Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8950 total)
32 online now:
DrJones*, Faith, Hyroglyphx, jar, JonF, ringo, Tangle, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (8 members, 24 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,233 Year: 22,269/19,786 Month: 832/1,834 Week: 332/500 Day: 31/64 Hour: 6/10


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Campaign
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 63 of 298 (854342)
06-07-2019 11:42 AM


The candidates
Joe Biden: Creepy, Uncle Joe who loves to inappropriately touch women and little kids... the human gaffe machine that has an uncanny knack for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. His age is certainly a question mark, but he does have a ton of political experience. He knows how Washington works... I'll let you decide if that's a liability or an asset. He'll have a deep electoral base though.

Tulsi Gabbard: I don't think she'll have the push to be a serious contender, but she is 1 of 2 Democrats that I would ever remotely consider electing. I like her military background and she's very eloquent. Ultimately I think she's a high rising meteor that will fizzle out. The crooked DNC will make sure she's a hit job if she comes anywhere close to the reigns of power.

Kamala Harris: She tries too hard to rebrand herself as a true liberal while having been a hard-nosed prosecutor in California. She is eloquent and has a veneer of presidential qualities, but to some Democrats she's way too conservative and to Republicans she's way too liberal (especially on guns). She's in a political no-man's land. But then again, Trump got elected so.... stranger things have happened.

Beto O'Rourke: Mr. Platitude; oh, but he's so Obama-esque! This guy has nothing substantive to say. When you get through all his double-speak the guy doesn't have a single definable plan for any of his pie-in-the-sky platitudes. He just knows what sounds liberal to liberals...

Bernie Sanders: He's got a lot of experience... and while I vehemently disagree with just about everything that comes out of his mouth, I sense that he is genuine whereas most politicians are, well, typical narcissistic politicians who will do anything and say anything if it ascends them to a role of power. His age is a factor, but he's got a very deep base. He's one of the only real contenders in the race.

Elizabeth Warren: Fake. Fake. Fake. She's cut from the same cloth as Hilary Clinton - a fake as fuck blowhard who is the antithesis of Sanders. There is nothing genuine about her, except her genuine desire for power. I have ZERO respect for her. She's a moron and a died-in-the-wool politician. But she will have a big backing from the behemoth that is the DNC. I would like to think that real liberals can see through the smokescreen just like they finally did when they saw the Clinton/DNC derail Bernie.

Andrew Yang: Probably the only Democratic candidate to get praise from FOX viewers... why? Because he has an actual plan that actually is measurable and based on rational inferences. He's the exact opposite of Beto (Mr. Platitudes). But his problem at this point in time is that he's really only known for his universal income schtick. He's a one-trick pony at this point. If he wants to be a serious contender, he is going to have to expand on his ideas. If he can follow suit he has the potential to bring a lot of Republicans over.

Corey Booker, de Blasio, Julian Castro, Buttigieg have some qualities that are appealing and some not so appealing.... they'll all likely fade away.

Howard Schultz, running as an Independent, has a lot of good ideas... he's a candidate who is liberal, but not too liberal, with some conservative ideas, but not too conservative... But he has no real big push or star power.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 06-07-2019 4:42 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 65 of 298 (854399)
06-08-2019 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Taq
06-07-2019 4:42 PM


Re: The candidates
I am really curious what led you to this opinions. I am not trying to debate any points here, just curious about how other people perceive her.

I can only speak for myself, but she strikes me as a total elitist who bemoans the injustices of the poor while being so wildly removed from it. Pelosi, Clinton and Warren come to mind as being disingenuous and hyper-partisan.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 06-07-2019 4:42 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Theodoric, posted 06-08-2019 9:54 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 68 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-08-2019 3:30 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 88 of 298 (855302)
06-18-2019 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Tanypteryx
06-08-2019 3:30 PM


Re: The candidates
And they're all women

Did you miss the part where I was critical of men on the list or that I lauded Tulsi Gabbard as being 1 of 2 considerations for my vote?

And they are each expert-level knowledgeable in their field, Congress and the law and effective leadership, world affairs, and banking and finance. You may not like their personalities or histories, but I don't think you can credibly deny their qualifications.

You cited Mitch McConnell in the previous paragraph... does his "expert-level knowledge" give him any credibility? No, I didn't think so... I mean, to say that a politician is knowledgeable of politics is about as redundant as a plumber being knowledgeable about plumbing.

Can you name any Republicans that are not hyper-partisan considering Trump's 90+% approval from Republicans?

Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Arlen Specter, John McCain, Joe Lierberman, etc come to mind as people willing to reach across the aisle. But of course, more could be said of the question itself. Because of this hyper-partisan political climate we live in, as soon as I was critical of people from the Democratic Party you rushed in to counter with Republicans. I'm not a Republican and I'm very critical of Donald Trump who, by the way, was a lifelong Democrat up until about 10-5 years ago.... I guess that means he's willing to reach across the aisle too!


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-08-2019 3:30 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-18-2019 4:08 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 125 of 298 (859397)
07-31-2019 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by LamarkNewAge
07-31-2019 12:14 AM


Re: David Axelrod is a liar ( telling disgusting lies about decriminalization)
Apparently, Axelrod just said that Democrats have to drop "the decriminalization card" because "Democrats need to face the fact that even many Democrats simply don't agree with decriminalization".

I still don't know what it is that they actually want and at this point I don't think they know what they want. They say the border patrol is akin to the gestapo but many say it's "bullshit" that democrats want open borders and to stop using that argument. So what exactly is it that you do want? Because as it stands, CPB is enforcing laws that Congress passed. And then Congress are the one's who bitch about it as if CPB has any control over what laws are passed. I mean... seriously?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by LamarkNewAge, posted 07-31-2019 12:14 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-31-2019 2:38 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 127 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 3:34 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 146 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-01-2019 12:00 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 133 of 298 (859485)
07-31-2019 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Tanypteryx
07-31-2019 2:38 PM


Re: David Axelrod is a liar ( telling disgusting lies about decriminalization)
So, Congress passed a law that says the border patrol has to lock people up in cells with standing room only, no sanitation or medical care? Congress passed a law that says children of all ages should be locked up in cages with no sanitation or adult care?

I think 90% of that controversy is embellished, but I don't want to get lost in the weeds in the minutia. I'm curious to know what precisely most Democrats want when it comes to the border. Everything I've seen seems to indicate an open border. Whenever that's mentioned, they say, no but offer no real provisions. So what is it that Democrats want when it comes to immigration policy?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-31-2019 2:38 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 10:06 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 150 by RAZD, posted 08-01-2019 9:50 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 153 by Tanypteryx, posted 08-01-2019 11:51 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 140 of 298 (859504)
07-31-2019 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Theodoric
07-31-2019 10:06 PM


Re: Who is calling for open borders?
Please show one prominent Democrat that has advocated for an open border.

Answer the question I posed already and I'll answer yours. If you don't want open borders then what do you want?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 10:06 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 11:10 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 143 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 11:16 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 145 of 298 (859515)
07-31-2019 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Theodoric
07-31-2019 11:10 PM


Re: Who is calling for open borders?
quote:
Elizabeth Warren has an immigration plan. Here are the highlights:

*Decriminalizes unauthorized immigration and returns to the civil enforcement we had before George Bush began Operation Streamline.
*Eliminates abusive immigration enforcement and keeps law enforcement at arms length from CBP and ICE.
*Reduces and reforms immigrant detention.
*Reforms immigration courts.
*Raises the refugee cap to 125,000 and affirms refugee protections.
*Reforms legal immigration and creates a path to citizenship.

This is a curious plan. As near as I can tell, it recommends no actions to improve border law enforcement in any way. There’s nothing about either a wall or a “virtual wall.” There’s nothing about E-Verify. There’s nothing about “smarter” or “more efficient” enforcement. No one will ever be deported—except, presumably, for serious felons, though Warren doesn’t even say that explicitly. Expedited removal will be ended. The Border Patrol will be reshaped from “top to bottom,” and will focus their efforts on “homeland security efforts like screening cargo, identifying counterfeit goods, and preventing smuggling and trafficking.” The whole thing is very similar to Julian Castro’s plan.

I have previously criticized Republicans who accused liberals of wanting “open borders.” President Trump tweets about this endlessly. But I have to admit that it’s hard to see much daylight between Warren’s plan and de facto open borders.


Source from a liberal rag so you can't conveniently dismiss it

Now answer the question that I asked first... If you or other Democrats don't want open borders, then what do you want when it comes to immigration?


