Political Discussion

dbarila said:
I think Warren could do well against Trump in an election. The "Pocohautus" thing will only go so far. She would stay level headed in the debates and doesn't carry as much baggage as Hillary.
Click to expand...

I like her, but was unimpressed with her performance when challenged on how to pay for healthcare. She was scared to talk about raising taxes and talked around the subject. Bernie was like, yep, damn right taxes are going to go up and that's a good thing because of xyz.
 
dbarila said:
I think Warren could do well against Trump in an election. The "Pocohautus" thing will only go so far. She would stay level headed in the debates and doesn't carry as much baggage as Hillary.
Click to expand...

I do too....I think if she wins the primary people will finally give her a legit listen to what she's saying.


I also like Pete.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
I've never totally bought into him, because I always thought he projected an air of naked ambition, sort of like his positions and the things he said were part of a performance for the trajectory to the presidency that he clearly thought he was on. Which is not to say that I don't think he really believes the things he says -- I'm pretty sure he does -- just that his words/actions have always seemed to operate on two pretty clear levels, to me.

I think people are also turned off by him being a bachelor. Is he still with Rosario Dawson? Weird pairing. I'd always assumed he just wasn't out. Veganism isn't a Great Uniter, either, but hey -- 2 of our last 3 presidents have been teetotalers, and we came [thisclose] to seeing a Mormon in the Oval Office, to boot.
Click to expand...
Booker is not "with" Rosario. That's an arrangement. He's closeted. And maybe that is the problem.

Just be you, dude!
 
jaycee said:
explain please.
Click to expand...

None of them combine the firebrand arm waving with radical policies like Bernie. IMO you only beat Trump by going toe to toe with him and I just don't see any of the other candidates doing that. Ideally AOC would be running, but she's not. Her time will come, but for now the best shot you've got is Bernie.
 
Captainfog said:
the others don't have any chance.
Click to expand...
jaycee said:
explain please.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don't think this is grounded in any of the data that is being produced so far.
Captainfog said:
She was scared to talk about raising taxes and talked around the subject. Bernie was like, yep, damn right taxes are going to go up and that's a good thing because of xyz.
Click to expand...
I don't think she's afraid. I think she's adamant that focusing on taxation is a talking point of the right, and she's not going to play into providing a sound byte for ads to be used against her. Whether that's a winning strategy is debatable -- I said earlier I think more people are rolling their eyes at it -- but it's not fear-based, it's a philosophical objection to the framing of the debate.
 
Captainfog said:
None of them combine the firebrand arm waving with radical policies like Bernie. IMO you only beat Trump by going toe to toe with him and I just don't see any of the other candidates doing that. Ideally AOC would be running, but she's not. Her time will come, but for now the best shot you've got is Bernie.
Click to expand...
I don't know if Bernie extreme can compare to Trumps though. Trump relies so much on emotion and mis information to appeal to those emotions. I'm not sure that the voters Bernie needs will be as easily swayed.
 
Teeeee said:
Booker is not "with" Rosario. That's an arrangement. He's closeted. And maybe that is the problem.

Just be you, dude!
Click to expand...
I don't know why you would think theirs is not a torrid affair.
“Dawson says they went two months without seeing each other. But they’ve made up for it with FaceTime, which they try to do twice a day,” the Post writes. “He’s gotten in the habit of sending her music every morning, and he just finished reading David Benioff’s World War II novel City of Thieves to her over the phone.”
Click to expand...
Sounds hOt
 
Captainfog said:
None of them combine the firebrand arm waving with radical policies like Bernie. IMO you only beat Trump by going toe to toe with him and I just don't see any of the other candidates doing that. Ideally AOC would be running, but she's not. Her time will come, but for now the best shot you've got is Bernie.
Click to expand...
I am SOOOOO excited for AOC to run. She has no time for anyone's nonsense. And she has the receipts and knowledge to back herself up.

No one has the complete lack of morals that the orange one does. So no one can match his hateful rhetoric.
 
