REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Who Is Running In 2020?

POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Sunday, October 13, 2019 12:55
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4301
PAGE 3 of 6

Tuesday, April 16, 2019 9:40 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Which of these is considered the "Centrist" this time around, ready to railroad Bernie to the gutter?

IDK. But I think we're already seeing the party* (*you call that a par-tay?) line with Pelosi. Without Hillary to crystallize on, I guess we'll just have to wait and see who the DNC picks. My guess is it's one of the pro-Israel pro-military candidates. or at the very least, one without any anti-military baggage, so they can go on with business as usual, assuming they win.

I haven't paying attention, what is Pelosis party line?
You think they will allow DNC to pick, or just preselect?

Obama hated Israel, so last Dem POTUS was who, BJ?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 2:02 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


There's no way the Corpo-Establishment-Neo-Liberals are going to give any presidential power to the Socialists or Communists in 2020.

Nancy's already shown on several occasions she makes no bones about squaring off against them and any of their ideas.

The extreme left is already turning on Bernie very early in his bid and calling him a Republican.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the DNC after the 2020 election, as well as what happens to the fringe Left. I'd imagine they're going to split off from the Democratic party entirely and try to form their own version in the hopes of one day dwarfing the Lefty Establishment and cannibalizing them.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 2:12 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Here's a great graph that shows the extremism of the Left these days:



Not only does it show that about half of the "Republican" voters fall on the left side of the graph on economic issues, but it also shows that around half of the "Democratic" voters are toward the center or even toward the top on social issues and identity politics.

Notice the Bottom Right corner. That's the Alt-Right there, folks. The Identitarians that are fiscally conservative. Not a lot of them, are there? It also looks as though there is a healthy mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents that fall into that category.

Your bottom left, especially the big blob of blue in lower left octant. Well... that's your AOC supporting, authoritative, identity politics driven, Socialist lefty fringe that throws out the word Nazi a dozen times a day.

You'd be astute for noticing that there is no equal and opposite for the upper right octant.

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarians-just-might-exist/



I'd surmise from this graph that if the Democrats were to drop identity politics altogether, that the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in the future. But if they choose to continue down that route you're only going to see the blobs further separate from each other.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 3:36 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Here's a great graph that shows the extremism of the Left these days:



Quote:


Not only does it show that about half of the "Republican" voters fall on the left side of the graph on economic issues, but it also shows that around half of the "Democratic" voters are toward the center or even toward the top on social issues and identity politics.

You must be looking at a different plot than what you posted.
Looks to me like the 50% line for blue from top to bottom is between -0.5 and -1.0, around -0.75 - nowhere even close to center. Looks like only 5% of Blue is above 0.0.
Quote:


Notice the Bottom Right corner. That's the Alt-Right there, folks. The Identitarians that are fiscally conservative. Not a lot of them, are there? It also looks as though there is a healthy mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents that fall into that category.

Your bottom left, especially the big blob of blue in lower left octant. Well... that's your AOC supporting, authoritative, identity politics driven, Socialist lefty fringe that throws out the word Nazi a dozen times a day.

You'd be astute for noticing that there is no equal and opposite for the upper right octant.

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarians-just-might-exist/

I'd surmise from this graph that if the Democrats were to drop identity politics altogether, that the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in the future. But if they choose to continue down that route you're only going to see the blobs further separate from each other.

Do Right, Be Right. :)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 3:50 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Here's a great graph that shows the extremism of the Left these days:



Quote:


Not only does it show that about half of the "Republican" voters fall on the left side of the graph on economic issues, but it also shows that around half of the "Democratic" voters are toward the center or even toward the top on social issues and identity politics.

You must be looking at a different plot than what you posted.
Looks to me like the 50% line for blue from top to bottom is between -0.5 and -1.0, around -0.75 - nowhere even close to center. Looks like only 5% of Blue is above 0.0.
Quote:



Notice the Bottom Right corner. That's the Alt-Right there, folks. The Identitarians that are fiscally conservative. Not a lot of them, are there? It also looks as though there is a healthy mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents that fall into that category.

Your bottom left, especially the big blob of blue in lower left octant. Well... that's your AOC supporting, authoritative, identity politics driven, Socialist lefty fringe that throws out the word Nazi a dozen times a day.

You'd be astute for noticing that there is no equal and opposite for the upper right octant.

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarians-just-might-exist/

I'd surmise from this graph that if the Democrats were to drop identity politics altogether, that the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in the future. But if they choose to continue down that route you're only going to see the blobs further separate from each other.

Do Right, Be Right. :)




No. We're looking at the same graph. You're just misunderstanding what I said.

There is about a 50/50 split for Republicans on either side of 0 for economics. That much is easy to see, that's what I said, and I don't believe you're arguing that point.

I used a different metric for the identitarianism for Democrats by saying that nearly 50% of them are somewhere near the center (0) or even toward the top. I didn't ever specify an exact "center" for them on these issues.

