Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 86 of 742 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896136186586 ... LastLast
Results 1,276 to 1,290 of 11127
  1. #1276
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    21,417
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    Yeah. It just feels like something easy to say when you don't have any actionable policy to promote.


    Klobuchar has been the one doing this sort of stuff the most I feel like. And remember how she said she'd use humor to handle Trump, and used "You know what Iíd like to see how your hair will work in a blizzard, Mr. Umbrella Man" as an example But for real, she's been hitting the unity/"I'll work productively with the right" thing the hardest.
    I donít underestimate the power of rhetoric, look at the current sitting president.

    Texas Democrat sounds about as centrist as you can get, he seems like somebody thatíll appeal to older white males and a young minority constituency. I could be wrong but thatís just the impression I get.

    Emphasis on impression. Itís way too early to call just yet. Iíve watched his videos from his election against Cruz and he was saying a lot of middle ground things that could appeal to both sides regarding guns and race relations.

    You guys know how liberal I am and that Iím not a fan of middle ground candidates but I feel like more democrats are aligned with Beto than they are Bernie, for instance.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    If Trump can become president with no political background then I don't understand why I need a resumť

  2. #1277
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezekial View Post
    I'd never vote for Kamala Harris in a primary.
    Nor would I. I saw her sleep her way into politics in SF. She's the worst kind of politician ... she's interested in power and winning above all else. Trump-like.

  3. #1278
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    21,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Nor would I. I saw her sleep her way into politics in SF. She's the worst kind of politician ... she's interested in power and winning above all else. Trump-like.
    Sources?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    If Trump can become president with no political background then I don't understand why I need a resumť

  4. #1279
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,055
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I saw her sleep her way into politics in SF.
    Doesnít that make you kind of a pervert?

  5. #1280
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    Sources?
    I remember a thing in the SF chronicle long ago, but I did a google of "kamala harris sleep her way into politics" and there was a LOT found including one where Willie Brown admitted it was true.

    https://www.google.com/search?client...+into+politics

  6. #1281
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    Doesnít that make you kind of a pervert?
    Nothing wrong with watching.

  7. #1282
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    19,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Nor would I. I saw her sleep her way into politics in SF. She's the worst kind of politician ... she's interested in power and winning above all else. Trump-like.
    I feel exactly the same. I feel she has no conviction.

  8. #1283
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,072
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    Interesting list. What do you like about Klobuchar?

    Has Gillum indicated he's running? I've soured on him a bit since the election. He's foaming at the mouth almost as much as anyone for military intervention in Venezuela and he's another guy that all of a sudden dove to the left for an election. If he runs I'm sure there will be plenty of scrutiny that hopefully can clear some of that all up.
    Klobuchar was a lawyer prior to public service and I think it's always a plus when someone knows about the laws they want to shape. She checks practically all the boxes you would want from a progressive perspective (however it's important to note she endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016). Ultimately though I think she's honest and she knows what she's talking about. I also think she's highly electable because of where she's from. She's extremely popular in Minnesota, around 60% approval, and I think that could benefit her in Wisconsin and Michigan. Considering Trump owes his Presidency to those states and Pennsylvania, she would be a major threat to his reelection.

    As for Gillum, he's not officially announced but he is definitely running. On March 20th, he's holding a big rally in Florida to deliver "a major announcement". Certainly it will be him declaring his candidacy for President of the United States. Mostly I like him from his gubernatorial run last year and how he ran on practically all of the policies that Bernie ran on in 2016.

    When I made the list it was actually pretty difficult for me to choose between Klobuchar and Buttigieg (what's not to love about him?) and who to put at #5. Basically for me it was Gillum, Biden, Harris, or Castro. Between the four I would probably choose Gillum, but there is a drop off between him and the top four for me. I would be quite disappointed if the nominee wasn't one of Sanders, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, or Warren.
    Last edited by TylerSL; 03-16-2019 at 04:27 PM.

  9. #1284
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,707
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerSL View Post
    Klobuchar was a lawyer prior to public service and I think it's always a plus when someone knows about the laws they want to shape. She checks practically all the boxes you would want from a progressive perspective (however it's important to note she endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016). Ultimately though I think she's honest and she knows what she's talking about. I also think she's highly electable because of where she's from. She's extremely popular in Minnesota, around 60% approval, and I think that could benefit her in Wisconsin and Michigan. Considering Trump owes his Presidency to those states and Pennsylvania, she would be a major threat to his reelection.

    As for Gillum, he's not officially announced but he is definitely running. On March 20th, he's holding a big rally in Florida to deliver "a major announcement". Certainly it will be him declaring his candidacy for President of the United States. Mostly I like him from his gubernatorial run last year and how he ran on practically all of the policies that Bernie ran on in 2016.

