-
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.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
What sort of "members of the fossil fuel industry" are you talking about?
The 2020 Democratic field is getting as packed as the 2016 Republican one. I wonder who is going to be put on the kid's table.
Apparently it's going to be random from debate to debate
Ya sure that what i said ... Lets go through the argument. Being an indie senator from Vermont not taking corporate PAC money meant he couldnt keep up with the explosion of interest the way some one with institutional backing could-> he chose those things and it resulted in x bad outcome->those choices were admirable and if the campaign finance system wasnt broken any one could end up in that situation, whats the point of disqualifying him from contention
The quotes I had in the link upthread were more than "Bernie thinks the Democrats aren't great." Its understating his opinion on the party, with decades of evidence it's not a one-off.
They did prove it at the ballot box. I've shown you evidence about politicians who dislike how he does business in politics, he's been like that for decades. Can he work with people occasionally? Sure. Is he like this through his entire career? No. Do people who work for the party have conflicts with him, several. Barney Frank was practically his arch-enemy on the Hill.
There's many reasons to not like Bernie, how he addressed sexual harassment in his campaign is one of them. Which you agreed with upthread, as if bringing up his massive mistakes as a politician is an unsavoury in a conversation. Your responses to that were also before I could see the full context for your opinion on the matter, which until recently I did not know.
I gave my evidence with a CNN interview and a Politico article which thoroughly went over his career in politics. With a few Dem politicians who he conflicted with. You've ignored the context for how he got those positions post-'16, which has been disappointing. The context for Bernie getting those things don't cease being true for your argument that Bernie's the nicest guy on the Hill who everyone in the party loves. When that's never been true.
I was mistaken on this subject, I apologise.
I disagree. Frankly, I'm stunned why you're adamant about loyalty not being an asset in politics.
Yup :( I liked Brown at first but the more I dug, the less I could support him
MontanaERA and ColoradoERA, how are Bullock and Hickenlooper
Because it's standards we shouldn't have to. His staffers well being shouldn't be sacrificed for his political career, if Bernie was unable to properly campaign under those conditions he shouldn't have run at all. I weight everything he does as a leader, because one day this might happen in his administration. He should have made sure he was able to get the proper resources in place for this,
I didn't say it was meant to be easy, it's his responsibility to make sure this happens since he's the leader of the campaign. I didn't say he wasn't viable as a candidate, this is a huge black mark on his leadership skills juts like Hillary's were with her sexual harassment complaints within her campaign. As a society we don't overlook the incidents any longer in our politicians and we're better for it.
Then he either should have got corporate backing or not ran. His staffers shouldn't be thrown under the bus for his agenda. It's vital for leaders to know their limitations and account for them in the field or people will get hurt, Bernie failed this test.
I mean I'm not a huge Beto guy anymore but that's flat out inaccurate. Sure he's not as left on those issues as say Bernie, but I wouldn't say taking individual donations from fossil fuel industry employees and supporting Medicare for All makes him what you described him as.
Your positions w/ donations and health care are based on absolute nonsense.
Beto taking money from people who worked for fuel industry companies is not an issue. If you work as a mail room employee for BP, there's absolutely nothing wrong with you donating to a candidate. The issue is that his campaign appears to have unknowlingly gotten a small amount of donations from Execs when he pledged not to (and weirdly they've been told to be radio silent on literally everything as a strategy so they haven't issued a response on it.)
UHC needing to be single payer is also a position that doesn't reflect reality. Germany and Switzerland both have multi-payer systems. Multi-payer UIHC systems exist in many countries in Europe and work just fine, you just don't hear about them as much because the countries don't speak English as their primary language. And in most countries you are still going to be paying co-pays of some sort because they're a necessity in order to prevent systemic abuse.
My opinion isnt it should be overlooked, my opinion given the context its not disqualifying. Also this is a terrible argument I'm sorry but your looking only at the negative outcomes of one decision. What of all the people for example in poverty who are sentenced death because politicians who accept corporate money and vote in their favor to be relected. Furthermore your proving my point with your reason for why he shouldnt have run. This means only those with institutional backing can run in your preferred system and even then I can make the same argument for any politician. Kamala, Clinton, Beto doesnt matter.
