• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,854
It's possible to care about Climate Change AND not give one single f*** about Inslee bowing out.

In the Year of our Lord 2019 WHO'S nomination do you think you're running for!?

EVERY candidate that makes NO effort to court the Democratic electorate, who is a virtual unknown to the party, but thinks they can jump in the race on a single issue (because apparently if you care about Climate Change you can only care about Climate Change) needs to do us a favor and jump right on out because you're wasting everyone's time.

This isn't a game. And candidates like Inslee are playing games.
Nah. Using the Presidential Election process to push for reform is a good thing. Some people have ideas that are good, but need to be heard a few times on a platform as big as Presidential debates for people to take notice.

Fringe, cause candidates are not playing games. Inslee fighting for an issue as important as climate change is a positive.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
Nah. Using the Presidential Election process to push for reform is a good thing. Some people have ideas that are good, but need to be heard a few times on a platform as big as Presidential debates for people to take notice.

Fringe, cause candidates are not playing games. Inslee fighting for an issue as important as climate change is a positive.

Yep. I think he had the intention of doing well but it didn't work out but good on him for making climate a bigger issue. It should be the biggest issue.
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,854
If you are a fringe candidate polling in the single digits. I think it should at least be for a difficult fight or cause that will make people's lives better.

Inslee is the least offensive candidate who is doing nothing to damage the race and ran to do what he could to push for major candidates to take serious positions on fighting climate change.

It is a game and it's how our system works. It's a platform unlike no other.
 

Royalan

I can say DEI; you can't.
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
11,963
Nah. Using the Presidential Election process to push for reform is a good thing. Some people have ideas that are good, but need to be heard a few times on a platform as big as Presidential debates for people to take notice.

Fringe, cause candidates are not playing games. Inslee fighting for an issue as important as climate change is a positive.
I can think of 4 names, who have all done infinitely more work moving the discussion on Climate Change within the Democratic Party than Inslee, a name that the vast majority of our base still don't know.

None of them did it by running for President.

Thinking that positive change can only come from pursuit of the Presidency is one of the Democrats' traditional failings, ain't it?
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,854
I think it's weird not to understand people can run to the left of what is popular and actually lead to change the minds of people.

America needs great leaders who take chances to reform us, not just people who read the base and decide what they are allowed to believe in.
 

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,854
I can think of 4 names, who have all done infinitely more work moving the discussion on Climate Change within the Democratic Party than Inslee, a name that the vast majority of our base still don't know.

None of them did it by running for President.

Thinking that positive change can only come from pursuit of the Presidency is one of the Democrats' traditional failings, ain't it?
It's not the only way, but it's one way. People actually pay attention to the Presidential Election versus basically every other civic activity in this country.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
I can think of 4 names, who have all done infinitely more work moving the discussion on Climate Change within the Democratic Party than Inslee, a name that the vast majority of our base still don't know.

None of them did it by running for President.

Thinking that positive change can only come from pursuit of the Presidency is one of the Democrats' traditional failings, ain't it?

More work /= more visibility. And visibility is important. There are many far more problematic candidates than Inslee still on the board so I don't see what your problem is. He dropped out, and honestly pretty early.
 

Royalan

I can say DEI; you can't.
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
11,963
More work /= more visibility. And visibility is important. There are many far more problematic candidates than Inslee still on the board so I don't see what your problem is. He dropped out, and honestly pretty early.

My problem isn't with Inslee. He was a harmless dude who was going nowhere, and thus flopped. That's the beginning and end of his story in this race.

My problem is with the "Oh no Inslee! And right before the Climate Change debate! I guess Democrats don't really care about the issues." crap that is starting crop up in the wake of Inslee dropping like a fly who just flew through a puff of Prerogative, the newest fragrance by Britney Spears.

To be clear: I'm a Democrat, I'm liberal, I'm progressive. I care about Climate Change, as well as a bunch of other things. I volunteer, organize, and donate. I'm also Black.

And my blackness is tired. Tired of my blackness and the work that people like me do in this party being ignored by privileged people thinking they can and should run for office without doing the work. Black and Brown people are tired of this. And while people may *say* that they want a reality where black and brown people aren't ignored in this party. Say that. But when we hype up Joe "I'm Every White Guy It's All In Me" Schmoe candidates who not only don't do the work, but apparently don't even see the value in making sure that their campaigns, and the way they sell their issues, are tailored to include black and brown working voices (that have traditionally been disinfranchised and thus felt excluded from conversations about issues like Climate Change), we perpetuate this reality where black and brown voices are ignored until the last second. And that should be disqualifying.

Because then what happens is these candidates run, and they appeal to your usual suspects. And then they hit the South. And then they hit the urban centers. And then they drop like rocks, predictably. And then your usual suspects, as they usually do, are left scratching their heads. Joe Schmoe was such a great candidate! So cool and hip! And he really cared about _________________! What happened with Black voters? Don't they know what's best for them???

The Democratic Party is diverse. And that diversity is important to us winning. And does that diversity include white people? Yes. Does it include the educated? Yes. Does it include the working class? Yes (...well, the minority working class). Does it include People of Color? Yes - and you need to speak to them. And if you don't, and your campaign flops (as it will), it's not because people "didn't care about the issues." It's because you didn't do the homework.

So yeah, no sweat off my back when candidates who don't do the work get cut early. That's the reality we should be working toward. Not this clown college audition we're suffering through now.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,818
The frontrunners are currently riding on celebrity more than anything else.

Joe Biden has managed to crowd out everyone else. Yay. Hillary scared everyone off in 2016. Awesome.

I would except Warren from this slightly. Since while she has relatively high name rec, her support has gradually grown.

I look forward to the 2024 primary where Bernie runs against Oprah.

I don't see how Warren or Harris are riding on "celebrity". Both have put in a lot of work and got some good moments to get their frontrunner status. I only really see Biden as someone who is riding purely of celebrity and name recognition.

As for Inslee, I'm not big on single issue Presidential candidates. The Presidency isn't a single issue job. Sure it's nice to have a candidate try to raise awareness on an overlooked issue but when there's such a crowded field I think it just ends up creating more noise than actually bringing the issue to the forefront to the average voter. That said, Inslee was one of the better generic white guy candidates and I was eventually able to tell him apart from the others. It's also good he's bowing out now instead of extending the 3-ring circus through the fall.
 

metalslimer

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,566
I understand your point royalan but I will say I would rather have multiple one issue candidates who drop out when it's clearly time to vs most of the rest of this field who are bringing nothing to to the table and refuse to leave.

At this point I'm more annoyed with people like Booty who seemingly only gave a shit about trying to address PoC legitimately when it was time to get to the part of the primary when it was necessary. It's amazing that if anyone one of the bottom half of the top 8 candidates had made any inroads into that community they would be a frontrunnner.
 

Gazele

Member
Oct 25, 2017
973
I would love to hear the strategy to keep the primary restricted to experienced statesmen with no name ID
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
Remember how much shit Ilhan Omar got for the thing about dual loyalty? And then Trump comes out and says something far worse?
 

metalslimer

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,566
He'll be just as wishy-washy as Bennett is (well, until he rented a spine to try and bolster his Presidential campaign).

Given the 2018 elections in Colorado, I think we can do much better than Hickenlooper and don't have to settle.

Too bad it's not really dependent on what we want. He will most likely blow away the competition because he is very well liked in Colorado.

I would be happy if someone more firmly left won the primary as I also think that barring Trump winning in a landslide, Gardner has no chance.
 

dlauv

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,513
Yep, I doubt the dude would help get rid of the filibuster. People hooting and hollering for him to drop out to senate cared more about the principle of it than what happens. Twitter politics, roses, fire and 100.
 

Soul Skater

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,201
We can do better but in a year where we need to win so many tough races I'd rather an automatic +1 with Hick and not think about it
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,620
Hickenlooper was stupid to say something like "I'm not cut out for the Senate" in public, on the record. It won't single-handedly sink him but it's a dumb thing to have out there as ammo for your rivals and/or Gardner.

yup.

her problem is that people know what they're getting with Biden, bernie and sanders. people have no idea what they're getting with her. she's all over the place.
Kamala's biggest problem is that talking healthcare policy is not her strong suit and healthcare is the #1 top-of-mind issue for Dem voters. People know where Biden, Bernie, and Warren stand on it. I, a relatively informed voter, still am not totally clear about Kamala's M4A bill -- and I've read about it more than once!
 

Arm Van Dam

self-requested ban
Banned
Mar 30, 2019
5,951
Illinois


The number of coal jobs in Eastern Kentucky dropped significantly in the second quarter of 2019, according to a report from the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet.

Jobs in the region went down 15.2 percent compared to the same period in 2018 and 15.9 percent from the first three months of the year, according to the report released this week.

Preliminary numbers show there were 3,367 people employed in the coal industry in Eastern Kentucky from April through June of this year, the report said.

Coal employment in Harlan County, perhaps the hardest hit by the shutdown of a major producer, Blackjewel L.L.C. , dropped by 53.7 percent in the second quarter of this year compared to a year earlier.

The final paychecks Blackjewel wrote to miners bounced, leaving them scrambling to make ends meet.

Bell and Floyd counties saw coal jobs increase over the same period in 2018, but the gains weren't enough to overcome losses across Eastern Kentucky.

Coal jobs increased in Western Kentucky from a year earlier, but not enough to counter the big drop in Eastern Kentucky.

Statewide, coal-industry jobs were down 5.7 percent from a year earlier and 9.7 percent from the first quarter.

Employment from April 1 through June 30 averaged 5,942 for all of Kentucky.

The numbers sometimes change in subsequent reports because the state gets additional information.

For example, the initial estimate for the average number of jobs statewide in 2018 was 6,409. That number was since revised up to 6,443.

Coal production in Eastern Kentucky totaled 3.6 million tons in the second quarter, down 16.9 percent from the comparable period in 2018, but was up 2.6 percent in Western Kentucky.

Relatively cheap natural gas has taken power-plant customers away from the coal industry in Kentucky and other states.

The industry also faced headwinds from proposals in the Obama Administration to beef up environmental standards and from other factors such as rising availability of renewable energy.

President Donald Trump vowed to revive the coal industry.

There has been growth nationwide under his watch, from 50,600 jobs in December 2016 to as many as 52,900 earlier this year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The preliminary figure for July edged down to 52,100.

Kentucky hasn't shared in the growth, however.

The number of coal jobs in the state averaged 6,609 in 2017, Trump's first year on the job, but slipped to 6,443 for 2018, then to 5,942 in the most recent quarter.

But coal is coming back like Trump said!
 

LordByron28

Member
Nov 5, 2017
2,348
So what are the chances that Trump deploys ICE in certain swing districts in a lot of key states during the election? He has been going on about election fraud with illegal immigrants voting for Clinton. I believe last election cycle he called on his supporters to be vigilant against illegal immigrants voting. I could see him use ICE to outright target brown people and question their citizenship. They have already detained and even deported a fair amount of american citizens because of their ethnicity.
 

MarioW

PikPok
Verified
Nov 5, 2017
1,155
New Zealand
This is the story of the emperor has no clothes. They are pretty much acting it out.



The implication here is that Greenland would be given State status, which it wouldn't be, not to mention the tshirt doesn't recognize the territories like Puerto Rico that are already part of "America" but which many forget or don't know about.
 

thefit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,243
The implication here is that Greenland would be given State status, which it wouldn't be, not to mention the tshirt doesn't recognize the territories like Puerto Rico that are already part of "America" but which many forget or don't know about.

That's exactly why he's doesn't back off, he want's to own AOC and Puerto Rico so bad by skipping them and making a "white" Island a state over them. I have no doubt this started as some racist joke among the idiots around him and he's grasped onto it like the idiot he is.
 

MarioW

PikPok
Verified
Nov 5, 2017
1,155
New Zealand
That's exactly why he's doesn't back off, he want's to own AOC and Puerto Rico so bad by skipping them and making a "white" Island a state over them. I have no doubt this started as some racist joke among the idiots around him and he's grasped onto it like the idiot he is.

I actually doubt that. Seems more like a play for their coal and mineral resources.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,818
Kamala's biggest problem is that talking healthcare policy is not her strong suit and healthcare is the #1 top-of-mind issue for Dem voters. People know where Biden, Bernie, and Warren stand on it. I, a relatively informed voter, still am not totally clear about Kamala's M4A bill -- and I've read about it more than once!

But once Kamala solidifies more on certain policies, she's probably the strongest general election candidate behind Biden. While Dem primary voters my dislike her AG past, but it's actually a strong selling point among independents and soft-Republicans. And her squishiness on certain hot-button progressive issues in the primary means the GOP can't pigeon-hole her as a private insurance killing, open-border socialist before the general election has even started. Right now the GOP doesn't know how to attack Harris and she's the candidate they're most worried about this side of Biden.

Kamala's campaign has money, has shown she can fundraise, and has proven she can pop in the polls with a good moment. Yes she's a frontrunner. She's behind Biden, Warren, and Sanders right now but she's among the top 4 and there's a definite path for her if she can grab one of the early states. Whereas Booty despite the positive media coverage and solid debates has never cracked double digits in a major poll except when counting corn kernels. And even if he wins or places high in an early state, it's tough to see a pathway to the nomination because of his poor performance with minorities. That's why Pete isn't a frontrunner and Kamala is even though at the moment they're within a few percentage points of each other.

Btw, Warren also has issues with minorities and does not poll well among African Americans and Hispanics. It's weird how everyone here lambasts Mayor Booty for not appealing to minorities but Warren has almost the exact same issues. It's just been hidden because she's eaten a lot into Bernie's support base.

I'm not saying Kamala is a perfect candidate, but this is going to be my 6 US Presidential election that I've followed closely and Kamala reminds me who hangs around the edges but still being viable in a crowded field and then ends up being a consensus candidate right when primary voters begin actually voting. If Biden ends up being judged as being too old then things open up very quickly. Warren still has electability issues because of certain policy positions and it appears she "lost" to Trump in an early fight. Bernie may seem to be too radical for a lot of voters and has minority issues like Warren. Then all of a sudden Kamala is looking pretty good. She's relatively young, doesn't have scary policies, and can be tough against old white men and criminals. At the same time, no one is going to accuse Kamala of being a centrist. She's a squishy progressive. Bad thing in a primary during campaigning, not such a bad thing when things get real and it's time to vote for someone who can win a general election.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,964
Buttigieg has more money than Harris. And she's polling poorly with black voters too lol. Based on day by day analysis her money was drying up before the first debates, it may be drying up again after her second debate failure.

No one is polling well with black voters except Biden and Sanders. Because the prime directive of black voters is finding someone they think can win.

The attack narrative on Harris for the GOP is easy. She's the flip flop candidate who believes nothing and will follow the polls to find a position.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
Some of y'all are giving Trump way too much credit with the Greenland thing. There is no thought process behind it. He probably saw it on TV, said it, and now is doubling down on it because he's a moron and it's what he always does.
 

aspiegamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,460
ZzzzzzZzzzZzz...
Speaking of trying to throw money at matters that can't be solved with money, I figure we could make a deal with China to write off the debt of ours they carry in exchange for a state! Kentucky, perhaps? Who's going to actually miss that state? They don't even have any pro sports teams!

Mind you I'm not good at valuing states' sale prices.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
My issue with Kamala is I have no idea what her politics actually are. I don't like to call a candidate opportunistic, especially because I feel when leveled against female candidates it always reeks of sexism. But like, with Warren, I may not always agree with her, but I know where she actually stands on issues. And, lord help me, as much as I hate Bernie, I know he has his position and he truly believes it. This isn't about ideological rigidity either. I have no issue with politicians changing their minds when confronted with new data. With Kamala though...it just feels like she says something, then focus tests it, then commits to whatever they came up with. I'm not sure if it's her history as a prosecutor or what.

Plus, and I'm not saying one debate should disqualify anyone, but maaaaaan how did she not have a good answer to deal with her past as a AG. It was an attack everyone and their brother knew was coming, and she completely flubbed the hell out of it. That's a sign of either poor prep or a poor campaign. Neither is a cute look.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,818
Buttigieg has more money than Harris. And she's polling poorly with black voters too lol. Based on day by day analysis her money was drying up before the first debates, it may be drying up again after her second debate failure.

No one is polling well with black voters except Biden and Sanders. Because the prime directive of black voters is finding someone they think can win.

The attack narrative on Harris for the GOP is easy. She's the flip flop candidate who believes nothing and will follow the polls to find a position.

Obama polled very poorly among blacks too at this point. A black candidate like Kamala or Booker (if he was polling higher overall) always has the potential for black voters to cascade to them as soon as they can prove they can win. Black voters trust Biden and the Clintons before him so that's why they got the initial support. There's no existing relationship with Warren and I seriously doubt there will be a cascade of support if she wins an early state, she'll have to earn their vote with a lot of blood and sweat.

You guys are also forgetting black voters tend to lean a little bit socially conservative, particularly in the South. It's why they rarely support far left candidates in large numbers and tend to prefer moderates.

As for the GOP tagging Harris as a flip-flopper, that's so 2004 and hasn't really worked well ever sense. In top of that, you got a GOP President in office who literally flip flops on an issue within 2 minutes in the same news conference. Those type of attacks only work if your candidate doesn't exhibit those same characteristics. That's why the Trump campaign dropped the whole "Creepy Joe" nickname because for a lot of people it just reminded them how creepy Trump was with women, teens, and his own daughter. If the GOP seriously went after Kamala over flip-flopping over a few Democratic primary positions, a high school 9th grader would be able to put together a montage within 5 minutes of a litany of flip-flops Trump has done just in a 72 hour period. It would be one of the dumbest and most ineffective attacks for the GOP to do.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,818
Plus, and I'm not saying one debate should disqualify anyone, but maaaaaan how did she not have a good answer to deal with her past as a AG. It was an attack everyone and their brother knew was coming, and she completely flubbed the hell out of it. That's a sign of either poor prep or a poor campaign. Neither is a cute look.

This is what annoys me (not necessarily directed at you). One minute people are saying how well prepared she and her campaign were to go after Biden on the first debate, but then turn-around and say she's awful and unqualified because she wasn't prepared for the attacks in the second debate.

Someone else mentioned it here to me, but this forum and progressive activist in general suffer from "what's happening now" syndrome. If a candidate just did something great, then they're awesome, a frontrunner, nomination almost a lock. But if they perform poorly, they need to get out of the race like yesterday. There's rarely perspective or taking the long-view, the good with the bad.

The truth almost no one in those debates was prepared to be attacked relentlessly. Beto wasn't. Biden wasn't. Kamala wasn't. Warren looked a little shaky at times when a few third rate candidates went after her as well. But she had the benefit in the 2nd debate of tag teaming with Bernie and in the 1st debate she was completely ignored. Everybody ignores the fact Tusli basically smeared Kamala. I agree Kamala should have been better prepared but it's a shame even among progressives we give credibility to smears if wrapped in aggression and twitter-friendly daggers. Nevermind the substance was completely off, apparently it's an indictment on Kamala, not Tusli.

From 30,000 feet, Kamala had one good debate and one bad debate when she was a target. She's shown in Senate hearings she can press fools on substance, so I don't doubt her ability. When it comes to debates, I'd like to see how she performs when the debate stage gets smaller and there's no more of these kamikaze candidates on book tours.
 

minato

Member
Oct 27, 2017
347
The polls have also shown that when combined with 1st and 2nd choice of preferred candidate she is basically tied with Biden and Waren. Her current problem is she everyone's current second opinion.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,964
There's zero signs of life right now to indicate Harris, let alone Booker, can pull off a win in an early state...

Lilly white John Kerry had no real history with black voters either... And they cascaded to him. Because he performed well in early states.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.