    When I made the list it was actually pretty difficult for me to choose between Klobuchar and Buttigieg (what's not to love about him?) and who to put at #5. Basically for me it was Gillum, Biden, Harris, or Castro. Between the four I would probably choose Gillum, but there is a drop off between him and the top four for me. I would be quite disappointed if the nominee wasn't one of Sanders, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, or Warren.
    Klobuchar has the same issue as Beto, and thatís health care. The only sensible solution to our current problem is a single payer system. What is the plan gonna be and what would it look like beyond better Obamacare? Better Obamacare is more handouts for insurance companies without any cost savings in the end. Anything less than single payer is gonna sound like political nonsense that loses the election. You can sensibly moderate most of the big primary issues, but there isnít a sensible moderate position for health care.

  10. #1285
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    Yeah. It just feels like something easy to say when you don't have any actionable policy to promote.


    Klobuchar has been the one doing this sort of stuff the most I feel like. And remember how she said she'd use humor to handle Trump, and used "You know what Iíd like to see how your hair will work in a blizzard, Mr. Umbrella Man" as an example But for real, she's been hitting the unity/"I'll work productively with the right" thing the hardest.
    That's pretty much what happened in 2016 with HRC. I don't think there's a person who can name an actual actionable plan she had....she ran on some song of "Better together, we're gonna all work together and really grow together blah, blah blah......and also Donald Trump is the devil". I think if any of these democratic candidates are going to be taken seriously by the swing voters in the middle they need to come to the table with something more than just being a trump hater. You can say what you want about Trump and disagree with what his beliefs are, but the thing he did during the campaign was lay out in detail of what he wanted to do and was detailed about it from SCOTUS picks to Tax Cuts to Trade Deals. Again, the left can criticize his personality or disagree with what he believes to be the right patch but he laid out specific plans and campaigned very strategically and that's why he won. Whoever the last democrat standing in this current pool is needs to have some actual substance this time around.

  11. #1286
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    14,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatch View Post
    That's pretty much what happened in 2016 with HRC. I don't think there's a person who can name an actual actionable plan she had....she ran on some song of "Better together, we're gonna all work together and really grow together blah, blah blah......and also Donald Trump is the devil". I think if any of these democratic candidates are going to be taken seriously by the swing voters in the middle they need to come to the table with something more than just being a trump hater. You can say what you want about Trump and disagree with what his beliefs are, but the thing he did during the campaign was lay out in detail of what he wanted to do and was detailed about it from SCOTUS picks to Tax Cuts to Trade Deals. Again, the left can criticize his personality or disagree with what he believes to be the right patch but he laid out specific plans and campaigned very strategically and that's why he won. Whoever the last democrat standing in this current pool is needs to have some actual substance this time around.
    This is a great post.

  12. #1287
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatch View Post
    That's pretty much what happened in 2016 with HRC. I don't think there's a person who can name an actual actionable plan she had....she ran on some song of "Better together, we're gonna all work together and really grow together blah, blah blah......and also Donald Trump is the devil". I think if any of these democratic candidates are going to be taken seriously by the swing voters in the middle they need to come to the table with something more than just being a trump hater. You can say what you want about Trump and disagree with what his beliefs are, but the thing he did during the campaign was lay out in detail of what he wanted to do and was detailed about it from SCOTUS picks to Tax Cuts to Trade Deals. Again, the left can criticize his personality or disagree with what he believes to be the right patch but he laid out specific plans and campaigned very strategically and that's why he won. Whoever the last democrat standing in this current pool is needs to have some actual substance this time around.
    I totally agree that Hillary didn't have any substance to most of her issues, and completely ran on being the first woman President and not being Donald Trump, but Trump himself was not clear on basically anything when he was running on either. The only issues the President was clear on during his campaign were the Supreme Court and the Wall. More often than not, Trump took positions that undermined other positions and he basically spouted nonsense for 2 years and still managed to win.

    The reasons for his win are extremely complex, from generations of failed politicians, to terrible economic inequality that was blamed solely on trade deals, to white people wanting to keep minorities beneath them, to Hillary Clinton being such an all-time terrible candidate who was easily provably corrupt. It doesn't matter that he was going to make inequality worse and was more corrupt than she was, he didn't have a track record in politics. He had "clean hands" so to speak. Those are the reasons he won, not because he was clear on what he wanted to do.

    I certainly agree with your last statement though, the 2020 Democratic nominee needs to have ideas. Luckily, that looks like it might be a prerequisite to the nomination this time around.

  13. #1288
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo View Post
    This is a great post.
    It appears the Adderall finally kicked in

  14. #1289
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerSL View Post
    I totally agree that Hillary didn't have any substance to most of her issues, and completely ran on being the first woman President and not being Donald Trump, but Trump himself was not clear on basically anything when he was running on either. The only issues the President was clear on during his campaign were the Supreme Court and the Wall. More often than not, Trump took positions that undermined other positions and he basically spouted nonsense for 2 years and still managed to win.