I was simply illustrating the point that while social issues are without a doubt more important to Liberals in general, a vast majority of them are not Identitarian extremists in the bottom left corner. (To which I also made the point that there is no equal and opposite group on the upper right corner made up of Republicans... hardly anyone is up there at all).

I'd consider anybody within 0.5 on any end of either metric to be "center" and the (arguably) most reasonable people of the bunch. The further you get from 0.5 on either metric, the more unreasonable you become until you're part of an extreme.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 4:03 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Here's a great graph that shows the extremism of the Left these days:



Quote:


Not only does it show that about half of the "Republican" voters fall on the left side of the graph on economic issues, but it also shows that around half of the "Democratic" voters are toward the center or even toward the top on social issues and identity politics.

You must be looking at a different plot than what you posted.
Looks to me like the 50% line for blue from top to bottom is between -0.5 and -1.0, around -0.75 - nowhere even close to center. Looks like only 5% of Blue is above 0.0.
Quote:



Notice the Bottom Right corner. That's the Alt-Right there, folks. The Identitarians that are fiscally conservative. Not a lot of them, are there? It also looks as though there is a healthy mix of Republicans, Democrats and Independents that fall into that category.

Your bottom left, especially the big blob of blue in lower left octant. Well... that's your AOC supporting, authoritative, identity politics driven, Socialist lefty fringe that throws out the word Nazi a dozen times a day.

You'd be astute for noticing that there is no equal and opposite for the upper right octant.

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarians-just-might-exist/

I'd surmise from this graph that if the Democrats were to drop identity politics altogether, that the Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in the future. But if they choose to continue down that route you're only going to see the blobs further separate from each other.

Do Right, Be Right. :)




No. We're looking at the same graph. You're just misunderstanding what I said.

There is about a 50/50 split for Republicans on either side of 0 for economics. That much is easy to see, that's what I said, and I don't believe you're arguing that point.

I used a different metric for the identitarianism for Democrats by saying that nearly 50% of them are somewhere near the center (0) or even toward the top. I didn't ever specify an exact "center" for them on these issues.

I was simply illustrating the point that while social issues are without a doubt more important to Liberals in general, a vast majority of them are not Identitarian extremists in the bottom left corner. (To which I also made the point that there is no equal and opposite group on the upper right corner made up of Republicans... hardly anyone is up there at all).

I'd consider anybody within 0.5 on any end of either metric to be "center" and the (arguably) most reasonable people of the bunch. The further you get from 0.5 on either metric, the more unreasonable you become until you're part of an extreme.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

You're still looking at a different plot.
Looks like only about 5% of Blue dots are between -0.25 and +0.25 up/down.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 17, 2019 4:23 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


I'm looking at the same plot.

You're reading what I said wrong, twice now.

Try again.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 28, 2019 8:56 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Will Freedom Liberty be a topic in the election?

Washington Has Destroyed Western Liberty: The Era of Tyranny Has Begun
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/04/27/washington-has-destroy
ed-western-liberty-the-era-of-tyranny-has-begun
/

https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=YQkOzl0aQv0

Jimmy Dore: The California DNC is openly cheating progressives and Bernie Sanders refuses to say anything about it?

https://invidio.us/watch?v=YQkOzl0aQv0

Rand Paul, 'The Electoral Prospects Don't Look That Good'
https://reason.com/2019/04/26/rand-paul-on-a-prospective-justin-amash-
presidential-run-the-electoral-prospects-dont-look-that-good
/

Journlaists and politik turn on each other? The Loony Left Eats itself?

Kamala Harris owns a handgun. That's unacceptable for a 2020 Democrat.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/26/kamala-harris-owns-h
andgun-unacceptable-2020-democratic-race-column/3567371002
/


What news on big tech censorship?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, June 26, 2019 8:20 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The next 2 days have the Dem candidate debates scheduled in Miami.


https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2019/03/first-2020-democrat
ic-debate-set-for-june-26-and-27-in-miami
/


http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/2020-democratic-debates-which-c
andidates-have-qualified.html


Apparently Pocahontas Warren is not going to the debates.

She even refused to go to the Senate to vote on a Bill for Emergency Funding of Detention Centers, because she was too busy protesting at Homestead Detention Center. She also announced that she WOULD NOT leave the protest until all of the children have been released (apparently to wander around without guardians while their miscreant adult co-travellers are still incarcerated), AND Homestead is CLOSED!! So obviously this attendance crisis forbids her from leaving to attend the Democrap Debates.

Unless, of course, if she is lying. Being a Democrap, that is likely a given for Pocahontas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 28, 2019 12:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Did anyone watch the debates? I'm sorry I missed them.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 28, 2019 12:28 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


I recorded them - saw the first half of the first debate. I intend to watch the all the rest later.

I got to the part where everyone but especially Castro was pissing and moaning about those poor immigrants, frequently neglecting the 'illegal' aspect - except Castro who wants to decriminalize it. I couldn't take it any more. I had to stop after a while.

