To be fair I'm not a fan of puppets either. The attacks are very obvious and I hope counter productive. The more he looks like an outsider the more Trump votes he is gifted.
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
To be fair I'm not a fan of puppets either. The attacks are very obvious and I hope counter productive. The more he looks like an outsider the more Trump votes he is gifted.
No I mean his race, I’ve seen a ton of people on Twitter criticising him for being “an old, white man.”
that is the angle the Evangelicals will take. Not that they were ever going to vote for him.
Have to be the corporate bots. 'He does not understand the needs of Blacks and women' narative.
Same shit they are using now.
that CNN Town hall will be an attempted hit job. Wait for the 32 trillion cost of Universal health care garbage to come out
32 trillion over a decade saves money v what it is now
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/amy-...tunities-for-staff_n_5c706f8fe4b03cfdaa553cdd
Klobuchar will have a fight on her hands to keep her Senate seat next time she runs. She will be primaried.
She can kiss the 2020 run off now.
Klobuchar will have a fight on her hands to keep her Senate seat next time she runs. She will be primaried.
She can kiss the 2020 run off now.
CNN will eventually question Bernie's health
The thing is they throw that number out without any honest data behind it.
They don't discount the health Insurance Costs . The premiums/Deductibles and Copays. These are artificial unnecessary costs.
All you need is a slight increase in payroll taxes we all pay now. That is shared between employer and employee.
Those who do not have jobs are covered in any case.
He has addressed it already.
You can have 50 year olds who are unhealthy. He is healthy. And honestly..he wont run if he was not.
he has not been about himself.
With him it has always been about serving the American people.
doesn't mean they won't stop questioning it though. Especially if he wins the primary
of course.
You make him sound like a saint.
Is there anything that you disagree with? Or is he the perfect candidate?
Genuine question
Rest assured my relatives will vote for whoever runs against Trump.
I'm guessing Franken may have a go at her.
Trump's anti-Bernie narrative is already taking shape. He's going to make the 2020 election a referendum on Capitalism v Socialism, which would be a winning strategy on his part if he frames the choice that way.
I doubt it.
Think it will be a Social Democrat.
Perhaps Erin Murphy. She contested Walz.
You don't think Franken can win ?
True.
But for many people Capitalism is a dirty word. Bernie would happily take on that fight.
Seriously though, Bernie is not going to destroy the Stock market. In fact he will help it.
Hopefully he Does destroy the health Insurance industry
he could. But I think he wont go against a fellow MN Senator.
The far right talk radio machine is already framing it this way. I heard some far right emotional arguments on the radio this week.
The argument was essentially:
1. Mock Ocasio-Cortez for saying "like" and "so" invoking the classic 'Vacuous Valley Girl' imagery to disparage her intelligence and make her seem like a clueless suburbanite. This is done first to underline every following point and undermine the actual argument AOC puts forth.
2. Attack the 70% on over 10 million as if that is a personal attack on everyone's morality. The right-wing isn't even wasting time debating the redistribution angle. They are outright going for the extreme right angle:
"They want to punish you for being successful"
"Taxes are a punishment by angry leftists"
3. Invoke sympathy for those making over 10 million/year and present some psuedo-science to back them up.
"Why would anyone work after making 10 million if they only make 30 cents on the dollar?"
"Why should people be punished for making over 10 million in one year? Now they don't have an incentive to work any more"
"People won't work if they get taxed at 30 cents after making 10 million in one year."
3b. Use a popular celebrity to illustrate this and make people feel like they are Tom Hanks being unjustly punished.
"Imagine Tom Hanks gets a movie offer but he has already made 10 million in one year. Now Tom Hanks isn't going to make that movie. He now has no incentive to make a movie after making 10 million in one year. So that movie doesn't get made and now all the cameramen and extras and support personnel suddenly don't have work all because Tom Hanks won't ever make a movie if he has already made 10 million a year. And others are punished too for Tom Hanks success. Maybe his car dealer doesn't get to sell him a car or his stylist can't buy him new clothes for a month because he already made 10 million in a year."
4. Invoke some Old Name to sound intellectual.
"Haven't you all read Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged? If you start taxing people they will just shrug and not work. Taxes punish people and make them not work."
5. Pre-empt the greed angle
"The Government is so greedy! The government budget is 1 trillion a year? Isn't that enough? Why is the government so greedy!?"
6. Take phone calls from listeners that were pre-screened to agree mapping the 70% tax rate over 10 million onto everyone
"Taxes are stealing! AOC wants to steal all your money for being successful"
"Taxes are socialism. Socialism is evil. AOC wants us to be like Venezuela"
"Taxes are greed and taxes violate the Ten Commandments to not steal"
Every quote is a very close paraphrase to what different people actually said 1-5 from the host on KABC and 6 were quotes from actual callers.
