2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mayor Pete, Kamala and Kloubachar. Would probably vote green if any of them 3 were the nominee.
 
Thought it was a decent debate this time round. Winners for me were:

Elizabeth Warren: Attacked from all sides by the moderates ,nothing really stuck

Bernie Sanders: Showed there is life in the old dog yet , Loved his attack on the MSM

Pete Buttigieg: Beginning to hate this guy more and more, but he upped his game for this debate


Losers:

Joe Biden: He did himself no favours taking credit for Warrens time as Head Of Consumer Finance. Nice comeback from her as well

Beto O’Rourke : Beto talked tough in the last debate but got floored by Buttigieg over the same question on guns

Kamala Harris: Did she really think that attacking Trump on Twitter was a vote winner, she as really fallen off and can't see her coming back.
 
Bernie was really good last night. Best I've seen from him in a while. Heart attack did him some good. Warren did fair concidering she had a big target in her back the whole debate due to her surge.
 
175,000 voters restored to rolls ahead of Kentucky's November election

The Kentucky Democratic Party won a lawsuit on Monday to restore 175,000 voters from an "inactive" list to the regular rolls.

"We're very pleased with Judge Wingate's quick ruling to restore all voters back to a single master voter list and believe this decision was necessary to protect Kentucky voters and ensure the integrity of the 2019 election," the party's chair, Ben Self, said in a statement.

The lawsuit stemmed from a decision by the state Board of Elections to place thousands and thousands voters on an inactive list between June and July, just months before the state's pivotal Nov. 5 election. The BOE argued it was
compelled
to move voters to an inactive list based on a 2017 federal consent decree to clean up the state's voter rolls following a lawsuit by a far-right conservative organization.
Click to expand...

https://shareblue.com/kentucky-inactive-voters-lawsuit-2019-election-november-5-matt-bevin/
 


Further proof that for these ‘benevolent’ billionaires, it’s still all about the power trip.

Those 50m can be used to flip dozens and dozens of state legislature seats, giving Dems a chance to have a say in redrawing the map next year.
 
Steyer has to be a special kind of cnut. It takes an insane level of selfishness to do what he is doing.
 
Adisa said:
Steyer has to be a special kind of cnut. It takes an insane level of selfishness to do what he is doing.
Click to expand...
Makes for an especially interesting, to say the least, contrast with GOP mega-donors like the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch or Sheldon Adelson. They built an unparalleled right wing infrastructure with the investment and it borne fruit year after year, to the point now when a party can lose the national vote by about 6 points regularly and still maintain control of government/protect their interests through one chamber of Congress and the Judiciary. They also have no qualms about embracing nascent populist movements like the Tea Party or alt right/white nationalism, while the Democratic counterpart ferociously fight against its own.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Makes for an especially interesting, to say the least, contrast with GOP mega-donors like the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch or Sheldon Adelson. They built an unparalleled right wing infrastructure with the investment and it borne fruit year after year, to the point now when a party can lose the national vote by about 6 points regularly and still maintain control of government/protect their interests through one chamber of Congress and the Judiciary. They also have no qualms about embracing nascent populist movements like the Tea Party or alt right/white nationalism, while the Democratic counterpart ferociously fight against its own.
Click to expand...
I have always admired the Republicans. Dems are busy looking for moral high ground while the GOP continues to win. The fact is America is so controlled by interests that it will eventually take one to fight the GOP. Just look at how CNN frames the healthcare question. America needs an onslaught information by the left and that can only be done with money.
 


Joe Biden is going to have a warm time competing in all the super tuesday states if he doesnt raise some cash fast
 
That to me says donors don't have faith in him and Buttigieg is stealing his cash. They are cut from the same cloth. Butt is worse even.
 
Adisa said:
That to me says donors don't have faith in him and Buttigieg is stealing his cash. They are cut from the same cloth. Butt is worse even.
Click to expand...
What it seems like is he's donor capped. He needs to find some new donors as the ones he has currently are basically maxed out
 
Red Dreams said:
Warren once again trying to have it both ways.
She does not answer the question.
Click to expand...