ETA: what I find objectionable is that for them, it's not about human rights. If it was, they would be equally pissing and moaning about all the citizens of this country who lack things like medical care, nutritious regular meals, and adequate housing - in some cases, any housing at all. Unless you assume that citizens here in the US deserve fewer human rights than anyone else.

No, this is theater for scoring political points. That's all it is.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, June 28, 2019 11:50 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


lol. The debates were an embarrassing shit show for Democrats, and they all know it.

You'll notice that nobody here who would be excited about all of the great moments have anything positive to say about them.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 7:01 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
lol. The debates were an embarrassing shit show for Democrats, and they all know it.

You'll notice that nobody here who would be excited about all of the great moments have anything positive to say about them.



Wrong of course. Or at least, not right for the reasons you think. For one, it's too early - I've got laundry to do that's more important. Also, who gives a shit about watching 20 politicians argue? Or say anything? It's the worst kind of theatre - just boring.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 7:19 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Nah. It's great entertainment. Watching them debase themselves and each other is better than most of the drek that Hollywood puts out these days.

Pure comedy gold.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 9:45 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Nah. It's great entertainment. Watching them debase themselves and each other is better than most of the drek that Hollywood puts out these days.

Pure comedy gold.




So, just to confirm - the fact that no one here (that you rightly or wrongly consider a Dem) is saying how great these debates were (other than you), doesn't mean what you said it does.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 10:11 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Why don't you take a second to re-read that question to yourself out loud and see if you know what the hell it is you're actually asking.

When I said they were great, I meant like a cheesy Nic Cage flick, or Leprechaun in the Hood.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 10:48 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]




I'll see if I can find more highlights for you since you missed it.

I think I'm sold on Marianne Williamson and I'm going to vote for her in the primaries. Love how she's channeling Pat Benatar.






Although I do think the best line so far was Gabbard's when she bitch slapped Tim Ryan so hard we thought it was a thunderclap all the way up here in Indiana when she said "The Taliban didn't attack us on 9/11. Al Qaeda did."

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 1:39 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by CEREALMUSH:
Also, who gives a shit about watching 20 politicians argue? Or say anything? It's the worst kind of theatre - just boring.

In other words - your mind is made up about which party you'll vote for, you're just waiting for democrats to serve you the special of the day? So - why bother listening to anything any politician says?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 3:05 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:


Also, who gives a shit about watching 20 politicians argue? Or say anything? It's the worst kind of theatre - just boring.- CEREALMUSH

In other words - your mind is made up about which party you'll vote for, you're just waiting for democrats to serve you the special of the day? So - why bother listening to anything any politician says? KIKI


Including Trump?


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 9:08 PM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Why don't you take a second to re-read that question to yourself out loud and see if you know what the hell it is you're actually asking.

When I said they were great, I meant like a cheesy Nic Cage flick, or Leprechaun in the Hood.




Why don't you stop huffing glue and read your own posts. Someone with your account posted: "You'll notice that nobody here who would be excited about all of the great moments have anything positive to say about them."

I disagreed because "So, just to confirm - the fact that no one here (that you rightly or wrongly consider a Dem) is saying how great these debates were (other than you), doesn't mean what you said it does."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 9:30 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Rephrase the question please. Your use of parenthesis to try to say 5 things in a single sentence at the same time is quite confusing.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 11:02 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Also, who gives a shit about watching 20 politicians argue? Or say anything? It's the worst kind of theatre - just boring.- CEREALMUSH
Quote:

In other words - your mind is made up about which party you'll vote for, you're just waiting for democrats to serve you the special of the day? So - why bother listening to anything any politician says? KIKI
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Including Trump?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

Well, if CEREALMUSH followed his own logic, it would be true. He should ignore Trump along with every other politician, as he claims to do.

But never underestimate the power of CEREALMUSH to provide inadvertent humor with his epic logic fails.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 29, 2019 11:26 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, in any case, I hope to find full versions of the debates online and listen as I work in the kitchen. If it's anything like KIKI said, I expect that it'll be like having a dentist drill in my ear. Especially all the handwringing about OHTHEPOORMIGRANT!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 30, 2019 5:28 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.







And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
tic tac

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 30, 2019 5:34 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 30, 2019 7:08 PM

JONGSSTRAW


The biggest winner by far was Marianne Williamson. She's the mystical magical Earth Mother who will make everything better for everyone. She smiles as if she just knows things the others never could, and with her mesmerizing voice simply tells us that love will conquer all. Quite an extraordinary debut for an unknown on that debate stage.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 2, 2019 2:50 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 3, 2019 5:29 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I have done a lousy job keeping the data updated in this thread.

For now, here is a roster of those 20 candidates who participated in the late-June Debates:

1. Pocahontas Warren.
2. Beto O-Rourke.
3. Cory Booker.
4. Julian Castro.
5. Tulsi Gabbard.
6. Jay Inslee.
7. Amy Klobuchar.
8. Bill DeBlasio.
9. John Delaney.
10. Tom Ryan.