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Theodoric, posted 07-31-2019 11:10 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-01-2019 12:10 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 149 by jar, posted 08-01-2019 9:42 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 151 by ooh-child, posted 08-01-2019 10:51 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 152 by AZPaul3, posted 08-01-2019 11:22 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 154 by Theodoric, posted 08-01-2019 11:54 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 155 by Percy, posted 08-01-2019 2:33 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 173 of 298 (860161)
08-05-2019 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Percy
08-01-2019 2:33 PM


Re: Who is calling for open borders?
But it's Kevin Drum's (writing for Mother Jones) way of summarizing Elizabeth Warren's plan. It's not the Democrats' plan. The Democratic candidates have a number of different positions on immigration, so it doesn't really make sense to ask for the Democrats' immigration plan.

His point is that whenever we hear a Democrat explain the situation on the border, its unequivocally met with a bunch of platitudes. And Warren's proposal, for what its worth, does sound like a de facto open border. All of the criticism is on CPB and every illegal alien is treated within the plan to have some pathway to citizenship. But nowhere in that, or any plan that I've ever seen proposed, does it clearly diagram how it ought to operate on a day-to-day basis.

he also says, "No one will ever be deported—except, presumably, for serious felons, though Warren doesn’t even say that explicitly." It's true that Drum's summary of Warren's plan doesn't mention deportation, but why do I have a feeling that Warren does have something to say about deportation?

Then why do multiple left-leaning outlets report the same thing?

Source

And just to be very clear: no Democrat running for president is in favor of open borders.

Yeah, no candidate is stupid enough to say that outright... as I'm sure even they are aware of the issues concerning human trafficking, drug smuggling, indentured servitude, etc that occurs simultaneously with benign families crossing. But as Drum's article points out, as well as others, making any attempt to see anything less than a de facto open border nearly impossible.

I am not endorsing any particular immigration plan, I'm not even very familiar with any of them (including Bill Weld's, the other Republican candidate for president) but I am definitely opposed to Trumpian border cruelty and to breaking our DACA promise.

Immigration is of vital and critical importance to the stability of the US; even on the Southern Border. We need immigrants, so long as it is done the right way. I'm all for easing restrictions, but not bypassing a port of entry. This is certainly a challenging issue and I don't envy anyone in the position of correcting past mistakes without sacrificing things that do work. The problem is that I rarely see politicians, on both sides of the aisle, making a concerted effort to actually address the issues at hand beyond making platitudes and empty promises.

On Trump's side its "Build a Wall and Mexico is gonna pay for it." Yeah, okay.... Just another empty and unfulfilled promise, even though that was categorized as one of his top priorities as first day on the job... meanwhile, four years later....

On the other side of aisle, I see a lot of platitudes that refer only to the positive aspects of illegal immigration and a scathing critique of CPB. Not much else. Beto is probably the worst when it comes to this. The guy doesn't have an actual plan for anything... he just knows what voters like to hear.

I, for one, would like to see a comprehensive plan that gets into the finer details. I'm sick of bullet-point talking points. Give us some substance.

Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Percy, posted 08-01-2019 2:33 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2019 8:20 PM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 230 by Percy, posted 08-10-2019 2:21 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 175 of 298 (860173)
08-05-2019 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Theodoric
08-05-2019 8:20 PM


Re: Who is calling for open borders?
So no one is advocating for open borders.

If you read the post, they are without outright saying it... just as you've been saying Trump is a racist without outright acknowledging it.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2019 8:20 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2019 9:53 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5881
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 176 of 298 (860174)
08-05-2019 9:43 PM


Political Assassination
The media in the United States is beyond corruption at this point. There is no such thing as objectively reporting the news any longer, its about manufacturing the news... Guiding it, steering the course of destiny, by hook or crook. Its so obviously a hit job against Tulsi because she's now viewed as a legitimate threat after she scalped Harris in the 2nd debate. Establishment Democrats view her as a potential regime change against the status quo.

If Tulsi's talking points were made against Trump, they'd all give her a standing ovation. But because its against their establishment candidates, Kamala and Biden, they have to rush in with a smear campaign in this political assassination attempt. He may be loathsome to you, but when Trump talks about "Fake News," its hard to argue against it. Pure propaganda.

Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019