Harris and Warren back slavery reparations

[twenty02]

The race to out-pander others to the furthest edges of left-wing nonsense is going to be crazy.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...tions-for-black-americans-affected-by-slavery

 

[Hank Reardon]

The race to out-pander others to the furthest edges of left-wing nonsense is going to be crazy.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...tions-for-black-americans-affected-by-slavery

I know the residents of this forum disagree with me on this, but this is the sort of thing that will get Trump re-elected. The Dems will end up picking the looniest toon-maker from the bin.

 

[twenty02]

I know the residents of this forum disagree with me on this, but this is the sort of thing that will get Trump re-elected. The Dems will end up picking the looniest toon-maker from the bin.

We shall see....if you look at Dem primary voter polling, the #1 issue is nominating someone who can beat Trump. My thought is that all of these people staking out far-left positions will end up splitting the vote of the progressive base, allowing someone from the more pragmatic wing to succeed.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I know the residents of this forum disagree with me on this, but this is the sort of thing that will get Trump re-elected. The Dems will end up picking the looniest toon-maker from the bin.

It's like they want him to get re-elected

 

[Hank Reardon]

We shall see....if you look at Dem primary voter polling, the #1 issue is nominating someone who can beat Trump. My thought is that all of these people staking out far-left positions will end up splitting the vote of the progressive base, allowing someone from the more pragmatic wing to succeed.

Maybe. But given the disdain that some on this very forum have shown recently for playing to the middle, I'm not so sure. The fringes generate the excitement in a primary. No one is going to get enthusiastic about Biden. I could see this devolve into a competition to see who can go furthest left, as of course you suggested in the OP. I think the dem base is ready for an all out trip that way.

 

[meridian]

It's like they want him to get re-elected

Who are "they", Warren and Harris or the Democrats?
If the latter, you are dead wrong since there's a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination. If the former, then it doesn't matter since there is a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination!

 

[Hank Reardon]

Who are "they", Warren and Harris or the Democrats?
If the latter, you are dead wrong since there's a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination. If the former, then it doesn't matter since there is a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination!

We all said the same thing about Trump.

 

[meridian]

We all said the same thing about Trump.

True, unfortunately!

 

[toastedbread]

Who are "they", Warren and Harris or the Democrats?
If the latter, you are dead wrong since there's a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination. If the former, then it doesn't matter since there is a snowball in Hell chance that either will win the nomination!

Harris is one of the favorites...

 

[Hank Reardon]

True, unfortunately!

I think it would be best for the Dems is if the field was relatively small by the time the actual primaries start. Having too many candidates seems to favor wildcards. I'm convinced the large bland Republican field really benefited Trump early, as he stood out as different while the rest ran together in a vanilla slush. I'd wager that if they'd started out with a Rubio/Bush/Trump trio (or pick any other two you want) that Trump would never have gained that initial traction. But I could be wrong.

But a field of 12 to start the dem primaries is going to favor someone on the outer fringes. Or so I believe.

 

[toastedbread]

I think it would be best for the Dems is if the field was relatively small by the time the actual primaries start. Having too many candidates seems to favor wildcards. I'm convinced the large bland Republican field really benefited Trump early, as he stood out as different while the rest ran together in a vanilla slush. I'd wager that if they'd started out with a Rubio/Bush/Trump trio (or pick any other two you want) that Trump would never have gained that initial traction. But I could be wrong.

But a field of 12 to start the dem primaries is going to favor someone on the outer fringes. Or so I believe.

I see a bunch of very progressive candidates and a couple of moderates. That heavily favors the moderates imo. I'm not a big fan of the expanded field though. I think it's going to turn into a shit show.

 

[Rockfish1]

Maybe. But given the disdain that some on this very forum have shown recently for playing to the middle, I'm not so sure. The fringes generate the excitement in a primary. No one is going to get enthusiastic about Biden. I could see this devolve into a competition to see who can go furthest left, as of course you suggested in the OP. I think the dem base is ready for an all out trip that way.

I don’t know what you mean by “playing to the middle”. If you mean opposing broadly popular policies that would help ordinary people — as the centristy centrists do — then I certainly disdain that.

No one ever seems to worry that Republicans will go too far. Even now that they’ve elected an unfit corrupt pussy-grabbing racist imbecile and possible Russian agent, the overriding concern among all the Very Serious People is that Democrats will do something kooky. This is why we can’t have nice things.

 

[toastedbread]

I don’t know what you mean by “playing to the middle”. If you mean opposing broadly popular policies that would help ordinary people — as the centristy centrists do — then I certainly disdain that.

No one ever seems to worry that Republicans will go too far. Even now that they’ve elected an unfit corrupt pussy-grabbing racist imbecile and possible Russian agent, the overriding concern among all the Very Serious People is that Democrats will do something kooky. This is why we can’t have nice things.

Its that big S word. Socialism. Causes people to crap their pants faster than a T-rex.

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

Harris is one of the favorites...

My thought as well, in fact I would call her THE favorite,

Although the Bern train has only just left the station.

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

I don’t know what you mean by “playing to the middle”. If you mean opposing broadly popular policies that would help ordinary people — as the centristy centrists do — then I certainly disdain that.

Your broadly popular policies are only popular on their face. They don't hold up under scrutiny or when explained thoroughly.

https://slate.com/business/2019/01/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-plan-is-actually-unpopular.html

Sorry bud. You're a radical, as much as you don't want to believe it.

 

[wiede]

Its that big S word. Socialism. Causes people to crap their pants faster than a T-rex.

The same folks that love their social security and Medicare? Asking for a friend.