11. Biden.
12. Bernie.
13. Pete Buttigieg.
14. Kamala Harris.
15. Kirsten Gillibrand.
16. Michael Bennett.
17. Marianne Williamson.
18. Eric Swalwell.
19. Andrew Yang.
20. John Hickenlooper.


To be clear, the requirements for the October Debates do not preclude other candidates from becoming eligible. I assume the above 20 have met some sort of criteria, unless Hilliary just Annointed them.

Reportedly, the top 3 are Biden, Bernie, and Pocahontas. Some reports are that the expected frontrunner in the fall will be Pocahontas. Maybe that is why she was allowed to change her answer the day after the first debate, when somebody told her how stupid it was.


If I understand correctly, DNC rules to qualify for the Fall Debates are 2-fold. At least 130,000 individual donors/contributors must have added to the campaign fund. And the candidate must have polled at least 2% in 4 approved polls during the period from June-August. I guess they also must have at least 20 States in which they have at least 400 donors.
Only 6 spots are allocated for the Fall Debates.

Some folk have commented on the lack of depth or substance in their debates and statements. This is reportedly due to the absolute need to increase their donor count, to spur those wackos on the Left to contribute to their campaign.


Already qualified:
Biden, Bernie, Pocahontas, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg.

Booker has only got about 100,000 donors. Beto has not polled high enough yet.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 8, 2019 8:35 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I have done a lousy job keeping the data updated in this thread.

For now, here is a roster of those 20 candidates who participated in the late-June Debates:

1. Pocahontas Warren.
2. Beto O-Rourke.
3. Cory Booker.
4. Julian Castro.
5. Tulsi Gabbard.
6. Jay Inslee.
7. Amy Klobuchar.
8. Bill DeBlasio.
9. John Delaney.
10. Tom Ryan.

11. Biden.
12. Bernie.
13. Pete Buttigieg.
14. Kamala Harris.
15. Kirsten Gillibrand.
16. Michael Bennett.
17. Marianne Williamson.
18. Eric Swalwell.
19. Andrew Yang.
20. John Hickenlooper.


To be clear, the requirements for the October Debates do not preclude other candidates from becoming eligible. I assume the above 20 have met some sort of criteria, unless Hilliary just Annointed them.

Reportedly, the top 3 are Biden, Bernie, and Pocahontas. Some reports are that the expected frontrunner in the fall will be Pocahontas. Maybe that is why she was allowed to change her answer the day after the first debate, when somebody told her how stupid it was.


If I understand correctly, DNC rules to qualify for the Fall Debates are 2-fold. At least 130,000 individual donors/contributors must have added to the campaign fund. And the candidate must have polled at least 2% in 4 approved polls during the period from June-August. I guess they also must have at least 20 States in which they have at least 400 donors.
Only 6 spots are allocated for the Fall Debates.

Some folk have commented on the lack of depth or substance in their debates and statements. This is reportedly due to the absolute need to increase their donor count, to spur those wackos on the Left to contribute to their campaign.


Already qualified:
Biden, Bernie, Pocahontas, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg.

Booker has only got about 100,000 donors. Beto has not polled high enough yet.

Today Swalwell dropped out so he can pursue his House seat.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I understand Kamala Harris has been supporting some proposal to pay black folk after confiscating money from descendants of Slave Owners.

So she would be paying into the fund, as her father made clear that they are descended from Slave Owners.

Talk about Virtue Signaling.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 22, 2019 3:57 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I have done a lousy job keeping the data updated in this thread.

For now, here is a roster of those 20 candidates who participated in the late-June Debates:

1. Pocahontas Warren.
2. Beto O-Rourke.
3. Cory Booker.
4. Julian Castro.
5. Tulsi Gabbard.
6. Jay Inslee.
7. Amy Klobuchar.
8. Bill DeBlasio.
9. John Delaney.
10. Tom Ryan.

11. Biden.
12. Bernie.
13. Pete Buttigieg.
14. Kamala Harris.
15. Kirsten Gillibrand.
16. Michael Bennett.
17. Marianne Williamson.
18. Eric Swalwell.
19. Andrew Yang.
20. John Hickenlooper.


To be clear, the requirements for the October Debates do not preclude other candidates from becoming eligible. I assume the above 20 have met some sort of criteria, unless Hilliary just Annointed them.

Reportedly, the top 3 are Biden, Bernie, and Pocahontas. Some reports are that the expected frontrunner in the fall will be Pocahontas. Maybe that is why she was allowed to change her answer the day after the first debate, when somebody told her how stupid it was.


If I understand correctly, DNC rules to qualify for the Fall Debates are 2-fold. At least 130,000 individual donors/contributors must have added to the campaign fund. And the candidate must have polled at least 2% in 4 approved polls during the period from June-August. I guess they also must have at least 20 States in which they have at least 400 donors.
Only 6 spots are allocated for the Fall Debates.

Some folk have commented on the lack of depth or substance in their debates and statements. This is reportedly due to the absolute need to increase their donor count, to spur those wackos on the Left to contribute to their campaign.


Already qualified:
Biden, Bernie, Pocahontas, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg.

