2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

[Shooshmoo]

Last I checked, this thread is titled 2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees. If it's not, then let me know. I can't see the GIFs that you posted because they don't show up when I'm viewing the boards on my computer. I'm sure they are great GIFs, though.

Yeah -- they were amazing gifs. Completely on point.

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

I like Brown, and I can see why others can rally around him. He’s also interesting in he pushes the narrative that the biggest thing for a politician is messaging and engagement. He’s one of the more liberal people while hailing from the great shit rust state of Ohio, not exactly known as a very blue state.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

This is fair. It's not an obvious flaw in the way that "Steve King is a racist" is a flaw. But I don't think it's just ideological either. I think the vast majority of scholarship would suggest that he is objectively wrong on the issue and those types of policies (where he shares considerable overlap with Trump) would actually make things worse. That is enough for me to call it a flaw.

The problem with the reliance on scholarship to broadly promote globalism over protectionism, is that scholarship doesn't address the correspondent inequality, market constriction and monopolization that goes along with global trade. GDP and the avg price of goods don't pay the rent and keep private dairy farms in business. The economic benefits of globalism are vastly funneled to the wealthiest. We cant continue to blanket fuck over blue collar and rural citizens just to help 401k and retirement funds. On top of that, it's dishonest to portray a liberal protectionist such as Bernie to be completely anti-trade. A shift towards protectionism in this current economy is a reasonable reaction. You can disagree with protectionism without exaggerating its extremity.

 

[Strickland33]

The problem with the reliance on scholarship to broadly promote globalism over protectionism, is that scholarship doesn't address the correspondent inequality, market constriction and monopolization that goes along with global trade. GDP and the avg price of goods don't pay the rent and keep private dairy farms in business. The economic benefits of globalism are vastly funneled to the wealthiest. We can't use 401k and retirement funds as an excuse to blanket fuck over blue collar and rural citizens. On top of that, it's dishonest to portray a liberal protectionist such as Bernie to be completely anti-trade. A shift towards protectionism in this current economy is a reasonable reaction.

can we not use the word "globalism?" you're referring to globalization, i think. globalism - despite having a basis in legitimate political theory - has become a nationalist, particularly white nationalist, dogwhistle.

 

[JuiceCrewAllStar]

I'm with Strick here (I think), there's a place for a global vision for labor and trade on the left

isolationism feels short-sighted and American-centric in some zero-sum capacity

there needs to be an accounting for uneven availability of resources globally, especially natural resources -- specialization is not a bad thing

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

I'm with Strick here (I think), there's a place for a global vision for labor and trade on the left

isolationism feels short-sighted and American-centric in some zero-sum capacity

there needs to be an accounting for uneven availability of resources globally, especially natural resources -- specialization is not a bad thing

Specialization (as opposition to protectionism) within the context of this debate is Darwinian. The global competition for ever increasing efficiency and low production costs grinds labor in the gears and ignores the humanity of production.

 

[JuiceCrewAllStar]

I hear you, but there there needs to be some account for the fact that you can't grow shit in certain parts of the world and that some places are great for harvesting solar energy, etc.

It's sticky, but there needs to be some accounting for resource-driven specialization

 

[ImTheCaptain]

I don't think any police officers should be proud of their "public service" because I don't believe the institution of policing as a public service should exist.

What if we call them “Crime Abolitionists”

 

[MHBDemon]

What if we call them “Crime Abolitionists”

Nailed it. No but seriously if cops cared about crime they’d be much more concerned about the murderers and rapists and wife beaters in their own departments.

 

[MHBDemon]

No shite. Anarchy and the Wild West. If that were the case, I would pack heat, and I don't like guns.

The opposite of having a violent, militarized police is not anarchy and the wild west. You are just telling on yourself and your privilege.

 

[RChildress107]

Ooof. Ok. Most is more than 50% -- so you think 50% or fewer police officers should be proud of their public service and do their jobs the right way. I can't get on board with that.

Pretty much. Well over 50% of police officers have allowed a small-ish minority (I hope) of police officers to do their job the wrong way without consequence. That’s not something to be proud of and it’s not doing their job the right way.

 

[Strickland33]

Pretty much. Well over 50% of police officers have allowed a small-ish minority (I hope) of police officers to do their job the wrong way without consequence. That’s not something to be proud of and it’s not doing their job the right way.

It sounds like the institution of policing may be a problem.

 

[Strickland33]

I may be misunderstanding you here, but you don’t have to worry about the Junebugs of the world supporting Trump. They are either voting third party (likely libertarian) or, depending on the donkey candidate, for the donkey, as much as it pains me to even consider it.

You are understanding me correctly, I think. Wouldn't you be more likely to vote for a Democratic candidate whose record has been thoroughly vetted? I guess it depends on where their record falls on an ideological spectrum, but I still think that the #nevertrump right, the mythical center, and the far left are more likely to vote for a Democratic candidate who doesn't have glaring issues/inconsistencies in their record. I'm less worried about the itc's and twmd's of the world who will vote for whoever has a D next to their name just like I'm less worried about the R's who will vote for whoever runs with an R next to their name.

 

[RChildress107]

I may be misunderstanding you here, but you don’t have to worry about the Junebugs of the world supporting Trump. They are either voting third party (likely libertarian) or, depending on the donkey candidate, for the donkey, as much as it pains me to even consider it.

True. The Junebugs of the world only support the politicians who support and enable Trump. That’s way better.

 

[Deacfreak07]

I may be misunderstanding you here, but you don’t have to worry about the Junebugs of the world supporting Trump. They are either voting third party (likely libertarian) or, depending on the donkey candidate, for the donkey, as much as it pains me to even consider it.

Lol, ok.

 

[Deacfreak07]

Explain

Ginsburg will be replaced in the next term in the WH if she makes it that far. That will be a sweet carrot to dangle in front of folks such as yourself to convince you not to make a “principled” vote for Gary Johnson or whoever that General was that jhmd patted himself on the back about pretending to vote for.

 

[bym051d]

You aren’t paying attention to my posts. I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 and I’m not voting for him in 2020. I would rather Ginsburg be replaced with a clone of herself that doesn’t age than vote for him.

Kudos for recognizing one of the greatest justices of all-time.

 

[Deacfreak07]

You aren’t paying attention to my posts. I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 and I’m not voting for him in 2020. I would rather Ginsburg be replaced with a clone of herself that doesn’t age than vote for him.

lol, ok

 

[Deacfreak07]

It’s just that we hear from so many pubs on here how they didn’t vote for trump in 2016, but he carried 92% of the party vote. Obviously it stands to reason that some members of the brave silent majority would be represented on here.

 

[IamThunderbolt]

So, Julian Castro anybody?






Nope?






Carry on.