The Democratic Presidential Debates

1…272273275277278…345

Comments

  • Posts: 49,597
    Lerxst1992 said:
    show previous quotes

    Bernie dropped to 8% in 3 days.
    I am concerned about the fact that democrats tend to vote early. I think I heard 40% of Cali has already voted? Plus it's obviously too late to removed Pete and Amy from the ballots. So Bernie should still have a good night. I am hoping Bloomberg sees the writing on the wall after today, drops out and throws his billions behind Joe.

    Say what you want about Bloomberg, his ad campaign was/is massive AND effective. Imagine what they can do to help Biden...
    www.myspace.com
  • Posts: 6,927
    Lerxst1992 said:
    show previous quotes

    Bully. 
    Snowflake.
  • Posts: 30,882
    The Juggler said:
    show previous quotes
    I am concerned about the fact that democrats tend to vote early. I think I heard 40% of Cali has already voted? Plus it's obviously too late to removed Pete and Amy from the ballots. So Bernie should still have a good night. I am hoping Bloomberg sees the writing on the wall after today, drops out and throws his billions behind Joe.

    Say what you want about Bloomberg, his ad campaign was/is massive AND effective. Imagine what they can do to help Biden...
    I heard on Sunday that it was only 20% in California.  
  • Posts: 31,474
    edited March 2020
    The Comeback Kid!



    https://youtu.be/OmBxVfQTuvI
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • New Jersey Posts: 29,122
    The Juggler said:
    show previous quotes
    Yeah, but he was sworn in 3 months later. The ads talk about him helping the city recover. It might seem distasteful, but if you were the mayor during that time, it is part of your record. To not talk about it would be political malpractice. 
    That makes sense.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Posts: 16,994
    Spiritual_Chaos said:
    The Comeback Kid!


    This "No One" seems like a pretty strong candidate based on that projection. Maybe Bloomberg should throw his billions behind No One. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • Posts: 30,882
    rgambs said:
    show previous quotes
    You sound bitter.  I don't think you understand the student loan situation for millennials.
    I'm mildly sympathetic.  I do know that those high loan balances (over 50K) are disproportionately concentrated in grad level students.  I have a daughter who is graduating college in May, and a son heading off this fall.  We talk a lot about smart choices.  My daughter could have gone to any school in the country, but I said no to private and out of state.  She went to William and Mary instead.  She graduated in 3 years because she took ap classes in hs and maxed out in undergrad.  It was the same cost to do 12 to 18 credits.  That saves her 28k right there.  For my son, his grades aren't as good as my daughter's, so I may have him go to juco for two years and then transfer.  This will save tens of thousands. 
    Last, my daughter entertained going to get her MBA but we said nope. Go get a job, work for a few years, and get with a company that offers tuition reimbursement.  She just landed her first job last week with a company in DC that does just that after 2 years.  So like I said, I'm mildly sympathetic, but I've watched lots of people make really bad judgments on their education decisions.  I'm not inclined to bail them out.  
  • Posts: 31,474
    edited March 2020
    nvm
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Posts: 30,882
    Spiritual_Chaos said:

    If these poll numbers play out, Biden will have a very good night and completely change the narrative of the race.  
  • Posts: 49,597
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    show previous quotes
    This "No One" seems like a pretty strong candidate based on that projection. Maybe Bloomberg should throw his billions behind No One. 
    Watch Bernie change his stance, once again, on the candidate having the most delegates being the nominee, regardless of him having the actual number required. 
    www.myspace.com
  • Posts: 31,474
    edited March 2020
    mrussel1 said:
    show previous quotes
    I'm mildly sympathetic.  I do know that those high loan balances (over 50K) are disproportionately concentrated in grad level students.  I have a daughter who is graduating college in May, and a son heading off this fall.  We talk a lot about smart choices.  My daughter could have gone to any school in the country, but I said no to private and out of state.  She went to William and Mary instead.  She graduated in 3 years because she took ap classes in hs and maxed out in undergrad.  It was the same cost to do 12 to 18 credits.  That saves her 28k right there.  For my son, his grades aren't as good as my daughter's, so I may have him go to juco for two years and then transfer.  This will save tens of thousands. 
    Last, my daughter entertained going to get her MBA but we said nope. Go get a job, work for a few years, and get with a company that offers tuition reimbursement.  She just landed her first job last week with a company in DC that does just that after 2 years.  So like I said, I'm mildly sympathetic, but I've watched lots of people make really bad judgments on their education decisions.  I'm not inclined to bail them out.  
    But why not fight for more decent conditions for the actual loans (not that I know of how good or bad they are in the US) rather than starting to forgive loans taken? Never understood that position from Warren/Sanders. 

    People take student loans here in Sweden from the state. Never heard anyone mentioning forgiveness, no matter how left you are. Also never heard about anyone being to burden by them to pay them back. Only talk ever here is about being able to loan more, and having higher "student grants" (to keep up with inflation). 

    That thing, and the whole "we will remove private insurance all together" comes off as bad politically to me. No nordic country that I know ban private insurances (whether one should is another discussion, but Sanders being so unreasonable on that front in the land of private insurances is to me weird). 