Even the Corporate Democrats are distancing themselves from AOC and her 70% tax statement.
So why are we surprised.
So why are we surprised.
The 70% tax is not happening in the near future America, better not get your hopes up.
I have no expectations. But 10 years ago if you told me that a US President would be imposing billions of tariffs on the EU and China I would have literally laughed out loud and thought that was talk for the padded walls.
You are right, however since tariffs fall under executive authority it takes one cretin to achieve it. Unlike the US tax laws.
Which means that the chance of a nuclear exchange is also greater than the 70% tax becoming a reality.
I think you have to push for that though to make anything happen. It starts seeding the idea of 70% in people's consciousness. Keep it up and 10-20 years then it will seem normal, just like some of the radical right-wing economic ideas that have been pounded for the last 30 years and how someone on the radio can still reference the long discredited Ayn Rand on the radio in 2019. Also it allows room to compromise and still achieve meaningful results. If the Dems start with 70 and have to compromise down to 55 they still achieved something meaningful. If they start like Klobuchar and take away any meaningful off the table to begin with we just end up with center-right corporate policy.
Just illustrates that the overton window hasn't shifted enough for the sort of systemic change the likes of Sanders and Warren are looking for. Even if Sanders wins the election and goes in with a slight Dem majority in congress, that still wouldn't result in medicare for all since the opposition forces would simply use it as a wedge issue to get back into power.
70% tax rate is well within the Overton window. Any ideas that have 55-70% public support are viable even if the elites will try their hardest to stop.
If we only go by what people think the elites will allow us to change, we have already lost. May as well just move out of the US at that point.
There's no energy behind it though. For instance, anyone running on that as a main part of their platform wouldn't get much support just based on that position.
This would be the smartest way to win over the upper/middle class white voters who mostly dislike Trump due to "Unpresidential behaviour" but
1)Trump is truly a idiot, so he might not touch the subject
2)Its only a tactic that will on white people over the age of 50
Bernie already raising over 6 million indicates there is energy behind it though. People underestimated how far Trump could push the nation in one election cycle. They are now making the same error thinking its impossible for any progressive candidate to reverse that. By conventional wisdom Trump wouldn't/shouldn't/couldn't have been elected. Same collection of cognitive biases are underestimating the progressives chances atm despite the 2018 midterms and now Bernie fundraising being strong indications the tides have already shifted from 2016.
The Democrats need to stop fighting the last war for once
He would raise the 6m with or without the policy because he has a cultish following. Warren, who has similar policies, is falling short of her fundraising goals.
Same was said about Trump and Obama. Its not really a negative if you are running for office.
For the second that's an odd statement when you yourself frequently say people vote on things like personality more than policy. Warren refused to challenge Clinton in 2015 when many wanted her to thus allowing Bernie to steal a march on her role as progressive standard bearer. She then made that massive own-goal with her DNA - I still hear far more people talking about that than any of her policies which seem to fade into the media noise. She hasn't had a powerful moment that captures people's imagination. I just think her time was 2016 and she made a huge mistake not running. She can't recapture her unique position of 2015 now. The world has moved on without her.
And that wouldn’t happen with Yang with his human-centered capitalism approach, just saying. Hard to paint the guy as socialist because he never claimed to be one in the first place. One can only dream...
I can see that too. Another thing about her is that she doesn’t give off that alpha vibe you’d need in a president. My opinion.
Good point about Yang. I think he'll have a brief window to make a move if circumstances are right and someone messes up but its a long shot sadly.
I'd agree with that. Unfortunately for Yang, he doesn't quite have the name recognition to move up the ranks. A vast majority of voters don't really follow politics with any degree of consistency to even know some of the names who are currently in the low single digits even exist, which is why the likes of Biden is polling so well, despite not even being in the race. People go with names that they know, so Yang has all his work ahead of him if he's going to become a factor.
Not hard at all. Republicans have called every democratic nominee socialist for as long as I can remember. Obama was one of the most centrist dems and they did it to him. Might as well get the real thing.
They include Biden who hasn't declared but don't include Andrew Yang by name even though he has declared?
How do you know they didn't include Andrew Yang? "Someone else" has 5%. He's just not popular. And of course they're going to include Biden, you can't possibly think that's strange.
Well they will definitely try, but I doubt it’ll stick with him as much as it would with Bernie and did Obama. But fair point about Obama. I think the difference is that Yang appeals to the working class folks in the Midwest more because he has been targeting a lot of his messaging to white working class men who a lot of voted for trump. So those people may already be on his side early on as opposed to the coastal liberals and all.
- Status