Booker has only got about 100,000 donors. Beto has not polled high enough yet.

I keep forgetting to comment about this.

DeBlasio? Really? He was working so hard to destroy his own City, but now he wants to get promoted before he is defeated for his failures?

I saw a screen shot of Tulsi. Wait a second. An attractive woman running for President as a Democrap? How can that be? If the words coming out of her piehole were not so disgusting, she might be interesting to listen to. Saw a pic of her in slacks, and no evidence of cankles.

Has Biden been running every time since 1996?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 23, 2019 1:55 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Hi JSF

It's an either OR requirement with a limit of 20 candidates. If more than 20 qualified, candidates who meet the polling requirement take precedence. The first two rounds have the limits set below, the round after that the requirements double.


Democrats Set Field For First Debates Of 2020 Election Cycle
https://deadline.com/2019/06/democratic-debate-field-set-july-nbc-news
-msnbc-1202632416
/
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/15/20691651/democratic-debate-2019-cnn-detr
oit-candidates-rules


1 percent in three separate qualifying polls released on or before a specific date OR raising money from at least 65,000 unique donors with at least 200 donors each in 20 states


https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2020-debate-schedule/2020-d
emocratic-debate-schedule/#schedule


Preliminary schedule:
First Debate

June 26 & 27, 2019
NBC News Democratic Primary Debate
Location: The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Miami, Florida
Moderators: Savannah Guthrie, Lester Holt, Chuck Todd, Rachel Maddow and José Diaz-Balart


Second Debate

July 30 & 31, 2019
CNN Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: CNN, CNN International, and CNN en Español
Live Stream: CNN.com

Night 1: Tuesday, July 30
8 pm ET, 5 pm PT
Candidates: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O'Rourke, Steve Bullock, John Delaney, John Hickenlooper, Tim Ryan, and Marianne Williamson

Night 2: Wednesday, July 31
8 pm ET, 5 pm PT
Candidates: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Julián Castro, Andrew Yang, Michael Bennet, Bill de Blasio, Tulsi Gabbard, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Gov. Jay Inslee

Location: Fox Theatre in Detroit, Michigan
Moderators: Dana Bash, Don Lemon, and Jake Tapper
Qualifications: A candidate will need to either have at least 1 percent support in three qualifying polls or provide evidence of at least 65,000 individual donations from a minimum of 200 different donors in at least 20 states.
Third Debate

September 12 & 13, 2019
ABC News Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: ABC, Univision
Live Stream: ABC News Live
Location: Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Qualifications: A candidate will need to either have at least 2 percent support in three qualifying polls, AND provide evidence of at least 130,000 individual donations from a minimum of 400 different donors in at least 20 states.
Fourth Debate

October, 2019
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Qualifications: A candidate will need to either have at least 2 percent support in three qualifying polls, AND provide evidence of at least 130,000 individual donations from a minimum of 400 different donors in at least 20 states.
Fifth Debate

November, 2019
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Sixth Debate

December, 2019
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
2020
Seventh Debate

January, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Eighth Debate

January/February, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Ninth Debate

February, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Tenth Debate

February, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Eleventh Debate

March, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD
Twelfth Debate

April, 2020
Democratic Primary Debate
Aired On: TBD
Location: TBD
Sponsors: TBD
Moderators: TBD
Candidates: TBD

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 23, 2019 3:36 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I might need to review that. I thought I had read that the qualifications for the summer debates - June/July - were the either/or version, and then the fall debates were the both.

I need time later to check that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2019 5:13 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


I've gotten the idea that Trump is a FAR more skilled salesperson than most people realize. One way to fix a meme in the generic American mind is to gain headlines over and over and over. Most people beyond the hyper-partisan aren't going to read, or care about, any of Trump's tweets specifically. What they WILL remember is Trump+ jobs; Trump+ illegal immigration; Trump+ unfair Chinese trade practices; even Trump+ Puerto Rican corruption; and so on. And those are things they can generically get behind. (And the media is doing a great job helping Trump along by amplifying each antic. Jeeze, just STOP already! and get back to actual news.)

Trump gets in early, and by outrageousness and repetition defines what the issues are, and defines individuals, forcing everyone to be in a position of responding.

ANOTHER person who seems to understand that is AOC. Now, by luck of the draw she got a lot of early press for her win, but she's certainly not one to let an opportunity go to waste! (The other 3 of The Squad aren't nearly as individually well-known, but as a 4-pack entity have achieved recognition.)

Even though none of The Squad are running for president, they're doing a good job so far defining the entire democratic party. AND TRUMP IS HELPING THAT ALONG.

Why AOC and The Squad (some day it'll be a band name) might want to define the dems is beyond me because - if they look at their polling - none of them are popular among the general public. While that may change in the future, at this point they might as well be putting concrete around the dem candidates' feet before sinking them in the ocean.

But I can understand why Trump wants to make that connection early and often.



And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 1, 2019 2:05 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


OMG. Just shoot me now.

