• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

The difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats let specifics get in the way of a good message. How we pay for shit literally doesn't matter at this stage. Messaging does. Hell, it's how Buttigieg has been able to gain so much ground on the other candidates. There is no "there" there in Buttigieg's policy proposals. It's just great messaging that appeals to midwestern Boomer rubes (and Ph).

That's how M4A has gotten as popular as it is.
 
The problem is way more people think they are in the middle class than are actually in it.

Yep. Somehow Republicans win on both sides of this. They do "tax cuts for the middle class" that primarily cut taxes for the wealthy and well-to-do people who think they're middle class. But if Democrats tried to do actual tax cuts for the middle class focused on households earning below $80K a year, the households making $150K+ who think they're middle class raise hell against the Democrats.
 
That's how M4A has gotten as popular as it is.

That's literally the point that I'm trying to make. Buttigieg doesn't have anything beyond "this is too ambitious"-messaging that plays really well with the boomer and up crowds, as well as with younger moderates.

When Biden, Sanders, and Warren press him to explain in fairly granular detail on how he can expand healthcare access through policy, which I'm assuming is going to happen in the next debate (since he was such a raging dickhead towards Sanders and Warren in the last one), he will fall flat on his face.

Like I pointed out in my post to itc, we - educated voters - know how we pay for this stuff already. It's not like anything would change for an M4A-type program. This shouldn't be this hard of a concept to understand.
 
Last edited:
You are freely admitting that the GOP would be lying with these ads right? And your premise seems to be that the ads will work, even though they are lies. So if that is the case, why wouldn't they run the same ads against Biden or Mayor Pete or whatever?

It's not a lie when both Bernie and Liz are saying that they want to eliminate the private health care industry.

If all republicans have to do is run ads informing the populace what leftist policy's mean, then you are running on unpopular policies.
 
Against Warren and Bernie this ad will go on steroids.

Others will be able to say, "We are trying to fix it."

The point is that they are branding all Dem positions as the same so they can attack them all with similar ads, regardless of the candidate.
 
The point is that they are branding all Dem positions as the same so they can attack them all with similar ads, regardless of the candidate.

TITCR

Is it really that hard for some folks on here to understand?

Almost all of us have all lived through the last three decades of Republican campaign fuckery. Why are we pretending like 2020 will be any different?
 
That's literally the point that I'm trying to make. Buttigieg doesn't have anything beyond "this is too ambitious"-messaging that plays really well with the boomer and up crowds, as well as with younger moderates.

When Biden, Sanders, and Warren press him to explain in fairly granular detail on how he can expand healthcare access through policy, which I'm assuming is going to happen in the next debate (since he was such a raging dickhead towards Sanders and Warren in the last one), he will fall flat on his face.

Like I pointed out in my post to itc, we - educated voters - know how we pay for this stuff already. It's not like anything would change for an M4A-type program. This shouldn't be this hard of a concept to understand.

It plays well because implementing it is literally impossible even in a best case scenario where she can implement a wealth tax. Spoiler alert she can't because it is unconstitutional and if it wasn't it would be effectively impossible collect revenue in that manner. See every other country who tried.

Of course Liz knows this, but she is ok deliberately misleading the American people.

So people who aren't idiots are gravitating towards Pete. Makes sense.
 
The point is that they are branding all Dem positions as the same so they can attack them all with similar ads, regardless of the candidate.

Which is why Pete would run such a great campaign, because he could effectively cut through republican bullshit. Instead of candidates tossing them softballs to hit out of the park.
 
It plays well because implementing it is literally impossible even in a best case scenario where she can implement a wealth tax. Spoiler alert she can't because it is unconstitutional and if it wasn't it would be effectively impossible collect revenue in that manner. See every other country who tried.

Of course Liz knows this, but she is ok deliberately misleading the American people.

So people who aren't idiots are gravitating towards Pete. Makes sense.

Did you take "socialism 101" with sailor, Whatamount?
 
No, but I know a charlatan and Bernie, Trump, and Liz are all rowing the same boat. Populists are the absolute worst. Left or right.

You feel comfortable equating Sanders, Trump, and Warren? You are honestly asserting this and definitely not trolling when you do so?
 
"Misleading the American people." The donald and fox news say "heeeeeeey"
 
Back
Top