Biden vs Trump 2020 - vote now and discuss!

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

mickeyrat said:

static111 said:

mickeyrat said:

So what in this makes Abrams not have the stuff?

1995 Abrams earned a Bachelor of Arts in interdisciplinary studies (political science, economics and sociology) from Spelman College, magna cum laude.[1] While in college she worked in the youth services department in the office of Atlanta mayor Maynard Jackson.[7] She later interned at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.[7] As a freshman in 1992, Abrams took part in a protest on the steps of the Georgia Capitol, during which she joined in burning the state flag. At that time Georgia's state flag incorporated the Confederate battle flag, which had been added to the state flag in 1956 as an anti-civil rights movement action. The flag was designed by Southern Democrat John Sammons Bell, an attorney and Chair of the Democratic Party of Georgia who was an outspoken supporter of segregation.[8][9]

As a Harry S. Truman Scholar, Abrams studied public policy at the University of Texas at Austin's LBJ School of Public Affairs, where she earned a Master of Public Affairs degree in 1998. In 1999 she earned a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School.[1]

I guess because it doesn’t say she has safely been making incremental change in the halls of Congress for 30+ years?  Seems to be a hot qualifier.  Personally I think she’d be great. Nobody’s perfect.

but she articulates that very point very well.

did you take the time to hear the podcast? Maron replays a segment with Obama that sets the table

I think she would be great.  I was being  either facetious or sarcastic. Not sure which.  Trying to state that to some people she isn’t an old reliable safe democrat hand and that can be a turn off for a lot of centrists or whatever they call themselves.

FTR, Demings didn't take office in the House until 2017, so she's not exactly an entrenched Washington insider. She's a retired police chief.  I'm sure the OPD has their share of issues, like every other department, but having her could protect the right flank for Biden on the Defund calls.  

Do we really think the right flank is what will decide the outcome of this election? If so are we really a liberal party if we play and pander to conservatives?

I think the flank to the right of us is important in the outcome of the election, particularly in WI, MI and PA.  I'm not talking about Trump supporters, I'm talking about independents, suburban moms, apolitical people, etc.  It's important that the party is pro-reform but not anti-police.  That's where we need to be to win.  

mrussel1 said:

The Juggler said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mickeyrat said:

potential running mate for Biden.  Good to hear her in this format...

http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1130-stacey-abrams

She comes across as smart and a decent person. But her highest office is state legislator in a state that will most likely vote republican without much of a battle.

I’d prefer someone more battle tested and a stronger resume.

Val Demings is a much stronger candidate. As former Police Chief of Orlando she has the perfect background and hometown for a 2020 presidential campaign. She is a talented communicator, as is Abrams, but comes across as tough but fair with the perfect experience in the current political climate.

Agreed...I realize the experience argument is somewhat out the door given the tRump victory but the VP needs to be ready on day 1.  I like Abrams but, even though she may be ready?, her background doesn't suggest it.

Demings would be huge with the black vote....and it will be hard for tRump to paint Biden as anti-police with her on the ticket.  Plus the FL connection.

With a large portion of the base calling to defund the police I don’t see how a police candidate would be a good thing.  Am I missing something or is she like the Greatest nicest never had a wrongful death on her watch cop?  Millions of dem voters out saying defund the police and people really think a cop Ticket  is what is needed Right now?

I don't think millions of dems are saying "defund the police"....but I do know that people that refer to "defund the police" do not tend to understand what it means.

Are you saying that the millions of people in the streets are not likely dem voters? Are you also saying that the people saying defund the police don’t understand that it means defunding their budget and reallocating funds for measures like community housing and mental health etc?  I think that anyone out in those streets saying defund the police knows exactly what it means. I also think that all of us that have spent time there are much more likely to vote D than R.

  Basically I’m not understanding what you are saying, maybe we agree.  To me putting a cop on the ballot is a sure fire way to really turn off voters.  Why have a law and order ticket? Isn’t that what the republicans are for?  I mean if people want a “tough on crime” ticket there is already an option for that.  Why should we try to appease republicans?

When someone predisposed to teh 'law and order' mindset hears 'defund the police', they think about eliminating law enforcement.  That's neither politically tenable or wise.  There are real life criminals out there and we need real life police, detectives, forensics and everything else.  Defund means eliminate funding, not reduce, not reallocate, not change the mindset.  So the rallying cry is a trap for liberals.  

