I want unique voices, I don't want 4 people saying the same thing over and over it does nothing to move anything forward.
The End of the World: A Political Thread. A New Hope coming soon!
- Thread starter Plainview
- Start date
- Status
I want unique voices, I don't want 4 people saying the same thing over and over it does nothing to move anything forward.
I want an actual debate with people that could actually be President. Candidates who are into to push a specific issue have done so. Now they run for vanity.
Couldn't disagree more, most people haven't even tuned into any of the debates yet so it makes sense to stay in when you are a unique voice to make sure people actually get your message. To that point why the hell did the DNC and ABC schedule a debate up against the NFL?
Seeing people trash Obama kind of cheeses me off. I realize that's the strategy they need to take on Biden, but come on. Obama had a 60% approval rating when he left office. In this polarized country that's probably as high as anyone is ever going to get.
I hate to tell people too, but anyone too far left will never, ever get anything passed through a centrist congress.
I hate to tell people too, but anyone too far left will never, ever get anything passed through a centrist congress.
I think they realized that after last debate and they made sure to praise Obama, as they should be anyway.
I was thinking back about his presidency last night after I turned off the debate, man, do I miss that guy in charge. It's going to be, maybe ever, if we have someone like him again.
And this was the time to get those messages out. Whatever impact that was going to have is done. If your message has a real impact then you will gain support. Just like Bernie in 2016
Just crank up the requirements and lets get on with it already
The Democrats field 20+ candidates, but not one of them can hold a candle to Obama, including his former VP.
Of course I'll vote for whoever wins this primary but these candidates are hard to get behind. Obama had that kind of magnetism. Even if I didn't always agree with him, I could get behind him.
IMHO - Bernie needs to go away. He couldn't beat Hillary alone and last night should finish him off. Sure, he has his loyal following, but it isn't going to grow. I can tolerate Biden, but damn I worry about him going head to head with Trump. Watching those 2 debate is going to make people stay home on election night. I really think someone else has to come out.
Warren seems to be the answer I always come up with. It's either Biden or Warren that comes out.
I like her more and more. Love how she brought up filibusters. I think she's just left leaning enough to unite people but not so far left as to scare away the centrists and undecideds. She seems to have that nice mix of being exciting enough, but also practical enough. You've got to energize the base and not scare away centrists who might sway to Trump, she's one of the few who do that.
My fear is that a big field just helps Biden win and that really scares me. While Biden will be fine with the undecideds, will he energize people to get out? I could see a lot of younger voters being turned away by him and staying home. It is horribly unfair how they attack him on stupid things from 40 years ago, but that's the world we live in.
Trump: I look orange, but so do you
"The light is the worst," Trump said. His administration earlier this month announced it would roll back regulations for increased energy efficiency.
www.nbcnews.com
Yeah just because you want to play it safe doesn't mean you have pick someone so boring.
New Yorkers hate Reggie Miller. Booker's impressed me a lot. I think I'm on board with Warren-Booker over Warren-Harris now.
So, yeah, last night was an example of why 10 is too many to have on stage. The first part of the debate was on healthcare, and it was basically Biden/Warren/Bernie, with a few shots from outside. And then the next 20-30 minutes, they don't call on Warren once. Yang's been left out for a while multiple times, and once in a while they pick some tool like Delaney to talk over and over when nobody wants to hear him.
They need to have six, max, on stage. Get everyone's input on each of the issues, and not just asking the same thing they asked the last two debates. Hell, I'd rather see town hall style debates at this point - let people who are going to vote and are undecided ask about the things they care about, and let the candidates speak to them, rather than another discussion about will Medicare for All raise taxes or if the goal is to leave Afganistan in year one, term one, day one or one day.
They need to have six, max, on stage. Get everyone's input on each of the issues, and not just asking the same thing they asked the last two debates. Hell, I'd rather see town hall style debates at this point - let people who are going to vote and are undecided ask about the things they care about, and let the candidates speak to them, rather than another discussion about will Medicare for All raise taxes or if the goal is to leave Afganistan in year one, term one, day one or one day.
I weirds me out how much appeal to emotion Booker can rhetorically, but he did start to layout an argument that he has history of achieving progress in Newark.
