• 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

If any bernie bro, warren widow, pete pal, or treasonous tulsi fan takes their vote and goes home rather than kicking faux 45 out of office they are a terrible person.
 
I must have missed this period of time when Democrats were known as the party of fiscal responsibility.

This fits Pete's mantra of reclaiming values that we've ceded to Republicans (e.g. freedom, security, democracy) even though we've been doing them and Republicans have not.

People are hyperventilating about everything Pete does. Slow down and think for a second. I'm going to guess there's also more context that makes this statement even more innocuous than it seems.

Here's a good response to that tweet that explains how foolish the anger about this is:

 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
I must have missed this period of time when Democrats were known as the party of fiscal responsibility.

This fits Pete's mantra of reclaiming ideas that we've ceded to Republicans even though we've been doing them and Republicans have not.
Click to expand...

That's not what Republicans tell their supporters and you know that. Pete trying on the "deficit hawk" hat fits his identity as a politician thus far in his career. Definitely not odious or craven, but certainly not progressive in any way, shape, or form.
 
I'm not sure what I'd expect most candidates to say when asked about the deficit. Are they supposed to start talking about modern monetary policy and quantitative easing?

Regardless, it's a bad time to be team austerity when that's the conservative party line in the big British election next week and Mitch McConnell's stated plan for 2020.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
But he hasn't shifted to a moderate/conservative Dem, Chris has made that abundantly clear.
Click to expand...


Because his plan to pay for it:

1. Is to reverse the corporate tax cuts, which would actually make corporate tax rates less competitive than the tax rates before for the trump tax cuts, due to a variety of changes that accompanied those tax cuts?

2. Significantly increase top tax rates on individuals.

That's moderate or conservative?


You Strickland and Townie are so out to lunch in your progressive twitter fueled La-La land that you don't even think about what you post.
 
Strickland33 said:
That's not what Republicans tell their supporters and you know that. Pete trying on the "deficit hawk" hat fits his identity as a politician thus far in his career. Definitely not odious or craven, but certainly not progressive in any way, shape, or form.
Click to expand...

What's not what Republicans tell their supporters?
 
Strickland33 said:
That's not what Republicans tell their supporters and you know that. Pete trying on the "deficit hawk" hat fits his identity as a politician thus far in his career. Definitely not odious or craven, but certainly not progressive in any way, shape, or form.
Click to expand...

both bernie and warren have said/claimed their policies would be paid for, which is what he's saying
 
christ, not every thing a person is quoted saying out of context is a fucking dog whistle, guys
 
PhDeac said:
I must have missed this period of time when Democrats were known as the party of fiscal responsibility.

This fits Pete's mantra of reclaiming values that we've ceded to Republicans (e.g. freedom, security, democracy) even though we've been doing them and Republicans have not.

People are hyperventilating about everything Pete does. Slow down and think for a second. I'm going to guess there's also more context that makes this statement even more innocuous than it seems.

Here's a good response to that tweet that explains how foolish the anger about this is:

Click to expand...

This is veering into seriously vs literally territory. Do we take him at his word and debate the issues he's talking about or do we ignore his words and talk about the issues irrespective of where he may eventually stand?
 
ChrisL68 said:
Because his plan to pay for it:

1. Is to reverse the corporate tax cuts, which would actually make corporate tax rates less competitive than the tax rates before for the trump tax cuts, due to a variety of changes that accompanied those tax cuts?

2. Significantly increase top tax rates on individuals.

That's moderate or conservative?


You Strickland and Townie are so out to lunch in your progressive twitter fueled La-La land that you don't even think about what you post.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your concern. I don't really use Twitter, though, so most of my perspective just comes from reading what the candidates actually say in journalism or on their respective campaign pages. It's easily accessible information for anybody that actually wants to talk policy instead of partisan talking points (see quoted text above).

PhDeac said:
What's not what Republicans tell their supporters?
Click to expand...

You're being obtuse. Republicans rose to prominence during the Obama era using similar deficit hawk rhetoric.

ImTheCaptain said:
both bernie and warren have said/claimed their policies would be paid for, which is what he's saying
Click to expand...

You should tell ChrisL that. I'm familiar with their plans because both are accessible in a few forms to everybody but Pete evidently. Either that, or his comments are in bad faith. I was told that I wasn't allowed to claim that they're in bad faith because Republicans are evil or something.

ImTheCaptain said:
christ, not every thing a person is quoted saying out of context is a fucking dog whistle, guys
Click to expand...

I agree. It's not a dog whistle and I never claimed that it was. He's just acting the part of a deficit hawk. You're the only one talking about dog whistling from what I can tell.
 