Do you believe that the defund movement means eliminating funding and abolishing police?  I’ve had enough conversations with you to think you know better.  Or Are you more or less saying the thoughts of uninformed people when they hear defund the police brings about images of lawlessness etc and scares them?  The movement is for a large scale defunding and reallocation of funds from the grossly bloated police budgets to more community services, so that actual cops, forensic experts, and detectives can work on real crime and not be the catch all for any time someone feels like they might need to call the cops for suspected minor misdemeanors.  Saying that defunding the police means eliminating funding and eliminating law enforcement really plays into the republican led narrative imo. Defund the Police is a much clearer call to arms than lets reallocate funds and tinker with the system and let the police continue to monitor themselves once we establish bipartisan agreed reforms imo.

ITS. AN. ELECTION. YEAR.  When you have to explain what your fucking slogan means, you're losing.

Those uninformed people you referenced VOTE. You have to make it easy for them to understand. Call it reform. Don't call it defundng. 

Good god. How are democrats so bad at politics?

It's not Democrats.  The three leaders of the party said they didn't support it.  It's the progressive wing.  

And you're right... when you're explaining,  you're losing. 

mrussel1 said:

cincybearcat said:

The Juggler said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mickeyrat said:

potential running mate for Biden.  Good to hear her in this format...

http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1130-stacey-abrams

She comes across as smart and a decent person. But her highest office is state legislator in a state that will most likely vote republican without much of a battle.

I’d prefer someone more battle tested and a stronger resume.

Val Demings is a much stronger candidate. As former Police Chief of Orlando she has the perfect background and hometown for a 2020 presidential campaign. She is a talented communicator, as is Abrams, but comes across as tough but fair with the perfect experience in the current political climate.

Agreed...I realize the experience argument is somewhat out the door given the tRump victory but the VP needs to be ready on day 1.  I like Abrams but, even though she may be ready?, her background doesn't suggest it.

Demings would be huge with the black vote....and it will be hard for tRump to paint Biden as anti-police with her on the ticket.  Plus the FL connection.

With a large portion of the base calling to defund the police I don’t see how a police candidate would be a good thing.  Am I missing something or is she like the Greatest nicest never had a wrongful death on her watch cop?  Millions of dem voters out saying defund the police and people really think a cop Ticket  is what is needed Right now?

I don't think millions of dems are saying "defund the police"....but I do know that people that refer to "defund the police" do not tend to understand what it means.

Are you saying that the millions of people in the streets are not likely dem voters? Are you also saying that the people saying defund the police don’t understand that it means defunding their budget and reallocating funds for measures like community housing and mental health etc?  I think that anyone out in those streets saying defund the police knows exactly what it means. I also think that all of us that have spent time there are much more likely to vote D than R.

  Basically I’m not understanding what you are saying, maybe we agree.  To me putting a cop on the ballot is a sure fire way to really turn off voters.  Why have a law and order ticket? Isn’t that what the republicans are for?  I mean if people want a “tough on crime” ticket there is already an option for that.  Why should we try to appease republicans?

When someone predisposed to teh 'law and order' mindset hears 'defund the police', they think about eliminating law enforcement.  That's neither politically tenable or wise.  There are real life criminals out there and we need real life police, detectives, forensics and everything else.  Defund means eliminate funding, not reduce, not reallocate, not change the mindset.  So the rallying cry is a trap for liberals.  

Do you believe that the defund movement means eliminating funding and abolishing police?  I’ve had enough conversations with you to think you know better.  Or Are you more or less saying the thoughts of uninformed people when they hear defund the police brings about images of lawlessness etc and scares them?  The movement is for a large scale defunding and reallocation of funds from the grossly bloated police budgets to more community services, so that actual cops, forensic experts, and detectives can work on real crime and not be the catch all for any time someone feels like they might need to call the cops for suspected minor misdemeanors.  Saying that defunding the police means eliminating funding and eliminating law enforcement really plays into the republican led narrative imo. Defund the Police is a much clearer call to arms than lets reallocate funds and tinker with the system and let the police continue to monitor themselves once we establish bipartisan agreed reforms imo.

ITS. AN. ELECTION. YEAR.  When you have to explain what your fucking slogan means, you're losing.

