming from the Bernie Liz flank and they may be able to push MFA onto the platform. So it would help us if folks understand it's not necessarily more expensive if that were to happen.
At this point in time a Medicare option is the best plan for dems to propose0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help