Warren is absolutely right in her approach to this payment question. The moderators want soundbytes about raising taxes and Warren rightly sticks to the nuanced facts - taxes may go up but they would be offset by the elimination of payroll contributions to healthcare and co-pays.
 
ChaddyP said:


Joe Biden is going to have a warm time competing in all the super tuesday states if he doesnt raise some cash fast
Click to expand...


Mayor Butt serving as an attack dog for the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Can we see a complete list of Mayor Butt's campaign donors? I'm sure it comes with a number of explanations attached.

All this phony wholesomeness from Mayor Butt and Klobuchar is nauseating. Their position is let's start small, and compromise along the way and end up with nothing. As prescribed by political campaign donors. When did we become the country of "No we can't, unless big donors and corporations tell us it's OK"?

fecking charlie uniform november tangoes.
 
Suedesi said:
Mayor Butt serving as an attack dog for the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Can we see a complete list of Mayor Butt's campaign donors? I'm sure it comes with a number of explanations attached.

All this phony wholesomeness from Mayor Butt and Klobuchar is nauseating. Their position is let's start small, and compromise along the way and end up with nothing. As prescribed by political campaign donors. When did we become the country of "No we can't, unless big donors and corporations tell us it's OK"?

fecking charlie uniform november tangoes.
Click to expand...
They’re a pair of pricks. Mayor Pete talks about needing new ideas from young people, then he falls back on the same old status quo neoliberal crap. Just because you’re young doesn’t mean you have the policies young people want. Just because you’re from the Midwest or wherever doesn’t mean you’ll put forward policies that will help people from the Midwest or wherever. To think otherwise is identity politics at its finest.
 
Suedesi said:
Warren is absolutely right in her approach to this payment question. The moderators want soundbytes about raising taxes and Warren rightly sticks to the nuanced facts - taxes may go up but they would be offset by the elimination of payroll contributions to healthcare and co-pays.
Click to expand...

She is actually not for Medicare For All.
She and others use that phrase because a significant majority of Democrats want it.
That's why she uses her canned answer "I will not sign a bill that raises costs to working families".
She has several times questioned how it would work.
What she and the other democrats are for is increasing the subsidies. This came out in the back and forths.
This would help in states that had a state exchange and where people did not have insurance through their employment.
It would still leave millions with inadequate coverage.
 
Red Dreams said:
She is actually not for Medicare For All.
She and others use that phrase because a significant majority of Democrats want it.
That's why she uses her canned answer "I will not sign a bill that raises costs to working families".
She has several times questioned how it would work.
What she and the other democrats are for is increasing the subsidies. This came out in the back and forths.
This would help in states that had a state exchange and where people did not have insurance through their employment.
It would still leave millions with inadequate coverage.
Click to expand...

Ok you know better I guess:

https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/health-care

Elizabeth supports Medicare for All, which would provide all Americans with a public health care program. Medicare for All is the best way to give every single person in this country a guarantee of high-quality health care. Everybody is covered. Nobody goes broke because of a medical bill. No more fighting with insurance companies.

The basic business model of an insurance company is to take in as much money as you can in premiums and paying out as little as possible in health care coverage.

That leaves families with rising premiums, high deductibles, and fighting with insurance companies to try to get the health care that their doctors say they and their children need.

Insurers protecting their bottom lines restrict your networks of providers and stand in the way when you want to see your doctor or need to see a specialist without going broke.

Medicare for All solves these problems. Everyone can see the doctor they need. Nobody goes broke. And your doctor gets paid by Medicare instead of fighting with an insurance company.

Every American should be able to get the care they need when they need it. This is a goal worth fighting for, and Elizabeth is in this fight all the way. That's why Elizabeth will fight for Medicare for All.
Click to expand...
 
