• 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

Shooshmoo said:
Yeah, I'm hurt. I make a concerted effort to not have problems with rj. That changes right now.
Click to expand...

As I said, it was off the top of my head and I'm oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllldddddddddddddddddd

many apologies.....

P.S. One reason I didn't go back through all the threads for a complete list is I didn't want create mental health issues for townie and other haters when they realize that the majority of the board and I get along just fine and they are in a small minority. It was partially a public service.
 
Last edited:
According to a growing number of pundits and media talking heads like Maureen Dowd, none of these Democrats can beat Trump, so we might as well just go ahead and cancel next year's election, I guess. She added her "wisdom" in an article after the Democratic debates. I get the impression that a number of media pundits, including several so-called "liberals", would actually be happy with another Trump victory, as they could continue to pontificate on Dear Leader's chaotic administration for another four years.

Link: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/maureen-dowd-has-game-changing-trump-doomed-democrats-to-irrelevance-1.4018833
 
This could go several places—I’ll put it here. Decent reporting/analysis—short on solutions. Not sure what next steps are anticipated beyond winning elections and “being prepared” for confrontation with Republicans.

Best to read onsite but I’ll copy below.

Republicans Don’t Believe in Democracy: Do Democrats understand what they’re facing?


Item: Last week Republicans in the North Carolina House used the occasion of 9/11 to call a surprise vote, passing a budget bill with a supermajority to override the Democratic governor’s veto. They were able to do this only because most Democrats were absent, some of them attending commemorative events; the Democratic leader had advised members that they didn’t need to be present because, he says, he was assured there would be no votes that morning.

Item: Also last week, Representative Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a subpoena to the acting director of national intelligence, who has refused to turn over a whistle-blower complaint that the intelligence community’s inspector general found credible and of “urgent concern.” We don’t know what the whistle-blower was warning about, but we do know that the law is clear: Such complaints must be referred to Congress, no exceptions allowed.

On the surface, these stories may seem to be about very different things. The fight in North Carolina is basically about the G.O.P.’s determination to deny health care to low-income Americans; the governor had threatened to veto any budget that didn’t expand Medicaid. The whistle-blower affair probably involves malfeasance by high government officials, quite possibly President Trump, that in some way threatens national security.

What the stories have in common, however, is that they illustrate contempt for democracy and constitutional government. Elections are supposed to have consequences, conveying power to the winners. But when Democrats win an election, the modern G.O.P. does its best to negate the results, flouting norms and, if necessary, the law to carry on as if the voters hadn’t spoken.

Thus, in 2016 the voters of North Carolina chose a Democrat to govern the state; the immediate G.O.P. response was to try to strip away most of the governor’s power. Last year Democrats won a majority of the votes for the state legislature, too, although Republicans retained control thanks to extreme gerrymandering. But they no longer have a veto-proof majority — hence last week’s power grab.

Similarly, last year America’s voters chose to give Democrats control of the House of Representatives. This still leaves Democrats without the ability to pass legislation, since Republicans control the Senate and the White House. But the House, by law, has important additional powers — the right to be informed of what’s going on in the executive branch, such as complaints by whistle-blowers, and the right to issue subpoenas demanding information relevant to governing.

The Trump administration, however, has evidently decided that none of that matters. So what if Democrats demand information they’re legally entitled to? So what if they issue subpoenas? After all, law enforcement has to be carried out by the Justice Department — and under William Barr, Justice has effectively become just another arm of the G.O.P.

This is the context in which you want to think about the latest round of revelations about Brett Kavanaugh.

First of all, we now know that the F.B.I., essentially at Republican direction, severely limited its investigation into Kavanaugh’s past. So Kavanaugh was appointed to a powerful, lifetime position without a true vetting.

Second, both Kavanaugh’s background and the circumstances of his appointment suggest that Mitch McConnell went to unprecedented lengths to create a Republican bloc on the Supreme Court that will thwart anything and everything Democrats try to accomplish, even if they do manage to take both Congress and the White House. In particular, as The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent notes, it seems extremely likely that this court will block any meaningful action on climate change.

What can Democrats do about this situation? They need to win elections, but all too often that won’t be sufficient, because they confront a Republican Party that at a basic level doesn’t accept their right to govern, never mind what the voters say. So winning isn’t enough; they also have to be prepared for that confrontation.