Those uninformed people you referenced VOTE. You have to make it easy for them to understand. Call it reform. Don't call it defundng. 

Good god. How are democrats so bad at politics?

Yup. You can align yourself with spray painting ACAN and defund the police....

or you could sign yourself with reforming police, including not making them be the front line for everything cause not every issue need the police...I mean why do we think we can train 1 person to deal with all those other issues.

Defund the police and ACAB are not helping 

So it was too hasty to get this tattoo of "1312"?

cincybearcat said:

static111 said:

The Juggler said:

static111 said:

mrussel1 said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

static111 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mickeyrat said:

potential running mate for Biden.  Good to hear her in this format...

http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1130-stacey-abrams

She comes across as smart and a decent person. But her highest office is state legislator in a state that will most likely vote republican without much of a battle.

I’d prefer someone more battle tested and a stronger resume.

Val Demings is a much stronger candidate. As former Police Chief of Orlando she has the perfect background and hometown for a 2020 presidential campaign. She is a talented communicator, as is Abrams, but comes across as tough but fair with the perfect experience in the current political climate.

Agreed...I realize the experience argument is somewhat out the door given the tRump victory but the VP needs to be ready on day 1.  I like Abrams but, even though she may be ready?, her background doesn't suggest it.

Demings would be huge with the black vote....and it will be hard for tRump to paint Biden as anti-police with her on the ticket.  Plus the FL connection.

With a large portion of the base calling to defund the police I don’t see how a police candidate would be a good thing.  Am I missing something or is she like the Greatest nicest never had a wrongful death on her watch cop?  Millions of dem voters out saying defund the police and people really think a cop Ticket  is what is needed Right now?

I don't think millions of dems are saying "defund the police"....but I do know that people that refer to "defund the police" do not tend to understand what it means.

Are you saying that the millions of people in the streets are not likely dem voters? Are you also saying that the people saying defund the police don’t understand that it means defunding their budget and reallocating funds for measures like community housing and mental health etc?  I think that anyone out in those streets saying defund the police knows exactly what it means. I also think that all of us that have spent time there are much more likely to vote D than R.

  Basically I’m not understanding what you are saying, maybe we agree.  To me putting a cop on the ballot is a sure fire way to really turn off voters.  Why have a law and order ticket? Isn’t that what the republicans are for?  I mean if people want a “tough on crime” ticket there is already an option for that.  Why should we try to appease republicans?

When someone predisposed to teh 'law and order' mindset hears 'defund the police', they think about eliminating law enforcement.  That's neither politically tenable or wise.  There are real life criminals out there and we need real life police, detectives, forensics and everything else.  Defund means eliminate funding, not reduce, not reallocate, not change the mindset.  So the rallying cry is a trap for liberals.  

Do you believe that the defund movement means eliminating funding and abolishing police?  I’ve had enough conversations with you to think you know better.  Or Are you more or less saying the thoughts of uninformed people when they hear defund the police brings about images of lawlessness etc and scares them?  The movement is for a large scale defunding and reallocation of funds from the grossly bloated police budgets to more community services, so that actual cops, forensic experts, and detectives can work on real crime and not be the catch all for any time someone feels like they might need to call the cops for suspected minor misdemeanors.  Saying that defunding the police means eliminating funding and eliminating law enforcement really plays into the republican led narrative imo. Defund the Police is a much clearer call to arms than lets reallocate funds and tinker with the system and let the police continue to monitor themselves once we establish bipartisan agreed reforms imo.

ITS. AN. ELECTION. YEAR.  When you have to explain what your fucking slogan means, you're losing.

Those uninformed people you referenced VOTE. You have to make it easy for them to understand. Call it reform. Don't call it defundng. 

Good god. How are democrats so bad at politics?

I get all the points that both of you are making, but the reality is that appealing to white middle class America has never brought any true structural change.  Maybe this time it’s different.  As for why democrats are so bad at politics part of it has to do with pandering to republicans and part of it has to do with not doing more to bring new voters to the table.  You can’t bring the left into the fold while trying to appease republicans.

I understand what you are saying. But you don’t provide your “competition” a rallying cry to get to the polls.  Then Dems continue to need a brand manager and PR staff.

mrussel1 said:

Damn..ya'll merciless.