I've watched the democratic presidential debates. Not only that, I'll listen to them again as I'm doing stuff around the house. Maybe it'll give me some insight into what exactly they stand for (except for Warren and Sanders who've spent a lot of time developing their positions) besides generating what they hope are good sound bites.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 1, 2019 3:44 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I heard that the Tuesday Debates on Conspiracy Network Narrative garnered less than 10 million viewers. Although 3-4 times the amount of CNN's maximum audience for about 10 years, this would compare to 4 years ago when over 24 million Americans tuned in to the Republican Debates.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 1, 2019 3:56 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I've been thinkning about Bite-Me.

He didn't even get the nomination in 2016.

So, when was the last time a sitting Vice President, or even a past VP, was elected President from the Democrat Party?

Beyond my fresh historical memory, I'd need to look it up.
Not Biden. (sitting)
Not algore. (sitting)
Not Mondale. (past)
Not Humphrey. (sitting)
Alben Barkley didn't live until the next election.
Not Garner or Wallace. (past)
Thomas Marshall didn't live until the next election.
Not Stevenson (past).
Not Breckenridge, who was VP until the first Republican - Lincoln - was Inaugurated.
And Dallas was the only prior one to live until the 1960 election.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2019 12:33 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


As you know, I think Kamala Harris is a kiss-ass to corporations and the DNC. She melted faster than frost in the morning sun when she accepted Obama's "deal" with the too big to fail banks which was just a slap on the wrist with no prosecutions. I've been completely disinterested in voting for her for ANYTHING after she showed her true colors. Obama, Booker and Harris are all just corrupt corporate kiss-butts in dark skin. Don't expect anything truly reformative from them.

Here is the exchange between Harris and Gabbard from the latest debate.
To save you from the irrelevant parts, Harris starts bragging about her record as CA Attorney General at 3:10 and at 3:45 the moderator asks Gabbard a question about something else, but Gabbard chooses instead to address Harris' record as Atorney General. Harris completely falls apart in reply.



And here is Tulsi, getting the screw-job from a bunch of women of color (Yanno,like she is.) Next, they'll be calling her a "Russian troll"



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 2, 2019 3:01 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


They've already been calling her a Russian troll.

Facebook also hid the fact that she was the number 2 trending candidate all night until they were caught doing it.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 4, 2019 1:05 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



For whatever it means, here are post-debate polls.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 4, 2019 11:07 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


"Routine" my ass
Quote:

California Removes Arrest Reports From Kamala Years
Routine website redesign obscures Democrat's record on criminal justice
A redesign of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation website will make it harder for voters to inspect Sen. Kamala Harris's controversial record as the state's top cop.

The department removed public access to a number of reports on incarceration in the state, including when presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D.) was California's attorney general. Twice a year, the CDCR releases information about the number of new individuals incarcerated in the California prison system as part of its "Offender Data Points" series. These reports provide important information on demographics, sentence length, offense type, and other figures relevant to criminal justice and incarceration.

Until recently, these reports were publicly available at the CDCR's website. A search using archive.org's Wayback Machine reveals that as of April 25, 2019—the most recent indexed date—ODP reports were available dating back to the spring of 2009. As of August 2019, the same web page now serves only a single ODP report, the one for Spring 2019. The pre-2019 reports have been removed.

The changes matter in part because the reports contain information about Harris's entire time as state A.G., 2011 to 2017. Harris has taken fire from multiple opponents for her "tough on crime" record as California's top cop, an image that she has tried to shed as a far-left senator and presidential candidate.

One particularly brutal attack came Wednesday night when Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hi.) laid into Harris for her record on criminal justice. Gabbard cited a Washington Free Beacon analysis — based in part on the ODP reports — that found that more than 1,500 Californians were sent to prison for marijuana-related offenses while Harris was attorney general.


MORE AT https://freebeacon.com/politics/california-removes-arrest-reports-from
-kamala-years
/



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 4, 2019 11:47 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.



Quote:

Tulsi Gabbard sues Google, claims 'election interference' over suspension of ad account
Nicholas Wu | USA TODAY

WASHINGTON – On Thursday, member of Congress and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard launched a lawsuit against Google claiming "serious and continuing violations of Tulsi’s right to free speech" because of Google's suspension of the Gabbard campaign's advertising account during the first Democratic presidential debate.

The campaign asks for an immediate court injunction to stop further meddling from Google and payment of financial damages.

According to the lawsuit, filed by lawyers representing Gabbard's campaign Tulsi Now Inc., Google suspended the Gabbard campaign's advertising account for several hours during the first Democratic debate, when Gabbard was briefly the most-searched candidate on Google.

"On June 28, 2019, millions of Americans asked Google about Tulsi Gabbard," the lawsuit says. "Tulsi sought to answer them. But Google silenced her."

In response, Google says "automated systems that flag unusual activity on all advertiser accounts -- including large spending changes" were to blame for the suspension of Gabbard's account. Google says their automated systems aim to "prevent fraud and protect our customers."