The bad news is that had Beto said everything you wished no candidate is going to be able to fulfil that goal due to how our system functions. This is a congress problem, not a POTUS one. Focus on electing candidates with that vision in the highest numbers you can before focusing on the presidency to fix it.
My Beto hype has died down quite a bit. I'm looking for a candidate that not only is progressive on the issues but will fight for them. Honestly I don't know where he stands on most issues but even more worryingly I feel like he'll try a bunch of "can't we all get along and be bi-partisan?" nonsense and nothing will get done. It's still early but if you take away the charisma, there isn't much substance to him yet.
I just listened to the interview that Ta-Nehisi Coates had with AOC and she is so smart and has such an articulate world view, then I think of the declared candidates so far and realized that Beto seems completely out of his league for what we need.
I just listened to the interview that Ta-Nehisi Coates had with AOC and she is so smart and has such an articulate world view, then I think of the declared candidates so far and realized that Beto seems completely out of his league for what we need.
The strongest arguments against Beto are actually coming from his behavior when it's come to being a team player. The Ukraine vote (and its even worse explanation) and giving an assist to Will Hurd's re-election (who won by less than a % point) are really bad, but they aren't really lefty or "Independent" criticisms, they're mainstream Dem ones.
Which is exactly my problem. It doesn't inspire faith. Obviously some average joe working for big oil who is on the ground level can obviously donate, that's fine, I'm talking about those execs he nor his campaign have spoken about. Like, this is probably my NUMBER ONE issue. Everything else doesn't matter when if we don't solve climate change as soon as possible. If we wait too long, we're going to see mass migration on an unprecedented scale and unless there's been revolutionary change in public consciousness towards the idea of chipping in to help all fellow humans regardless of WHERE they were born or WHAT their skin color is or WHO they believe is God or whatever, we WILL see fascism come back as it has recently, but even more so, to the detriment of hundreds of millions if not billions of innocent people who lost their homes to flooding. Assuming of course, we even manage to fight it back now.
That's not even getting into everything else it'll entail...
Fair enough, I need to do more research into such stuff. All I know is Canada and UK are single payer and they work a lot better than the US does. If multi-payer systems mean that you won't get put into massive debt just for being injured or sick, that's fine. But I know our current system certainly doesn't do that for many, many Americans.
Of course I'm looking at the negatives, it's a horrible situation which occurred to multiple people it wasn't a one off incident unlike with Hillary's. Bernie wouldn't be able to save people in poverty be able to save had he been elected, regardless. He certainly wouldn't have broken the private prison system or solved the student debt crisis. You've overestimating not only Bernie's capability to work with others in congress but how outgunned he is in the system which he didn't make sure he wasn't ready for the big time when it counts. The issue is far more complex than simply corruption, which Bernie is no Warren in understanding the depth or wonkery the policy side, either. Bernie is proving that for me, it's his job to make sure he can protect his employees - there are no excuses for not accomplishing that. This isn't my "preferred system" it's the system we got, so we have to make do with what we have. This is not about regular black marks, every politicians had them, its what they do as a leader in their campaigns. From what I can tell none of them have the media linking them to sexual harassment in their campaigns like Bernie went through.
Last edited:
In the UK nurses are not paid well, and the tories are trying to systematically dismantle aspects of the NHS system because they've had full control for so long. The big benefit of single payer is cost control due to taxes being a source of revenue with an inherent upper limit, but there are downsides as well.
We definitely need more subsidies, regulations, etc. We just don't need single payer for that, we just need to transition to a model that actually works.
Candidates so far:
Kamala Harris:
+ inspiration factor
+ can go against Trump and win with words
+ attracts independents moderates and disenfranchised republicans
- too moderate for some progressives
- too aggressive as a prosecutor some progressives
Tulsi Gabbard:
+ youth factor
- bigot
- islamophobic
- homophobe
- war hawk
- dictator pal
- Putin friendly
Kirsten Gillibrand
+ will get a lot of women voters
+ well spoken
+ can go against Trump with words
- was a bigot until she wasn't
- will throw people under bus with the change of wind direction , opportunistic
Elizabeth Warren
+ true progressive
+ Will get a lot of women voters
- too passive to go against Trump in a debate
- too policy driven and will bore folks looking for inspiration
- too progressive for many swing state voting blue dogs and independents
Castro
-too unknown on national level voters
Kamala Harris:
+ inspiration factor
+ can go against Trump and win with words
+ attracts independents moderates and disenfranchised republicans
- too moderate for some progressives
- too aggressive as a prosecutor some progressives
Tulsi Gabbard:
+ youth factor
- bigot
- islamophobic
- homophobe
- war hawk
- dictator pal
- Putin friendly
Kirsten Gillibrand
+ will get a lot of women voters
+ well spoken
+ can go against Trump with words
- was a bigot until she wasn't
- will throw people under bus with the change of wind direction , opportunistic
Elizabeth Warren
+ true progressive
+ Will get a lot of women voters
- too passive to go against Trump in a debate
- too policy driven and will bore folks looking for inspiration
- too progressive for many swing state voting blue dogs and independents
Castro
-too unknown on national level voters
First of all lets not bring Clinton into this she has a long history of throwing victims of harrasment under the bus personally that is far worse. Of course im under no illusions that Bernies going to break down the gates and destroy institutions like the prison complex, however my argument is that in general not being beholden to corps will result in policy outcomes that will save a lot of lives. The push for 15 is an example of this. Also the current system is not all we got as Bernie forged a new path, it wasnt perfect but the future is better because of it
What if I support single-payer not specifically because it's the only route to universal coverage but because I genuinely want to see the profit motive driven out of healthcare, and insurance companies are useless and the logical place to start?
Like, single-payer has more than one function, destruction of a pillar of capital being one of them.
They're both terrible, let's not understate how badly Bernie failed multiple staff under his command, this is what one staffer dealt with. Bernie hasn't forged anything, it's the Justice Democrats who are doing that and he's not one of them. Not having corporate sponsorship has its costs, like with this sexual harassment showed, which took to late for him to rectify. This is why it's important for candidates to make sure they are fully prepared as possible, rather than jumping into a presidential primary at the last minute and expecting everything to be fine.
Destruction of capital is only a good goal if you're profoundly ignorant to economic realities.
Like say, public and private hospitals having basically no difference in efficacy.
I think whether he jumps in or not is going to depend on how this goes.
That said, he should have been doing this months ago.
I have no interest in Bernie, or Biden, I'd love for them to just not run.
I would be happy with Gillibrand or Harris and maybe Warren. I liked Warren more before the whole 23 and me stunt.
I would be pretty let down if Booker or Beto got it.
I'll be fucking furious if Tulsi or any of the random CEO's saying they have considered running did well.
I would be happy with Gillibrand or Harris and maybe Warren. I liked Warren more before the whole 23 and me stunt.
I would be pretty let down if Booker or Beto got it.
I'll be fucking furious if Tulsi or any of the random CEO's saying they have considered running did well.
Tulsi isn't going anywhere. She might stay in the race way longer than she should (we can thank Russia for that), but she doesn't have a prayer of winning the nomination.
I think we all know this, honestly even peeking into this thread 22 months before the election or 18 months before we know who the democratic candidate is enough to make my anxiety go up haha. I don't know how ya'll do it. This is going to be the longest election cycle ever.
And I just learned Harris is on the fucking anti-Palestine train. :\
God dammit. God fucking dammit. Why is the party filled with genocidal maniacs?
I guess Bernie or Warren then...
I mean the savings shouldn't matter in the first place when we got super-rich people running around, but that should solve the "we don't have the money for it" problem.
God dammit. God fucking dammit. Why is the party filled with genocidal maniacs?
I guess Bernie or Warren then...
WOW. Saves us 5.1 trillion. Thank you for sharing.
I mean the savings shouldn't matter in the first place when we got super-rich people running around, but that should solve the "we don't have the money for it" problem.
Yeah, no problem. I'll also mention that the study (direct link here) covers a lot of additional ground, beyond the strictly economic analysis:
1. Universal Health Care and Health Outcomes .................................................................................................................18
2. Demand Increases and Costs of Universal Health Care.................................................................................................22
3. Cost Saving Potential under Medicare for All...................................................................................................................43
4. Financing Medicare for All.....................................................................................................................................................68
5. Budgetary Impacts on Businesses and Families............................................................................................................77
6. The Transition into Medicare for All ..................................................................................................................................92
7. Macroeconomic Impacts of Medicare for All ................................................................................................................122
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=64&v=7SlVw9Zz15Q
Liberals should be hating on AIPAC as much if not more than the NRA, both are lobbies that profiteer off of the constant loss of life.
Yeah I should have known earlier. I didn't put two and two together until now. Just. Ugh. D:
I'll take a full look later. Summaries make it sound like good stuff.
Jesus she will have just turned 35 by that election. Stop acting like this woman is the next coming of Christ. Leaders take time this shit doesn't happen overnight. She hasn't even proven shit as a congress woman.
This is good and everything thing, but the fucker is too late and too old for me get on board with him joining the fray at this point. I'm still glad he's doing it though.
Hahahaha. Well at least we're confident she's not getting the nom...
Right?
... Right?
Gabbard is the one person that, I can say with certainty, has no chance at winning the primary.
If you asked me to handicap the current field and the remaining potentials, my money would be on on Warren or Harris or Gillibrand.
This is enormously dumb. His campaign took individual donations, that are capped at.... What, 2k a pop? From people that work in the fossil fuel industry. All of those donations combined make up less than 1% of the money he received. There's no way in hell that would make a difference in policy making. This is the literal dumbest point people can make against Beto.
Thank goodness for that....
She's the closest thing to a truly decent politician we have on a national level along with a few of the others voted in this year, I can't blame people for thinking she'd be a good president before she's done much. I myself think that if she proves herself as I suspect she will, that I am all aboard her being the youngest president ever.
I don't think it's enormously dumb to be suspicious of people who may bend to big fossil fuels. As noted, this isn't about the little guys donating, it's about the executives he took money from regardless of how much. He needs to come out and say he's accepting their money not for their opinions on big FFs, but on other issues. Otherwise, as someone who takes climate change seriously and a major threat on all sorts of axes- environmentally, socially, economically- I can't trust him. Why should I?
It's not that simple, the Isreali lobby is immensely powerful in America angering them can hurt their careers when they reuse to play ball. This is why it's important that sentiment toward the Palestinians is growing, eventually this will have less hold on American political parties.
This may be natural human behaviour, but it's not logical. They're thirsty for a leftist champion on an emotional level, and after Bernie she's the next Big Thing in those circles. This can end badly when she stumbles or doesn't live up to her rep. It's too much pressure, too early for anyone to live up to. That's the crux of this, nobody knows her future, while we may speculate don't get too attached or it'll be like Obama again.
The article which started this controversy was about Beto taking donations from ordinary workers in the industry - in Texas. It's difficult to get any deeper results on my Google, it seems like every reputable news source considered it a nothingburger, and I can't say I blame them. He took $200 for executives, because as much as I agree they're terrible they are within their rights to do that and it's not like they're giving him $20,000. Say you trust him, how is this going to help your climate change? What do you expect him, or anyone else, to do with congress?
Last edited:
Because if a bunch of small donations adding up to 400k or so in a campaign that raised 10s of millions influenced a politician's decision making then someone could literally kickstart that much money for any other policy under the sun to influence them the other way (Not that you could donate 400k in one load, but you get my point). It beggar's belief that that has any significant influence on their policy making. The money is insignificant compared to the whole.
Let me be clear: I do not like beto. I just think some of the attacks on him are bottom of the barrel nothings.
Calm the fuck down. No one is treating her like christ, we're just excited that she feels like an actual human which is more to say than anybody else currently running, and she has a lot of useful knowledge about ways that we can help people who are suffering. Anything can happen between now and if she were to run. It's almost like I said "if she stays on this path" in my post.
She has a fresh and interesting take on politics and she brings a lot of energy.
Sounds like you need some shit you need worked out if you're getting this worked up about people enjoying seeing a politician they can actually relate to and who holds some hope for bringing positive change.
Last edited:
- Status