    The reasons for his win are extremely complex, from generations of failed politicians, to terrible economic inequality that was blamed solely on trade deals, to white people wanting to keep minorities beneath them, to Hillary Clinton being such an all-time terrible candidate who was easily provably corrupt. It doesn't matter that he was going to make inequality worse and was more corrupt than she was, he didn't have a track record in politics. He had "clean hands" so to speak. Those are the reasons he won, not because he was clear on what he wanted to do.

    I certainly agree with your last statement though, the 2020 Democratic nominee needs to have ideas. Luckily, that looks like it might be a prerequisite to the nomination this time around.
    He basically spouted nonsense for 2 years but still won? C'mon that's not even a "we can agree to disagree" statement. Though we can agree a good part of his victory was the fact he was not a career politician. That had a good amount to do with his popularity as the country had grown weary of politics.

    But here's the first mindset.....in this day of media saturation every single political figure has missteps, indiscretions and scandals that get attributed to them. All of them say things that get twisted the wrong way or that plain old are a reactionary mistake. Obviously Trump has said some things that aren't phrased the best and many things even the people that support him just kinda wish he hadn't said. However, take your pick of the HRC's, AOC's, Warrens, Bookers etc..........and they all do and have the same thing. No one on the left let's ill advised hypocrites gaffes detract from their support of their candidate. What the left can't seem to rationalize is that the right also does the same with Trump. The country was at it's end point with the same old same old empty politicians that they just want results. They don't care how many strippers Trump banged, they don't care that he uses aggressive off color remarks...they want results. That's the mistake the MSM makes. They keep going after trump on these type situations and no one cares in the same fashion that the left doesn't care about Hillary's scandals or any of her ilk.

    So after all that what you're actually left with is ideas and action. The left as a whole can't seem to separate policy from this notion they believe him to be the second coming of Lucifer. Is there bluster and rhetoric? Sure. No different than any of the other candidates pretty much anywhere since the invention of elections. But on Trumps key issues there was no vague:

    1. Scotus picks - listed specific names (votes supported that)
    2. Border Security - believes in a sovereign nation, clamping down on drugs and crime and attempting to curtail a huge blackhole of taxpayers money spent (we know now the left believes that's made up drama....but he was specific in his belief it was important to the country...and the voters supported it)
    3. Trade deals need to be re-worked (he was specific in which deals were bad and that he would have actionable plans to save our taxpayers money not being spent wisely........voters supported that)
    4. He believed the key to fixing many of America's social issues was to provide jobs. Cutting taxes and corporate taxes and getting business that had moved over seas for better deals to come back to the US. (he was direct about that plan and the voters supported it).

    So all the other he was vague and made stuff up is mostly white noise and cherry picking...those are the core issues his base wanted and felt ignored on and he laid out a plan to get it back for them. I will agree that he was vague on one core issue and that was handling ISIS. He got criticized because he repeatedly said he would not announce how he was going to handle ISIS because it would essentially be alerting them to our plans. So yeah, that was vague but his base was OK with that. Although objectively you can say it's kinda worked out so far.

    So look at the issues that are meat.....he was specific and is attempting to make them happen. If you want to cut down to the core issue to me it comes down to this:

    The current left wants to solve social issues such as healthcare, unemployment, perceived income inequality etc......by a system of handouts that guarantee a result. The current right believes that you solve much of that by providing jobs and meaningful income to be available for it's citizens so they can provide for themselves.

    The left needs to separate their disdain for the man, their disagreement with his ideas from the actual truth that he has specific beliefs on what it takes to make the country successful and that half the country supports it.

  15. #1290
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,055
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatch View Post

    So look at the issues that are meat.....he was specific and is attempting to make them happen. If you want to cut down to the core issue to me it comes down to this:

    The current left wants to solve social issues such as healthcare, unemployment, perceived income inequality etc......by a system of handouts that guarantee a result. The current right believes that you solve much of that by providing jobs and meaningful income to be available for it's citizens so they can provide for themselves.

    The left needs to separate their disdain for the man, their disagreement with his ideas from the actual truth that he has specific beliefs on what it takes to make the country successful and that half the country supports it.
    But many, many people (here and elsewhere) have said that it is Mr. Trumpís ideas and actions that they oppose.

    I do ó and have said so repeatedly. For example, the current administration and its congressional minions have implemented an enivronmental policy that I believe is potentially disastrous. They have passed a tax bill that I believe is potentially disastrous. They have pulled out of international treaties which I believe is potentially disastrous.

    I can go on.

    So, I ask you humbly to take your own advice and give the benefit of doubt also to those of us who oppose this president for what he has done while in office.
    Last edited by Crovash; 03-17-2019 at 09:40 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •