Democrats 2020

[southernhybrid]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Keep seeing numbers released for fundraising and it appears the Democrats couldn't be more energized and 2020 looks great.

But I keep remembering 2012, a partisan energized right-wing base, though they never did get the candidate they wanted until 2016. The R's kicked the D's butts in the 2010 mid-terms (though by a smaller margin than the D ass whooping of the R in 2018), and they also had a good deal of money coming in. Looking over the link, Ron Paul raised around $40 million!

So while the Dems are outraising Trump, he Republicans did likewise, sometimes with Obama as well. We all know how 2012 ends up on Election Night.

With the latest shit from Pompeo on 'reexamining inalienable rights', I don't think I'd be able to sleep for a week if Trump were re-elected.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

 

[Elixir]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

"More"? Cheato isn't a businessman. He's a reality TV star who played a businessman.
The guy was GIVEN hundreds of millions of dollars, and is now probably worth some negative sum after squandering it all on himself.

 

[southernhybrid]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

I"m not voting for him, but I wouldn't compare him to Trump. I'd also prefer someone with lost of actual experience in government, but I'll take any Democrat over Trump. I'm sad that not all Democrats feel this way. Anyone that sits home or votes for a third party candidate instead of a Democrat, who they don't like, is just enabling Trump's second term. I'm not suggesting that anyone here would do that, but Gun Nut is probably right. Lately, I've seen lots of comments on WaPo by Bernie or Warren supporters that are saying they won't vote if they don't get their preferred candidate or if they perceive that the nominee isn't progressive enough for their personal agenda. That's irrational and immature imo.

 

[Politesse]

Before the primaries:

Progressives need to shut up. This is a critical time for Democrats to close ranks and get Trump out.

After the election:

Progressives need to shut up. The results of the primaries prove that there is no support for radical views.

At all times:

Progressives need to shut up. It is never the right time to question the assumption that capitalism and liberalism are compatible.

 

[Elixir]

I'll take any Democrat over Trump.

Sure - so would most Democrats. I'd take any Republican over Trump. Hell - I'd take pretty much anyone over that psychotic narcissistic bastard.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Before the primaries:

Progressives need to shut up. This is a critical time for Democrats to close ranks and get Trump out.

After the election:

Progressives need to shut up. The results of the primaries prove that there is no support for radical views.

At all times:

Progressives need to shut up. It is never the right time to question the assumption that capitalism and liberalism are compatible.

Progressives need to understand how the real world works, that major changes take time to enact and that occurs in steps. They need to realize that electing a single person doesn't make things become law, that requires a two party Congress. Progressive have to fucking show up at the mid-terms!

I'm a progressive and appreciate all of this.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

I"m not voting for him, but I wouldn't compare him to Trump.

Neither am I. Romney, George W. Bush, Donald Trump. Romney is the only one with any success in politics. W and Trump have been abject failures. We've seen that the polish of Macron has worn off in France. Politicians are a disease, but they are the ones that know how bureaucracy works.

I'd also prefer someone with lost of actual experience in government, but I'll take any Democrat over Trump.

Right now we are in the position to help ensure that it isn't just "a Democrat", but a viable person that can handle the role.

I'm sad that not all Democrats feel this way. Anyone that sits home or votes for a third party candidate instead of a Democrat, who they don't like, is just enabling Trump's second term. I'm not suggesting that anyone here would do that, but Gun Nut is probably right. Lately, I've seen lots of comments on WaPo by Bernie or Warren supporters that are saying they won't vote if they don't get their preferred candidate or if they perceive that the nominee isn't progressive enough for their personal agenda. That's irrational and immature imo.

...reckless as well.

 

[Politesse]

Before the primaries:

Progressives need to shut up. This is a critical time for Democrats to close ranks and get Trump out.

After the election:

Progressives need to shut up. The results of the primaries prove that there is no support for radical views.

At all times:

Progressives need to shut up. It is never the right time to question the assumption that capitalism and liberalism are compatible.

Progressives need to understand how the real world works, that major changes take time to enact and that occurs in steps. They need to realize that electing a single person doesn't make things become law, that requires a two party Congress. Progressive have to fucking show up at the mid-terms!

I'm a progressive and appreciate all of this.

When has silently waiting for the powerful to voluntarily surrender their power ever accomplished a damn thing?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Before the primaries:

Progressives need to shut up. This is a critical time for Democrats to close ranks and get Trump out.

After the election:

Progressives need to shut up. The results of the primaries prove that there is no support for radical views.

At all times:

Progressives need to shut up. It is never the right time to question the assumption that capitalism and liberalism are compatible.

Progressives need to understand how the real world works, that major changes take time to enact and that occurs in steps. They need to realize that electing a single person doesn't make things become law, that requires a two party Congress. Progressive have to fucking show up at the mid-terms!

I'm a progressive and appreciate all of this.

When has silently waiting for the powerful to voluntarily surrender their power ever accomplished a damn thing?

Is that even a question worth addressing?

The solution to problems isn't throwing a fit and letting the mentally incompetent choose our Government. It is about getting a seat at the table. Sanders managed to do that in 2016.

 

[Derec]

Blah blah blah. Every right wing nut job tries to tout Venezuela as the end all be all example of socialism -

I am not a "right wing nut job", but Venezuela is a good example of socialism.
And it wasn't so long ago that the socialists though that too. It's only recently that Venezuela went from "shining example of 21st century socialism" to "real socialism was never tried".

always ignoring the MANY MANY MANY successful socialist countries around the world INCLUDING South America.