"In this case, our system triggered a suspension and the account was reinstated shortly thereafter," said Google spokeswoman Riva Sciuto. "We are proud to offer ad products that help campaigns connect directly with voters, and we do so without bias toward any party or political ideology."

The New York Times first reported the lawsuit. Warning of the "dominance of big tech companies," Gabbard told the Times, "This is a threat to free speech, fair elections and to our democracy, and I intend to fight back on behalf of all Americans.”

Gabbard's campaign website took a more aggressive tone.

"Tulsi Takes Google to Court Over Election Interference," said a banner at the top of Gabbard's campaign website, mirroring language about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Republicans have long attacked tech giants like Google for what they see as an ideological bias. Last month, President Donald Trump held a "Social Media Summit" at the White House, where he hosted prominent conservative detractors of tech companies.

Ahead of the summit, Trump railed on Twitter against the "tremendous dishonesty, bias, discrimination and suppression" of the tech companies and said they would not be able to do so for much longer.

"if Google can do this to Tulsi, a combat veteran and four term Congresswoman who is running for the nation’s highest office, Google can do this to any candidate, from any party, running for any office in the United States," says a statement on Gabbard's website.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/07/25/tuls
i-gabbard-democrat-candidate-sues-google/1828271001
/ I hope Tulsi get $50million to fund her campaign

*****

Quote:

WaPo Publishes Gabbard Smear Piece Filled With Blatant Lies
Caitlin Johnstone

The Washington Post, which is wholly owned by a CIA contractor who is reportedly working to control the underlying infrastructure of the global economy, has published a shockingly deceitful smear piece about Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard in the wake of her criticisms of her opponent Kamala Harris’ prosecutorial record during the last Democratic debate.

The article’s author, Josh Rogin, has been a cheerleader for US regime change interventionism in Syria since the very beginning of the conflict in that nation...

His article, titled “Tulsi Gabbard’s Syria record shows why she can’t be president”, is one of the most dishonest articles that I have ever read in a mainstream publication, and the fact that it made it through The Washington Post’s editors is enough to fully discredit that outlet.

You can read Rogin’s smear piece without giving Jeff Bezos more money by clicking here for an archive. There’s so much dishonesty packed into this one that all I can do is go through it lie-by-lie until I either finish or get tired, so let’s begin:

“Gabbard asserts that the United States (not Assad) is responsible for the death and destruction in Syria, that the Russian airstrikes on civilians are to be praised”

This is just a complete, brazen, whole-cloth lie from Rogin. If you click the hyperlink he alleges supports his claim that Gabbard asserts “Russian airstrikes on civilians are to be praised,” you come to a 2015 tweet by the congresswoman which reads, “Bad enough US has not been bombing al-Qaeda/al-Nusra in Syria. But it’s mind-boggling that we protest Russia’s bombing of these terrorists.”

Now, you can agree or disagree with Gabbard’s position ...[but] There is simply no way to represent the content of her tweet that way without knowingly lying about what you think it says.

Just as an aside, misrepresenting what other people have said seems to be a common tactic around here too ...
Quote:



“That bias, combined with her long record of defending the Assad regime and parroting its propaganda, form the basis for the assertion Gabbard has ‘embraced and been an apologist for’ Assad, as Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) said Wednesday post-debate on CNN.”

Gabbard has no record whatsoever of “defending the Assad regime”.

MORE AT https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/wapo-publishes-gabbard-smear-piece-filled-with-blatant-lies-cdb55451c4fd

*****

This will be xposted in "Internet Censorship". http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=63198&p=1#10804
41
I expect to see a lot of cross-postings about candidates and censorship.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 6, 2019 2:11 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


I've heard of:
Free health care
Free college tuition
Free basic income cash
free pohones
free internet.
etc
etc.


I wonder what would happen if any candidate suggested the following:
Free guns - but only to law-abiding Citizens who pass a drug test (and not merely selling guns to his fellow habitual criminals, like Obama did)
Free American Flags
Free Improvement grants for lawe-abiding Citizens who pass a drug test


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:12 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Has anybody heard the clips from this Convention of Socialist Democrats?

I heard Rush playing the clips of this, it was hilarious. They sounded like a Student Body Council of kindergardners, without any adult supervision at all.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 8, 2019 3:04 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


As of today 9 democrats qualify for the next round of debates.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debates-2019-dnc-debate-housto
n-september-democrats-who-qualify
/

Former Vice President Joe Biden
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker
South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg
California Sen. Kamala Harris
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar
Former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Andrew Yang, businessman

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 8, 2019 3:28 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

[/i]


Well... Tulsi got screwed like Bernie last time.

It's Biden's race to lose.

Buttigieg is really the Democrat's only chance of winning on Trump.

He's the only one up there that's not in Biden's position who is a strategist and has an IQ in the triple digits.

A. He's gay. Everybody knows that he's gay. The media can't stop talking about the fact that he's gay. He's the only one that never brings up the fact that he's gay.

B. He's the only one outside of Biden that doesn't have the impossible task of walking a million miles of ultra-left-wing pandering back to the center when he goes up against Trump.