    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Posts: 44,443
    The Juggler said:
    show previous quotes
    Watch Bernie change his stance, once again, on the candidate having the most delegates being the nominee, regardless of him having the actual number required. 
    hes already said that.....
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • Posts: 30,882
    Spiritual_Chaos said:
    show previous quotes
    But why not fight for more decent conditions for the actual loans (not that I know of how good or bad they are in the US) rather than starting to forgive loans taken? Never understood that position from Warren/Sanders. 

    People take student loans here in Sweden from the state. Never heard anyone mentioning forgiveness, no matter how left you are. Also never heard about anyone being to burden by them to pay them back. Only talk ever here is about being able to loan more, and having higher "student grants" (to keep up with inflation). 

    That thing, and the whole "we will remove private insurance all together" comes off as bad politically to me. No nordic country that I know ban private insurances (whether one should is another discussion, but Sanders being so unreasonable on that front is to me weird). 

    I don't know what you mean by 'decent conditions'.  There are two major loan programs in the US.  There are the FFEL and direct loans (gov't backed/subsidized) and private loans (non gov't banks).  Of course the terms on the private are higher because they aren't subsidized, but they do have deferment periods and other benefits that traditional loans don't have.  Generally speaking, the terms for those loans are far more favorable than a person with teh same credit could get for credit card, auto, home, etc.  The problem is not the loan terms, it's the astronomical cost of tuition that has outpaced inflation.  There are probably 8 different reasons for that, and that's a source of much study.  But at the end of the day, yes there should be a more concerted effort to change the cost curve of tuition.  Although that doesn't really help the people out of school, with the loans today.  
  • Posts: 44,443
    mrussel1 said:
    show previous quotes
    I don't know what you mean by 'decent conditions'.  There are two major loan programs in the US.  There are the FFEL and direct loans (gov't backed/subsidized) and private loans (non gov't banks).  Of course the terms on the private are higher because they aren't subsidized, but they do have deferment periods and other benefits that traditional loans don't have.  Generally speaking, the terms for those loans are far more favorable than a person with teh same credit could get for credit card, auto, home, etc.  The problem is not the loan terms, it's the astronomical cost of tuition that has outpaced inflation.  There are probably 8 different reasons for that, and that's a source of much study.  But at the end of the day, yes there should be a more concerted effort to change the cost curve of tuition.  Although that doesn't really help the people out of school, with the loans today.  
    isnt it true that the gov backed loans do not see relief through either refinancing or bankruptcy?
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,598
    The bolded states will not help the Democrats at all in November, but tonight will help the party machine secure the nominee it wants. If you really want to know where the base is, pay attention to the rest. 

    Alabama
    Arkansas
    California
    Colorado
    Maine
    Massachusetts
    Minnesota
    North Carolina
    Oklahoma
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Vermont
    Virginia
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Posts: 30,882
    mickeyrat said:
    show previous quotes
    isnt it true that the gov backed loans do not see relief through either refinancing or bankruptcy?
    Generally speaking, student loans cannot be discharged.  But frankly, as someone who has worked in credit my whole career, I agree with that.  If you could file bankruptcy when you exit school and discharge 100k, why wouldn't you?  So you have bad credit for 7 years, big deal.  That's much better than paying 100k.  So if you could do that, then the cost of credit (interest rates) would increase 2 or 3x to account for all of the bad loans.  Or worse case, everyone exits that business.  
  • Posts: 30,882
    JimmyV said:
    The bolded states will not help the Democrats at all in November, but tonight will help the party machine secure the nominee it wants. If you really want to know where the base is, pay attention to the rest. 

    Alabama
    Arkansas
    California
    Colorado
    Maine
    Massachusetts
    Minnesota
    North Carolina
    Oklahoma
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Vermont
    Virginia
    There's only four states on that list that matter.  The rest are locked in D or R, regardless of the candidates.  I would also argue that NC has the potential of being a swing.  
  • Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,598
    mrussel1 said:
    show previous quotes
    There's only four states on that list that matter.  The rest are locked in D or R, regardless of the candidates.  I would also argue that NC has the potential of being a swing.  
    Wouldn't you have said Michigan and Wisconsin didn't matter at this same point in 2016? Assuming you can use the south to nominate whatever candidate makes the machine most comfortable is dangerous. The idea that blue states will vote for whoever we tell them to, and that blue states will be blue states forever, is reckless.

    Blue states matter. Purple states matter. Red states don't. (Except in this primary where they are given huge importance.)
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Posts: 30,882
    JimmyV said:
    show previous quotes
    Wouldn't you have said Michigan and Wisconsin didn't matter at this same point in 2016? Assuming you can use the south to nominate whatever candidate makes the machine most comfortable is dangerous. The idea that blue states will vote for whoever we tell them to, and that blue states will be blue states forever, is reckless.

    Blue states matter. Purple states matter. Red states don't. (Except in this primary where they are given huge importance.)
    That's completely illogical thinking.  Virginia was a red state.  Colorado was a red state.  New Mexico was red.  Arizona was deep red.  Sorry, you can't have it both ways logically.  You're saying blue states will turn but red states never can, so fuck them.  
  • Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,598
    mrussel1 said:
    show previous quotes
    That's completely illogical thinking.  Virginia was a red state.  Colorado was a red state.  New Mexico was red.  Arizona was deep red.  Sorry, you can't have it both ways logically.  You're saying blue states will turn but red states never can, so fuck them.  
    No, I'm saying let them turn and then I'll worry about them disproportionately in the primary. And so that is a yes on WI and MI?
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
This discussion has been closed.

Quick Links

Categories