What would those "MANY MANY MANY MANY" countries be? And note, capitalist countries with a more generous social safety net than US are not "socialist countries".

This person said it best

Who would that person be? If you are quoting somebody, you should attribute it as well.

It’s not the system (see Denmark, Sweden, etc.) but the governance, and it’s a shame when the same worn-out arguments are trotted out that avoid discussing the important factors that actually cause states to fail.

Denmark and Sweden are actually capitalist countries. They are both muti-party democracies where government tends to switch between the conservative and social democratic blocks.

 

[Derec]

Tom Steyer reconsiders 2020 and plans to enter the race - POLITICO - "The billionaire environmentalist who has poured millions into an effort to impeach President Trump had decided against a run in January."

Well with Swallwell gone, there is a free seat in the clown car ...

 

[blastula]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

Ross Perot (r.i.p.) heard you loud and clear.

 

[southernhybrid]

Before the primaries:

Progressives need to shut up. This is a critical time for Democrats to close ranks and get Trump out.

After the election:

Progressives need to shut up. The results of the primaries prove that there is no support for radical views.

At all times:

Progressives need to shut up. It is never the right time to question the assumption that capitalism and liberalism are compatible.

I have no problem with the progressive views, but imo, the current candidates who are the most progressive are offering plans that are extremely unrealistic. They keep saying that the wealthy can pay for these idealistic ideas throughout higher taxes, but we don't have enough wealthy people in this country to support these plans.

I'd prefer a candidate who is realistic and pragmatic that's why Stacey Abrams was extremely popular when she ran for governor of Ga, and likely would have won if it weren't for voter suppression and unreliable voting machines. No, she's not ready to run for president, but she's my example of an excellent candidate.

More than half of the Democrats in Congress are fairly moderate compared to AOC and her group. But then again, contemporary progressives seemed to have changed the definition of what liberal means.

Why isn't well regulated capitalism compatible with liberalism? It's worked for many European countries, so why not here? There are better ways of providing UHC, other than single payor. Mixed economic systems have always offered the most benefits for the most people.

If this were any other election, I'd be more willing to support someone further to the left. But, we live in a period of time when the country is moving further to the right than any other time in my life, with the possible exceptions of the McCarthy era, when I was just a toddler. We must come to terms that change comes gradually. Trump didn't start this move to the hard right. It's been coming since the 80s.

I'd like to see candidates talk more about raising the minimum wage, ensure that SS will be maintained for both my generation and the younger generations, as y'all will be old and need it before too long, less expensive programs to help older adults stay in their homes instead of entering expensive long term care facilities, lowering the interest rates of college debt, decreasing the military budget, making it easier for immigrants to enter the country legally in return for moving to areas where jobs are needed that they are qualified to do, improving regulation of industry, realistic plans for changing over to cleaner renewable energy, strengthening the EPA, job training to help those in jobs like coal mining transition to higher paying safer jobs, better access to health care, improving the care of the mentally ill, helping provide more affordable housing in expensive cities, rebuild our failing infrastructure, etc. Etc. All of those things are progressive, but they can't happen over night or by simply raising the tax rates on the rich. I haven't heard anything reasonable from the current group of so called progressive candidates. They are either lying or they aren't as smart as they might think. Imo, all they have is a lot of pie in the sky sound bites.

Despite my lack of enthusiasm for all the candidates, My primary vote will be for the one who appears to have the best chance of winning enough swing states to defeat Trump. I just want that dangerous, incompetent man gone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

Ross Perot (r.i.p.) heard you loud and clear.

Nice to know someone listened to me.

 

[lpetrich]

I posted that Steyer was running yesterday. Keep up already.

No more businessmen!

Do businessmen make good presidents? - looking at presidents since Teddy Roosevelt. The best of the business leaders over that time is George Bush I, and he had had some public-service experience before the Presidency. The other ones had also done so, even the worst of them, Warren Harding. So Donald Trump stands alone among business-leader presidents as having had no previous public-service experience.

 

[Politesse]

It is about getting a seat at the table. Sanders managed to do that in 2016.

Precisely by being "too loud" and not being afraid to criticize his supposed party members.

 

[Elixir]

So... is being chosen by party leaders now a poison pill for a candidate?

 

[angelo]

In what universe does Sanders gaining 12 points in the polls after the debate, with support at almost double the next two candidates combined, constitute shooting himself in the foot?

A self described socialist is not going to win the popular vote or a presidential election. Period. I think that most people are good people who want to help others. Bernie has hurt the democratic party deeply by associating increasing the safety net with socialism.

You're obviously not basing that conclusion on polls, which have Sanders consistently beating Trump in battleground states and second in the primary only to Biden, whose numbers are plummeting every time he opens his mouth. Polls also show stronger support for socialism compared to capitalism among likely Democratic voters, based on whatever the poll participants take those terms to mean. They also show Sanders with the highest popularity of any candidate in the race, which continues the long trend of his favorability being high among politicians generally in America. All of his policies enjoy strong support among partisan and non-partisan groups, and are the benchmark that most of the other candidates are trying to position themselves around in some way or another.

The only people scared of Bernie's socialism are (a) stuck in the 1980's mindset of appealing to the mythical Reagan Democrats who never existed in the first place, or (b) actually against his policies because they harm their potential profits, and are concealing this fact by re-framing it as a concern about electability.

Polls predicted Hillary would cakewalk into the White house, as did polls and bookies here in Australia all predict the socialists [ ALP] would also cakewalk into government. The only question was by how many seats. In fact it was rumoured that the bookies started paying out on bets 2 days before the general election which of course was won by the center right Liberal Party.