AOC going after Buttigieg now. He’s calling grassroots donations “pocket change.” He is a bellend
 
Bit odd to back up an unashamedly corporate, zero credibility tv channel with an unashamedly corporate, zero credibility website but hey ho
 
Charlie Foley said:
AOC going after Buttigieg now. He’s calling grassroots donations “pocket change.” He is a bellend
Click to expand...

It's true nevertheless. Trump's leftover campaign funds are somewhere up of $83m which is more than all 3 Dem candidates put together as of now. Perhaps calling them 'pocket change' is wrong, but saying no to big-money is still a idealistic mistake imo.

There can be a balance without bowing down to corporate interests. And post the debate, I can see Pete's small donations starting to improve.
 
nimic said:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-october-democratic-debate-in-6-charts/
Click to expand...

Here's the study they reference:
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default...10/topline_538_ipsos_post_oct_debate_poll.pdf

No matter how you plan to vote, who do you think performed best in the Democratic primary debate on Tuesday, October 15?

Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Joe Biden 17
Cory Booker 4
Pete Buttigieg 15
Julian Castro 1
Tulsi Gabbard 2
Kamala Harris 5
Amy Klobuchar 6
Beto O’Rourke 3
Bernie Sanders 9
Tom Steyer 1
Elizabeth Warren 21
Andrew Yang 3
Don’t’ know/No opinion 14
Skipped -

And thinking more specifically, how would you rate the performance of each of the candidates who participated in the Democratic primary debate on Tuesday, October 15?

Joe Biden Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Total Poor Performance 24
Total Good Performance 69

Pete Buttigieg Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Total Poor Performance 19
Total Good Performance 66

Amy Klobuchar Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Total Poor Performance 23
Total Good Performance 56

Bernie Sanders Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Total Poor Performance 16
Total Good Performance 76

Elizabeth Warren Base: Watched all or part of the debate Total (N=712)
Total Poor Performance 15
Total Good Performance 78

Which of the following Democratic candidates for president are you considering voting for in the Democratic primary?

Joe Biden 57
Cory Booker 11
Pete Buttigieg 25
Julian Castro 6
Tulsi Gabbard 5
Kamala Harris 25
Amy Klobuchar 10
Beto O’Rourke 14
Bernie Sanders 39
Tom Steyer 5
Elizabeth Warren 52
Andrew Yang 11
Someone else 3
Skipped 1

I don't think their conclusion is supported by the data they reference in the first place.
 
Suedesi said:
Mayor Butt serving as an attack dog for the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Can we see a complete list of Mayor Butt's campaign donors? I'm sure it comes with a number of explanations attached.

All this phony wholesomeness from Mayor Butt and Klobuchar is nauseating. Their position is let's start small, and compromise along the way and end up with nothing. As prescribed by political campaign donors. When did we become the country of "No we can't, unless big donors and corporations tell us it's OK"?

fecking charlie uniform november tangoes.
Click to expand...

Probably since inception.
 
freeurmind said:
Just wanted to iterate this again.
Click to expand...
He also earned close to $1bn in free media. You’d hope that it was only because he was new, abrasive and obscene like nothing they ever saw before, and this time it will be different, but not having high hope on that.

Fundraising isn’t an issue for the presidential campaign itself, either Sanders or Warren would raise over 1bn from small donations regardless, its the downballot that corporate bans affect, the DNC is broke.
 
nimic said:
Couldn't disagree more. She should say it, because it's true. It might very well also be true that total costs will still go down, but her eternal evasion is a black mark on her, not on the journalists asking the question. Sanders has no problems admitting that he'd raise taxes.
Click to expand...
Isn't what she said correct? She said the cost for the families will go down. I don't understand why she has to specifically say middle-class family's taxes will raise? To just give her republican opponents a brilliant sound bite from her mouth itself to attack her with? You just know, if she specifically says "The M4A will raise middle-class taxes." this is all what the republicans will run in ads without giving the context of the net cost. I would even argue they would cut the video saying "I will raise taxes on middle class" and run ads with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.