C. Biden is a dufus and is going to get crushed by Trump. The rest of them have already destroyed their own chances in the general election with all of their talking points in the debates.


I honestly think that Trump's chances would be less than 50/50 if he's got to go up against Buttigieg.




EDITED TO ADD: I'm only talking about the field of viable candidates here. Biden, Warren, Harris, Sanders, Buttigieg.

The rest of them should just drop out. I like Yang, but it's far too late for him.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 8, 2019 5:44 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Yeah, they started on Tulsi early - and often.

FWIW I watched then re-watched both days of the debate, round 2. I just want to say that, magically, the democratic party seems to have 'discovered' the working class - except for Sanders, Warren, and a few others who have well-established bona fides. DNC - better late than never, I guess.

I look on this through the lens of my 2 main concerns: nuclear war, and global warming.

I really like Tulsi because of her position re the military.

But the person who impressed me was Jay Inslee. He would wipe the floor with Trump. He has the smarts, the knowledge, the quickness, and the thoughtfulness to make Trump look like a kindergärtner having a tantrum. Plus he has an even-keeled, thoughtful, direct demeanor. And when he's taking an unpopular position, he can make a cogent, honest case for it. He's not evasive or defensive when it comes to answering any question. And he especially doesn't shy from addressing problems just because Trump pointed them out first. (And that's a flaw in a lot of the democratic response - instead of saying, well, yes, inner cities across the US have been rotting for years, they scream RACISM !! with as much fervor as they screamed RUSSIA !! It just makes them look like hypocrites.) Buttigieg said let's just pick the policy we think is right and argue for it. Inslee can walk that talk.

Anyway, Inslee isn't going anywhere, and neither is Gabbard, and that's too bad.

As for the rest, Harris doesn't give me quite the same level of creepiness that Hillary did, but she does come across to me as a self-serving opportunist with no moral compass. She can't defend her record when it comes up, or even acknowledge it. Instead she does the quick hustle, and that's just so transparent. But if nothing else she's willing to pitch whatever the talking points are that democrats want to hear, which I think is the secret to her popularity. Shakes head. The dems. Sigh.

I wonder if blacks are going to look at Biden as 'more of Obama', and whites (especially independents) as 'more of Hillary'. I see him as 'more of Hillary', which is everything wrong with the democratic party and why they lost the last time around. Aside from which he's just plain shifty about all the baggage he's carrying around, and an astoundingly poor debater.

Sanders and Warren have some deeply flawed policies (like reparations), but neither of them have a history of being war-hawks. I'd vote for them if they were on the ballot. But I don't think they can carry independents because a lot of their arguments are based on referring to 'values' / feelz (Warren more so than Sanders). But not everyone shares those extremely liberal values, and they don't bother to explain why they're good.

Buttigieg I think is a fast learner, and he comes up with good sound-bites. His lack of thought about national and global issues shows, I think because he seems to be making up is mind during the debate. But yeah, he would give Trump a stiff head-wind.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:17 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
As of today 9 democrats qualify for the next round of debates.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debates-2019-dnc-debate-housto
n-september-democrats-who-qualify
/

Former Vice President Joe Biden
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker
South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg
California Sen. Kamala Harris
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar
Former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Andrew Yang, businessman

Is this next debate end of September?
More could qualify by then, right?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 8, 2019 11:14 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Is this next debate end of September?
More could qualify by then, right?


Thursday, September 12, 2019 with a second night on September 13 if needed. The limit will be capped at 10 candidates per night.
Rather than the 1% polling threshold and/or 65,000 unique donors, the new qualifications will require at least 2% polling support and 130,000 unique donors, with at least 400 unique donors across 20 states.


https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2019/05/abc-news-to-host-3r
d-democratic-debate-with-tighter-threshold
/

I hope the info helps!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE
1KIKI 10.13 12:55

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Intellectual Pastimes
Sun, October 13, 2019 18:17 - 5 posts
Impeachment Investigation Is Underway, Judiciary Committee Says
Sun, October 13, 2019 18:01 - 670 posts
Where has SIG and 1kiki's outrage about anyone allying with Saudia Araba gone ?
Sun, October 13, 2019 17:26 - 77 posts
Ghosts
Sun, October 13, 2019 17:07 - 39 posts
Tulsi Gabbard - now it makes sense
Sun, October 13, 2019 17:04 - 9 posts
Middle East media interviews Putin
Sun, October 13, 2019 16:27 - 2 posts
Trump is not a sociopath or a narcissist, he has ADHD. Get over it.
Sun, October 13, 2019 16:21 - 1 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Sun, October 13, 2019 16:07 - 3020 posts
Propaganda blaming Demz for illiterasy
Sun, October 13, 2019 13:07 - 46 posts
Who Is Running In 2020?
Sun, October 13, 2019 12:55 - 272 posts
This needs fixing
Sun, October 13, 2019 11:35 - 61 posts
Trump's Budget
Sat, October 12, 2019 15:45 - 226 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL