US Politics XII: shutting down Interference until @U2 agrees to pay for a firewall

[namkcuR]

Rolling Stone has published a ranking of all the candidates and potential candidates so far.

This is the link to the whole article - https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/2020-democrat-candidates-771735/ - but I'll post the top ten right here:

1. Harris
2. Warren
3. Sherrod Brown
4. Beto
5. Biden
6. Sanders
7. Gillibrand
8. Klobuchar
9. Castro
10. Booker

 

[Irvine511]

So are we just going to outlaw private medical insurance? What’s this M4A going to look like?

 

[LuckyNumber7]

But what specific policy positions are making you say that? I'm really asking. I want to know.



And I totally disagree about Hillary. The right is completely beyond-help over-the-top irrational about her, and seeing them campaign against her again would be unbearable and insufferable. I've already seen that movie and have no interest in seeing it again.

I could sit and go through his positions that make him a soft centrist but I’m not going to do that. You know fine well that’s what he is. What petty attempts he’s made to “make for the left while the going is good” makes me roll my eyes. He’s a farce.

And the point you make about the right and Hillary makes me adore the idea. Based upon your response, im not sure you understood my post. Clinton is only barely left of Booker, and that’s after many sharp left turns from her past.

But boy, would she be a middle finger right in the mouth and down the throat of those deplorables if she became president in 2020. That would be some beautiful justice.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

So are we just going to outlaw private medical insurance? What’s this M4A going to look like?

Yes please. Insurance (of all types) is a fucking scam and the notion that we are lawfully obliged to have it in so many fields is a joke. Lawfully obliged insurance is literally a marriage of preying on fear and gross capitalism that leads to accidental poorly planned socialism, except the beneficiaries are some company rather than the people who pay into the system.

Why the fuck should there be a company that makes money off of literally doing nothing but collecting your money against your will and redistributing it out to you but taking a massive cut? I’d prefer that being the government. At worst, that massive cut is probably turned into government bureaucracy and inefficiency, and probably employs like 3x more people.

 

[namkcuR]

I could sit and go through his positions that make him a soft centrist but I’m not going to do that. You know fine well that’s what he is. What petty attempts he’s made to “make for the left while the going is good” makes me roll my eyes. He’s a farce.

And the point you make about the right and Hillary makes me adore the idea. Based upon your response, im not sure you understood my post. Clinton is only barely left of Booker, and that’s after many sharp left turns from her past.

But boy, would she be a middle finger right in the mouth and down the throat of those deplorables if she became president in 2020. That would be some beautiful justice.

I do not 'know fine well' that's what he is. I wouldn't have asked if I already knew the answer. If there are specific policy positions that bother you, say them.

I don't think Hilary would win. That's the point.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I do not 'know fine well' that's what he is. I wouldn't have asked if I already knew the answer. If there are specific policy positions that bother you, say them.

I don't think Hilary would win. That's the point.

You literally called him “too centrist for most” like two posts ago. I’m on my phone and don’t really want to text out a whole Cory Booker schpeel, most of which is documented but some of which is impression-based from how he presents himself on challenging issues, and on his timeliness.

Would Hillary win? Anything can happen. I don’t think the democrats stand any better of a chance with Booker, or honestly any of the current candidates that aren’t named Joe Biden minus ten years in age but plus the vice presidency.

Much like a re-up on a Brexit vote, I think all we need is another election to fix this. Doesn’t really matter who the candidate is. It just matters that Obama was in office for 8 years and that’s enough for opposition to collect themselves. As with Bush-to-Obama.

The difference here is incumbency. Something we can do nothing about.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Anyways, I can go more into Cory Booker tomorrow if you want.

edit: here’s this for now https://nypost.com/2018/09/07/the-cory-booker-you-see-has-always-been-an-imaginary-creation/

 

[Irvine511]

Yes please. Insurance (of all types) is a fucking scam and the notion that we are lawfully obliged to have it in so many fields is a joke. Lawfully obliged insurance is literally a marriage of preying on fear and gross capitalism that leads to accidental poorly planned socialism, except the beneficiaries are some company rather than the people who pay into the system.

Why the fuck should there be a company that makes money off of literally doing nothing but collecting your money against your will and redistributing it out to you but taking a massive cut? I’d prefer that being the government. At worst, that massive cut is probably turned into government bureaucracy and inefficiency, and probably employs like 3x more people.

that's a nice esoteric objection, but wouldn't it be easier/better to create a public option to compete against private insurance?

 

[Irvine511]

also, jesus fucking christ:

This tweet is not the first time Trump has apparently echoed plot points in the Sicario franchise while ostensibly speaking about real events at the U.S.-Mexico border. The president has also claimed that women are being taped up and trafficked via the southern border, a reality that has been disputed by immigration and human-trafficking experts . . . what Trump describes is, once again, a plot point in the Sicario franchise.


https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...I-P1cKlTJx5mROmcVd3jouhBMPjeG_qyjW665P_tGVums

 

[LuckyNumber7]

that's a nice esoteric objection, but wouldn't it be easier/better to create a public option to compete against private insurance?

No, there’s a fundamental flaw in that you’re propping public insurance up against private insurance.

There’s no doubt the private sector is far more efficient than the public sector. The government’s job isn’t to be a business. Collect taxes and supply basic services. If you want additional protections you have every right to purchase additional insurance.

I don’t want to beat the dead horse of “it works in the UK,” but it works in the UK. Beautifully.

But I’m not sure what is so esoteric about my point. Unconstrained capitalism (inclusive of the government enforcing and participating on capitalizing on its people, and inclusive of allowing large corporations to monopolize) destroys any beauty of capitalism. A monopoly destroys capitalism. Insurance companies have oligopolized (yup going with that) their industry. To think there’s competition to drive prices down is silly. There’s competition to keep prices from going up, but that’s about it.

 

[Irvine511]

Esoteric because it doesn’t seem remotely practical and such a proposal would inspire a backlash that would prevent any real change from actually taking place. Competing against government would help break up said oligopoly.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Esoteric because it doesn’t seem remotely practical and such a proposal would inspire a backlash that would prevent any real change from actually taking place. Competing against government would help break up said oligopoly.

I get what you’re saying, but I would argue that if everything right seems so impractical, then we’ve been grossly capitalized into submission. Nothing can change anymore, mostly because the problem has become stiff. Fun note, that terminology (a “stiff” problem) is used in computational sciences for when an optimization problem won’t budge despite varying the inputs.

If presidents could end slavery, if presidents could establish income taxes, if presidents could enact a draft to force military service, if presidents could yada yada, why have we stagnated so hard at this point? For better or for worse, real change doesn’t happen anymore. We are frogs who entered the water before it was boiling.


The government competing with an oligopoly is not the same as outright ending it. And like I said before, you’re arguing insurance vs insurance. Not insurance vs healthcare. We don’t have healthcare. We have a system that forces us to pay in only to guarantee that statistically more money will go in then come out. That. Is. Wrong.

 

[dabiggestu2fan]

I am glad to see that there is no global waMing going on! The president said so! Too bad there is still global warming happening!

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Excuse me... It's climate change, because we have too many stupid people who think that it it isn't got every day that there's no warning

 

[dabiggestu2fan]

Excuse me... It's climate change, because we have too many stupid people who think that it it isn't got every day that there's no warning

Oh right! Climate change! Wouldn’t want to offend anyone with that global warming nonsense.

But at least there is no global waMing

 

[dabiggestu2fan]

Well I’m off to to get my covfefe and hambarders before work. It’s going to be a long day.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Excuse me... It's climate change, because we have too many stupid people who think that it it isn't got every day that there's no warning

... if it isn't hot everyday.

Auto correct typos in posts calling other people stupid are the best kind of typos.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

DaveC went to a book signing

 

[anitram]

That heckler is literally all of us.

I don't like Cory Booker for policy reasons and personality reasons. His school reforms were concerning, his very public vote against the affordable pharmaceuticals bill, whatever it was called a couple of years ago, was wrong, IMO. I have not found him at all impressive on the judiciary committee (again, I've watched more than any normal person should) and got the sense that he was preening more than anything. It's interesting because you had at least two others (Harris and Klobuchar) on the same committee clearly trying to test the waters and score some points in the event they eventually declared as nominees but neither of the women came across as so grossly theatrical and obvious about it. Finally, he's not a fighter but this I'm somewhat less concerned about because he is not the biggest offender in that regard. That would be Beto O'Rourke, who to this day espouses the complete nonsense of "when they go low we go high." The guy has literally learned absolutely nothing from the last 2 years (and how many before that when McConnell and Ryan barely allowed Obama to govern). He endorsed a Republican, albeit a more moderate one, over a Democrat running for a congressional seat close to his district when he was running last fall and again did that based on this grandiose "what's best for my country/unity" crap. He does not get it. And that's to say nothing of his wishy washy policies, which you couldn't nail down if your life depended on it. Hard pass.

 

[trojanchick99]

So the misogynistic attacks on Kamala Harris have begun. I fucking hate this shit. Attack her policies, her record, not her previous relationships.

 

[anitram]

It matters a lot whom she slept with 30 years ago.

How could she run against the paragon of virtue we have in the White House now??

 

[trojanchick99]

It matters a lot whom she slept with 30 years ago.

How could she run against the paragon of virtue we have in the White House now??

Seriously. The current governor of California who I gladly voted for had an affair while he was Mayor. There wasn't a peep about it during the campaign because IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER. But of course the standard for women is different.

 

[anitram]

The Republicans themselves have established that “what happened in private life before X was in office doesn’t matter” so they can all fuck right off.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Everyone knows that Jesus was a flawed man and Mary was a whore.

 

[womanfish]

So, what do we all think about Howard Schultz potentially running as an Independent?

Consensus seems to be that nobody wants it, that it will siphon votes away from the Democratic nominee, dilute the anti-Trump vote, and get the clown re-elected. I think I agree.

Yeah, and on top of it I don't see any appeal in what he's sellin' or his experience. Go away Howie.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Does Senator Harris still get a period? Is she a witch? These questions need to be answered. Probably unfit for office.

I was impressed by her and most of her answers in the town hall last night. I'm always impressed when she speaks. So intelligent and natural. She most definitely has the brains and demeanor to be President. Will wait to see how the rest unfolds.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Seriously. The current governor of California who I gladly voted for had an affair while he was Mayor. There wasn't a peep about it during the campaign because IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER. But of course the standard for women is different.

You are correct about that. The standard for women is different, no matter how much some people try to deny that.

 

[womanfish]

CNN has clearly endorsed Kamala Harris early, rejected Elizabeth Warren, and failed to acknowledge Tulsi Gabbard (who I wouldn’t want winning but still).

Sounds an awful lot like 2016.

Don't blame the media here. The candidates have to actually do something noteworthy to get coverage. Warren, being the wonky nerd, is trying to make herself more folksy, so she's Instagramming about her dog every day...
Haven't heard a peep from the others since announcing, which is fine, its super early. But when Harris is out accepting interview offers from the media and drawing over 20,000 people at a kick off speech, then that is something to take note of.

The whole media endorsement thing just means that some candidates are better at using the coverage to their advantage. Others seem to be putting their hat in the ring because they want to be a VP pick.

 

[womanfish]

Does Senator Harris still get a period? Is she a witch? These questions need to be answered. Probably unfit for office.

I was impressed by her and most of her answers in the town hall last night. I'm always impressed when she speaks. So intelligent and natural. She most definitely has the brains and demeanor to be President. Will wait to see how the rest unfolds.

Agreed. She's quick, she has a strong confident presence, and is quick and tenacious.

There are three things that i think will result in a successful candidate this time around.

1. They have to be quick on their feet, ready with facts and able to dismember Trump with their attacks and rebuttals.
Hillary is insanely smart. But she couldn't come back at Trump well in the moment. She needed to go and study it and do a few focus groups first. sigh...
I see Harris being able to do this effectively. Biden could do well here, Warren would be a bit hit and miss, Bernie ok, but gets stuck in his repetitive talking points. Yet to be seen with Gillibrand, Amy K. and others.

2. They have to drive the vote of women and minorities, while STILL appealing to everyday working class white folks. Not a simple feat. And right now... It's hard to see that any of them fit that bill.
Biden would be great with working class, ok with women and so-so with minorities. If he could get back PA, WI and MI, well hell, that would be the ballgame.
I think Harris would struggle here. A "California Elite" may suffer the same fate in the rust belt and I don't see here picking up any red states to make it up. Possibly Florida though, and that again, would be the ballgame.
Warren, nope. Sanders, doesn't pull the minority or women's vote, but would do well in the midwest. could lose NV and possibly VA, and would be a bit of a wash.
Don't see Amy K, or Gillibrand doing much aside from bringing out white women.

3. A bonus would be if they could come from a swing state. OH, FL, NC, GA???, PA, Unfortunately not much to go on here. Biden from PA, Brown from OH. Beto and Castro from TX, but probably wouldn't swing the state.

 

[anitram]

3. A bonus would be if they could come from a swing state. OH, FL, NC, GA???, PA, Unfortunately not much to go on here. Biden from PA, Brown from OH. Beto and Castro from TX, but probably wouldn't swing the state.

I think that this time, unlike in most elections, the VP pick will actually matter. First because you can provide someone for everyone in a way. I fully expect the democratic ticket will have one man, one woman. If pressed, I'd be more likely to guess 2 women than 2 men. No way no how will we have 2 white men on the Dem ticket. So the VP pick lets you be a bit more flexible if you choose a person who is charismatic enough and good enough of a campaigner to deliver something of value. Tim Kaine was a horrific pick for Hillary, I said it here a million times. How they were able to go out and find the only man in America with less charisma than Mike Pence is quite the achievement.

Watched the Harris town hall as well, not all of it, but she passes the most important test IMO, which is electability. She's what that dinosaur Orrin Hatch would describe as "pleasing to the eye", well-spoken, confident, not stiff with regular people/audience, and looks good on TV. Many of these are very superficial but those are the times we live in.