And surely the first step is recognizing the problem exists. Which brings me to the Democratic presidential primary race.

The leading candidates for the Democratic nomination differ considerably in both their personalities and their policy proposals, but these pale beside their differences from Donald Trump and his party. All of them are decent human beings; all would, if given the chance, move America in a notably more progressive direction.

The real chasm between the candidates is, instead, in the extent to which they get it — that is, the extent to which they understand what they’re facing in the modern G.O.P.

The big problem with Joe Biden, still the front-runner, is that he obviously doesn’t get it. He’s made it clear on many occasions that he considers Trump an aberration and believes that he could have productive, amicable relations with Republicans once Trump is gone.

Which raises the question: Even if Biden can win, is he too oblivious to govern effectively?
Click to expand...
 
 
New Yorkers waited. Let's see her get those audiences in Western PA or places with diversity. It looks like it's really down to her and Biden. She's going to have to start drawing crowds that include high numbers of people of color.

Warren also has to walk back killing private health insurance. That's a losing general election position. It gives the GOP an effective, three second slam to scare the public, "she wants to take your insurance away." It doesn't matter what the goals are or how we get there. The public will only hear "she's going to take your insurance away."

Sorry, but that is reality.
 
Yep because New Yorkers don’t count
 
They are already a lock for any Dem. She needs to be out in swing states. She needs to attract people of color and hasn't.

She needs to soften her healthcare stance or she will lose the general. Like it or not, the #1, #2, #3 and more ads will be about her "taking your healthcare away from you." This is her major, major hurdle. If she can't get over that, Trump will beat her.

No, the public won't get the nuance nor will they want to work hard enough to understand it.
 
RJKarl said:
They are already a lock for any Dem. She needs to be out in swing states. She needs to attract people of color and hasn't.

She needs to soften her healthcare stance or she will lose the general. Like it or not, the #1, #2, #3 and more ads will be about her "taking your healthcare away from you." This is her major, major hurdle. If she can't get over that, Trump will beat her.

No, the public won't get the nuance nor will they want to work hard enough to understand it.
Click to expand...

This is correct.
 
RJKarl said:
They are already a lock for any Dem. She needs to be out in swing states. She needs to attract people of color and hasn't.

She needs to soften her healthcare stance or she will lose the general. Like it or not, the #1, #2, #3 and more ads will be about her "taking your healthcare away from you." This is her major, major hurdle. If she can't get over that, Trump will beat her.

No, the public won't get the nuance nor will they want to work hard enough to understand it.
Click to expand...

But, the frustrating thing is that it's not even nuanced....Trump and McConnell actually worked to revoke health care coverage and Warren's plan will greatly expand access and coverage.
 
She could easily change to, "I'm not taking your private healthcare. Rather, every American and every American company will have the added choices of Congressional health insurance or the ability to buy into Medicare and Medicare supplements."

Regardless of what the far left wants to believe, by far, the quickest way to universal healthcare (with small or no deductible) is to make Medicare no different than any other health insurance choice. If you think small or giant companies will willingly pay 20-40% more for their share of employee insurance costs, you aren't being realistic.

Supplemental plans for current Medicare are very reasonable and eliminate co-pays and deductible. Even with these included, companies and individuals will save 20% or more.

This will effectively kill private insurance except for supplemental policies in very short order without freaking out the public. They won't even realize we will be morphing to universal coverage until they already have it.
 
My healthcare arguments are based in reality and marketing. The reality is there are over 150M Americans who have private health insurance. If you say, you are going to take that away, they will panic and vote against you. If you show them how to save massive amounts of money, they will listen.
 
Ok so don’t say “we’re going to take away your health insurance”
 
RJKarl said:
My healthcare arguments are based in reality and marketing. The reality is there are over 150M Americans who have private health insurance. If you say, you are going to take that away, they will panic and vote against you. If you show them how to save massive amounts of money, they will listen.
Click to expand...

This is kind of just playing up the GOP fear machine....cause what's happen in reality is Liberals have taken great steps to expand health coverage and make insurance more affordable, while the GOP has tried, desperately, the scuttle the Dems effort and retract coverage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top