I browsed Booker's website and I'm intrigued he also has a Dividend plan that has my attention.
corybooker.com
* Pass the Worker Dividend Act to require that corporations share profits not just with shareholders, but with workers.
I think things like this recognize that the employee should be seen as a Stakeholder of the company. I would really like to see some back and forth on this between Booker and Yang's Dividend plan.
I also feel that this is kind of Capitalist in a way. Maybe the issue is for way to long workers are only given compensation for their labor, time, or skill, but that's kind of like breaking even not getting ahead or attaining real Profit that is a return of more than what they put in. Now this probably works on a curve being less noticable with highly skilled tech workers or upper management, but toward the middle lower classes I think it's horrible.
I remember in my first career job before the Recession we at least got profit incentive bonuses. Eventually, our parent company went public and the money I used to get went to the share holders and our bonus was replaced with some free pizza in the employee lounge. It would have be quicker for the boss to just walk into my work space and flip me off than suggest Dominos is a substitue for a bonus check.
I browsed Booker's website and I'm intrigued he also has a Dividend plan that has my attention.
Economic Security and Opportunity — Cory 2020
Our economy must be built around the success of everyday workers.
corybooker.com
* Pass the Worker Dividend Act to require that corporations share profits not just with shareholders, but with workers.
I think things like this recognize that the employee should be seen as a Stakeholder of the company. I would really like to see some back and forth on this between Booker and Yang's Dividend plan.
I also feel that this is kind of Capitalist in a way. Maybe the issue is for way to long workers are only given compensation for their labor, time, or skill, but that's kind of like breaking even not getting ahead or attaining real Profit that is a return of more than what they put in. Now this probably works on a curve being less noticable with highly skilled tech workers or upper management, but toward the middle lower classes I think it's horrible.
I remember in my first career job before the Recession we at least got profit incentive bonuses. Eventually, our parent company went public and the money I used to get went to the share holders and our bonus was replaced with some free pizza in the employee lounge. It would have be quicker for the boss to just walk into my work space and flip me off than suggest Dominos is a substitue for a bonus check.
It would have been so much bettter to divide the time up between all even them evenly. I guess that'd be about 18 minutes each which would be like sitting through 10 TED Talks. Let them use that time to make their case speaking with no interruption.
Crank up the debate requirement to 4% for November and you might not have more than 5 candidates. If you can't reach that number by that point you shouldn't be in the race anyway.
It will never be two women on the ticket
It will never be two women on the ticket
We are still 5 months away from the first primary vote being cast, this was just the 3rd debate and it was on against the NFL for some stupid reason. Most people aren't paying attention yet, sadly most people don't really start paying attention until the primaries are over and we are in the general but there is plenty of time for a candidate like Yang to move up.
Booker has been around for a while now, a lot of people on the left "know him" and it just seems like most aren't interested. He's a better motivational speaker than he is a politician IMO. I like the guy and I know he's a very intelligent individual but a lot of progressives are wary of his ties to wall street and they just don't want that type of candidate.
Yeah a two woman ticket was never going to happen, I can imagine how the media would kill their chances by constantly talking about the fact that they were women vs what their ideas were.
Well there needs to be at least a couple debates with the smaller field before votes are cast. One more big debate and if you haven't started to build some real support after that then it just isn't going to happen.
I agree that people would use that as that as an excuse to justify their vote
That's one thing I hated about the "I'm with her" line for HRC's campaign, we all know her gender so let's make it about the policy positions and not the identity stuff.
As far as the debates, I do think some need to go but I don't think anyone with a unique message should go. If anything I do think some of the moderates need to drop out, I don't consider Booker or Harris progressives they are moderates who are trying to lure some progressives their way. I do think one of them should go, I think Castro should go and I think either Delaney or Klobuchar need to go, I can see one of them staying in as a true out and proud moderate in case Biden falls which isn't that far fetched. I also think Mayor Pete should really consider dropping out but he has too much donor money to need to do that for a while, he's not making any gains in any polls that I've seen but wealthy donors seem to love him. If Gabbard doesn't make the next debate she should drop out. Ideally for me a perfect debate set up would be Sanders, Warren, Yang, Biden, Booker, Mayor Pete and Klobuchar or Gabbard and that's it. That covers most people in the party, everyone has at least one person to appeal to them and it's not a bunch of people who are saying basically the same thing overlapping.
- Status