Teeeee said:
I am SOOOOO excited for AOC to run. She has no time for anyone's nonsense. And she has the receipts and knowledge to back herself up.

No one has the complete lack of morals that the orange one does. So no one can match his hateful rhetoric.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the rhetroric against aoc in special is so agressive, that i could see here being gunned down by some right-wing Lunatic at some point
 
Jan said:
Unfortunately, the rhetroric against aoc in special is so agressive, that i could see here being gunned down by some right-wing Lunatic at some point
Click to expand...
Yes, true. At the moment it would be extremely unsafe for her to run.

I'm hoping that a Dem wins next. And settles the country, thus enabling AOC and more like her to succeed even more than they already are.
 
Teeeee said:
settles the country
Click to expand...
Sadly, no matter the outcome of impeachment/elections, I find this part to be the most unlikely result of all. I think the Republican Party is irredeemably compromised in its current incarnation, but has to run out its current path of destruction before something more normal can take its place.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Sadly, no matter the outcome of impeachment/elections, I find this part to be the most unlikely result of all. I think the Republican Party is irredeemably compromised in its current incarnation, but has to run out its current path of destruction before something more normal can take its place.
Click to expand...


So much this. The refusual to hold a confirmation hearing for Merrick Garland and the election of Donald Trump was the point of no return in my eyes for both parties.
 
dbarila said:
I don't know if Bernie extreme can compare to Trumps though. Trump relies so much on emotion and mis information to appeal to those emotions. I'm not sure that the voters Bernie needs will be as easily swayed.
Click to expand...

IMO to take the votes from Trump you need to use the same anti establishment, stick it to the elites rhetoric. It's us against them. You empathise and agree with with their anger, but offer different solutions and get them to punch up, not down. None of the current candidates do this better than Bernie and that's why I think he's your best shot for defeating Trump.
 
Captainfog said:
I like her, but was unimpressed with her performance when challenged on how to pay for healthcare. She was scared to talk about raising taxes and talked around the subject. Bernie was like, yep, damn right taxes are going to go up and that's a good thing because of xyz.
Click to expand...

Agreed, Bernie had the more morally appropriate response. Americans do not give a damn about doing the "right" thing and Warren's strategy throughout her political career has been to not say anything she doesn't have to, particularly when it comes to healthcare.

I don't know if that strategy is smart. I wish she made it clear what she believes in but that hasn't traditionally paid off for candidates in the past. The less you say about what you really think the better.
 
Last edited:
Captainfog said:
IMO to take the votes from Trump you need to use the same anti establishment, stick it to the elites rhetoric. It's us against them. You empathise and agree with with their anger, but offer different solutions and get them to punch up, not down. None of the current candidates do this better than Bernie and that's why I think he's your best shot for defeating Trump.
Click to expand...

I think this is a misconception. People don't vote here. I don't know what the eligible voter turnout was last presidential election (it's highest for pres elecs) but it is appallingly low. American politics is so far beyond the theoretical middle that switching teams very rarely happens. Each party just tries to get the most people they can registered for their party and voting. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that I don't think getting people to switch from Trump is a winning strategy.

Something like 30% of Americans will vote for whomever is the Republican candidate regardless of any real or perceived crimes
 
Unless something happens to shift momentum (i.e a surprise Iowa victory for Bernie or Pete)-- it's going to be Warren / Trump. Biden has nose dived in most polls, he spent more than he raised last quarter, he polls at like 6% with people under 35 and he is going to lose the early states intentionally while banking on easy victories in the south... but that just seems like a roadway to momentum being completely lost.

And I honestly think Trump is toast so long as he isn't facing Biden (which will risk suppressing turnout of the roughly 100 million voters under 35 and lend ammo to Trump to shoot at Clinton 2.0). His cult is going to turn out in mass but there are a lot of ways to offset that via strong youth vote (which was at record high during the midterms), minority turnout and the suburban support that has flipped against him.

Warren and Bernie are also capable of eating into the Obama to Trump voter AND (to my surprise) impeachment proceeding seem to even be chipping away at a small percentage of his base support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top