• 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

AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Once again I will point out that Harris is the 2nd-most liberal senator behind Warren, so calling her “establishment” and claiming she is “co-opting left language” is just patently untrue. Criticize her prosecution record, that will keep you busy for a while, but save the “she’s Clinton 2.0!” pearl-clutching for the sailors and moons of the world.

Those are fair claims for Booker though, considering his Wall St connections.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure metrics of most "liberal" from, which media outlet?, are really what we should be using here to counter my point.
 
You can't say "my number one client has always been the people" when its patently untrue.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Only positive I see from this extremely over crowded field is that maybe it prevents any one candidate from building a huge lead in endorsements before the primary. I think Harris is still the obvious establishment darling, but ber opponents dont seem discouraged.
Click to expand...

MHBDemon said:
I'm not sure metrics of most "liberal" from, which media outlet?, are really what we should be using here to counter my point.
Click to expand...

I’m using a combination of data from 538, Pew, and referencing a few ideology scoring lists I have been able to find. Interestingly, since I last checked, Harris is now #1 most liberal in the Senate based on crucial voting record according to ProgressivePunch. (www.progressivepunch.org/whatIsProgScore.htm for more information on what a crucial vote is). 538 still has her #2, and I tend to agree that Warren is more liberal. VoteView also has Harris second to Warren.

These are all ongoing calculations, but all signs point to Harris, Warren, and Sanders as all having pretty stellar progressive voting track records in Congress. Again, criticize all of her AG background to the furthest extent, but stop pretending she’s some fake liberal coming to steal the nomination from a “true progressive”.
 
I really recognize that Kamala Harris has a very progressive voting record, but I believe voting record is an incomplete method of measuring progressiveness, especially as it relates to showing independence from Democratic establishment campaign financing.

What I want to see from Kamala Harris is for her to take ownership of a radical agenda and show the willingness to resist entrenched corporate political influence. How can you trust a political candidate who is constantly triangulating between a populist movement and a conservative donor base?
 
She isn't radical enough of a loon that will ressurect the Pub party after Trump.
 
ChrisL68 said:
She isn't radical enough of a loon that will ressurect the Pub party after Trump.
Click to expand...

Meh, anyone with a D by their name will be portrayed as a radical on Fox, Russia Today and One America. Hell, if Booker gets the nomination and is elected, he'll be left of the radical Kenyan who can't run again. And his hue will also probably be objectionable.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Fuck you, thats not what I said. Theres plenty of room for you to disagree with me without bullshitting.
Click to expand...

you guys talk all day about how a candidate's record (job or voting) is the indication of their political 'honesty' and when someone points out that Harris is actually pretty progressive based on her record you flinch and says "yeah but"
 
ChrisL68 said:
She isn't radical enough of a loon that will ressurect the Pub party after Trump.
Click to expand...

You forget that Pelosi just said publicly that the US needs a strong republican party, and you don't have to look any farther than W and McCain to see how the establishment will actually drive the rehabilitation of the republican party. So yeah, bad take.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
you guys talk all day about how a candidate's record (job or voting) is the indication of their political 'honesty' and when someone points out that Harris is actually pretty progressive based on her record you flinch and says "yeah but"
Click to expand...
When someone is running for President my expecations for them are different, yeah. You can't honestly say that just because Harris has a progressive voting record, that makes her an equivalent leftist with AOC or Bernie. Bernie is on record having same policy stances 35 years ago, while Kamala started supporting M4A this month. They arent the same. I believe Elizabeth Warren is more progressive as well.
 
BiffTannen said:
Nah, just trying to get elected by appealing to a wide range of voters and raising money for a campaign.
Click to expand...

Is this helpful #analysis? This is what everyone does. The point is not that she shouldn't do it. The point is that it is transparent, and not genuine, because it contradicts her time as a prosecutor.
 
Really ? Does Elizabeth Warren appeal to a wide range ofcorporate interests as thelesser of many evils ?

Who's the last president elected who Corporate America wasn't at least somewhat comfortable with ?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
When someone is running for President my expecations for them are different, yeah. You can't honestly say that just because Harris has a progressive voting record, that makes her an equivalent leftist with AOC or Bernie. Bernie is on record having same policy stances 35 years ago, while Kamala started supporting M4A this month. They arent the same. I believe Elizabeth Warren is more progressive as well.
Click to expand...

no, i didn't attempt to equate her with [M&M approved] leftists. It's just that the idea of elect-ability is such an anathema it's hard to take you seriously sometimes.
 
BiffTannen said:
Really ? Does Elizabeth Warren appeal to a wide range ofcorporate interests as thelesser of many evils ?

Who's the last president elected who Corporate America wasn't at least somewhat comfortable with ?
Click to expand...

Well Obama, but for some reason I don’t think it was because of his economic policies
 
ImTheCaptain said:
no, i didn't attempt to equate her with [M&M approved] leftists. It's just that the idea of elect-ability is such an anathema it's hard to take you seriously sometimes.
Click to expand...
I honestly have no idea what you're referring to. I don't ever use the term "electability", because it's so subjective as to be nearly meaningless. I gave you specific criticisms of Harris, so why don't you address what I posted, instead of ranting about "electability", which I didnt even mention.
 
cville deac said:
Meh, anyone with a D by their name will be portrayed as a radical on Fox, Russia Today and One America. Hell, if Booker gets the nomination and is elected, he'll be left of the radical Kenyan who can't run again. And his hue will also probably be objectionable.
Click to expand...

But that will be a harder and harder sell without some big snafu. Get Bernie in either being totally ineffective getting anything passed or worse being effective with the economic turmoil it will cause, and it will really do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top