 

[twenty02]

I don’t know what you mean by “playing to the middle”. If you mean opposing broadly popular policies that would help ordinary people — as the centristy centrists do — then I certainly disdain that.

No one ever seems to worry that Republicans will go too far. Even now that they’ve elected an unfit corrupt pussy-grabbing racist imbecile and possible Russian agent, the overriding concern among all the Very Serious People is that Democrats will do something kooky. This is why we can’t have nice things.

I wouldn't think slavery reparations would fit the bill of broadly popular.

 

[meridian]

Harris is one of the favorites...

The favorite is Biden. I know he has not declared it but he will in time.

 

[meridian]

I wouldn't think slavery reparations would fit the bill of broadly popular.

I agree. That happened over 150 years ago, and there aren't many who are over 150.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Its that big S word. Socialism. Causes people to crap their pants faster than a T-rex.

I liked this because it was funny... Is that really a saying?

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I wouldn't think slavery reparations would fit the bill of broadly popular.

Some dinosaurs just don't get it

 

[Hank Reardon]

I don’t know what you mean by “playing to the middle”. If you mean opposing broadly popular policies that would help ordinary people — as the centristy centrists do — then I certainly disdain that.

No one ever seems to worry that Republicans will go too far. Even now that they’ve elected an unfit corrupt pussy-grabbing racist imbecile and possible Russian agent, the overriding concern among all the Very Serious People is that Democrats will do something kooky. This is why we can’t have nice things.

If you say so. I’ll watch with interest as those proposing these Broadly Popular Policies sweep to victory in 2020. Broadly popular as they are.

 

[toastedbread]

I liked this because it was funny... Is that really a saying?

No clue... i made it up as i typed it.

 

[toastedbread]

I wouldn't think slavery reparations would fit the bill of broadly popular.

In a democratic primary it would. 20%+ of registered dems are black. I would imagine a lot of young white support reparations as well. Astute political move.

 

[Rockfish1]

I wouldn't think slavery reparations would fit the bill of broadly popular.

Me either.

 

[Rockfish1]

If you say so. I’ll watch with interest as those proposing these Broadly Popular Policies sweep to victory in 2020. Broadly popular as they are.

If you support cutting Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, you aren't "playing to the middle." If you oppose raising taxes on the wealthy, you aren't "playing to the middle." If you reject the notion that it's government's job to help people get health care, you aren't "playing to the middle."

It's Democrats who are "playing to the middle" on all of this, yet you claim Democrats don't play to the middle.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

No clue... i made it up as i typed it.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Its that big S word. Socialism. Causes people to crap their pants faster than a T-rex.

Which goes to show people have zero understanding of what true socialism is.

 

[Hank Reardon]

In a democratic primary it would. 20%+ of registered dems are black. I would imagine a lot of young white support reparations as well. Astute political move.

But I think this goes back to the original point. That is, the pandering required to gain the nomination is what might make them undetectable in the general election.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

But I think this goes back to the original point. That is, the pandering required to gain the nomination is what might make them undetectable in the general election.

It worked just fine for Trump. He promised everything to everyone and 63 million idiots fell for it.

 

[Rockfish1]

But I think this goes back to the original point. That is, the pandering required to gain the nomination is what might make them undetectable in the general election.

Yet somehow right-wing pandering is never a problem.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Yet somehow right-wing pandering is never a problem.

That’s different

 

[twenty02]

It worked just fine for Trump. He promised everything to everyone and 63 million idiots fell for it.

Populism is a powerful and dangerous animal. We had two running last time....one won, the other almost won the Dem nomination. Now it's the soup du juor.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Populism....

You misspelled Broadly Popular Policies.

 

[Rockfish1]

You misspelled Broadly Popular Policies.

I notice that you’ve got only snark and never substance on this point.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

The race to out-pander others to the furthest edges of left-wing nonsense is going to be crazy.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...tions-for-black-americans-affected-by-slavery

Sheer lunacy.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

But I think this goes back to the original point. That is, the pandering required to gain the nomination is what might make them undetectable in the general election.

I will laugh so hard if one of these lunatics win the nomination

 

[Hank Reardon]

I will laugh so hard if one of these lunatics win the nomination

I'd not take much satisfaction at seeing a nominee destined to give us 4 more years of Donald Trump. And if the process on the Dem side turns into a race to out-Bernie Bernie, then that's what will happen.

 

[Univee2]

I know the residents of this forum disagree with me on this, but this is the sort of thing that will get Trump re-elected. The Dems will end up picking the looniest toon-maker from the bin.

One solution to the problem is to fast-track an amendment to the Constitution that no president can be 70 or older on the day he or she or it is inaugurated.

The following candidates and their age on Inauguration Day in 2021:

- Bernie Sanders : 79
- Joe Biden : 78
- Donald Trump : 74
- Hilary Clinton : 73
- Elizabeth Warren : 71

The net catches Trump and leaves the door open for some degree of normalcy to return. Anybody willing to make this four-for-one trade?

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

One solution to the problem is to fast-track an amendment to the Construction that no president can be 70 or older on the day he or she or it is inaugurated.

The following candidates and their age on Inauguration Day in 2020:

- Bernie Sanders : 79
- Joe Biden : 78
- Donald Trump : 74
- Hilary Clinton : 73
- Elizabeth Warren : 71

The net catches Trump and leaves the door open for some degree of normalcy to return. Anybody willing to make this four-for-one trade?

It's somewhat surprising that this idea hasn't happened. There are many studies that show that cognitive decline begins in the 45-55 range. By 70, one is in no shape to command the greatest nation on earth.