Strickland33 said:
I agree. It's not a dog whistle and I never claimed that it was. He's just acting the part of a deficit hawk. You're the only one talking about dog whistling from what I can tell.
Click to expand...

oh please - "acting the part of hawk" is just another way for you to say "pete's a DINO"
 
TownieDeac said:
This is veering into seriously vs literally territory. Do we take him at his word and debate the issues he's talking about or do we ignore his words and talk about the issues irrespective of where he may eventually stand?
Click to expand...

That's crazy talk. Take him seriously and literally. Just don't pretend he's saying something he isn't. He's saying Democrats don't have a rep for fiscal responsibility. That's true. Why are people going nuts about it? Again, feel free to debate whether or not we should prioritize debt/deficits vs. MMT. That's an important debate we should be having. But don't pretend he's making a pro-austerity argument when his plans are for raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for increased federal spending.
 
Pete says everything he has proposed is paid for, saying we should think about deficits and debt when making plans. Bernie bro’s say all of his and Warren’s plans are also paid for, guess they thought of deficits and debt when they made their plans. Why did they think of deficit and debt if nobody cares about it and it’s just a republican political narrative?
 
Strickland33 said:
You're being obtuse. Republicans rose to prominence during the Obama era using similar deficit hawk rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Yeah. So what's in my post was not what Republicans tell their supporters?

Read the tweet I posted. Pete's consistently talked about how Republicans promote themselves as deficit hawks but they're not.

I'm trying to understand your point. You seem to be claiming Pete is presenting himself as a deficit hawk or trying to change the Dem party rep to fit the reality of what Clinton and Obama actually did.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Pete says everything he has proposed is paid for, saying we should think about deficits and debt when making plans. Bernie bro’s say all of his and Warren’s plans are also paid for, guess they thought of deficits and debt when they made their plans. Why did they think of deficit and debt if nobody cares about it and it’s just a republican political narrative?
Click to expand...

This. Warren moved heaven and earth to show her plans won't add to the deficit and no one questioned her progressive bonafides. Pete's just saying we should change the party rep to fit what Dems are already doing.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
oh please - "acting the part of hawk" is just another way for you to say "pete's a DINO"
Click to expand...

How is that related to dog whistling? I haven't been shy about noting Pete's conservative rhetoric on here. It seems like more random people on the internet are starting to agree with me? I'm sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable.
 
PhDeac said:
Yeah. So what's in my post was not what Republicans tell their supporters?

Read the tweet I posted. Pete's consistently talked about how Republicans promote themselves as deficit hawks but they're not.

I'm trying to understand your point. You seem to be claiming Pete is presenting himself as a deficit hawk or trying to change the Dem party rep to fit the reality of what Clinton and Obama actually did.
Click to expand...

What? I'm saying that Pete is telling his supporters what Republicans tell their supporters. Regardless of whether you think that Pete is portraying himself as a deficit hawk, he is signaling to his supporters that he will be and that his primary opponents are fiscally irresponsible.

My point is really clear, man. You're the one splitting hairs. Pete is moving to the right in his rhetoric months before the election. That's been my point since he started pulling this shit before the last debate. Whether this move is reflective of his "actual" politics (and he actually is a DINO) or is a cynical strategy to siphon off voters from Warren/Sanders/Biden - I don't know and, frankly, don't care. He's not my ideal candidate. I don't have to love him, but I'll vote for him in November if, heaven forbid, he gets the nomination.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Pete says everything he has proposed is paid for, saying we should think about deficits and debt when making plans. Bernie bro’s say all of his and Warren’s plans are also paid for, guess they thought of deficits and debt when they made their plans. Why did they think of deficit and debt if nobody cares about it and it’s just a republican political narrative?
Click to expand...

The Republican political narrative is that only Republicans care about the deficit and debt.

They shout it over and over as they blow holes in the deficit.
 
Strickland33 said:
What? I'm saying that Pete is telling his supporters what Republicans tell their supporters. Regardless of whether you think that Pete is portraying himself as a deficit hawk, he is signaling to his supporters that he will be and that his primary opponents are fiscally irresponsible.

My point is really clear, man. You're the one splitting hairs. Pete is moving to the right in his rhetoric months before the election. That's been my point since he started pulling this shit before the last debate. Whether this move is reflective of his "actual" politics (and he actually is a DINO) or is a cynical strategy to siphon off voters from Warren/Sanders/Biden - I don't know and, frankly, don't care. He's not my ideal candidate. I don't have to love him, but I'll vote for him in November if, heaven forbid, he gets the nomination.
Click to expand...

"deficit hawk !!!" vs "caring about the deficit"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top