The only two concerns for the dem nominee are can they turn out their voters, and can they turn out independents? The GOP would try to use this as a wedge between Beto and Latinx voters (due to Catholicism), but I will take my chances on Beto vs. Trump with that demo.
None of the frontrunners for the dems, IMO, will turn out independents. There's only one, maybe two candidates who might do that, but the dems have no interest in them. (Buttigieg and Yang).
I have no idea why the Dems wouldn't trot out someone who is more centrist in their general approach. They already have the never trumpers locked up. They're not doing themselves any favors by preaching to their own friends whether that's in who they get behind as the democractic nominee or doing things like banning Fox News from their debates.
Maybe Beto will just pardon Trump to keep the nation from chaos
What happened to that abortion story? This ia the only place I've heard about it...
Well, in case you haven't noticed, there is little conservative "news" in this forum. I skim it to see what is being said in the, largely, belief-oriented circles and will occasionally post something I think might be significant.
Kinda plays into my point. Beto's comment is really only a conservative talking point. Thus it's only going to affect Beto should he become the Dem candidate. The conservatives won't be voting Beto anyway.
Don't you think his comment is a talking point across the aisle, but, it's more that the conservatives aren't afraid to talk about it?
If you're on the left, and you aren't in favor of late term abortion, you'll be castigated as a bigot so of course you can't try to have a discussion about it.
87% of Americans are not in favor of final term abortion according to a Gallup poll so how can that be "only" be a conservative talking point?
I love how the article just casually notes we've been dropping bombs in Somalia for a decade, without the need to even explain the reasoning. I'm assuming it's related to the general threats of "terrorism", but we only hear about it when people die, either civilians or soldiers (as was the case in Nigeria last year).
I know the media has forgotten what the 'business beef' between Mueller and trump is...it's because they are already gaslit
Mueller didn't want to be a member of a golf club that is a fundraising arm for trump...
trump takes a negative and uses it as a battering ram to spread his BS and no one calls him on it.
Quote:
The hefty fees members are required to pay at Trump golf properties have caused issues in the past.
The one-time initiation fee, which does not include the annual fee, can range anywhere from $14,000 to $450,000 per person, depending on the club location.
And Trump reportedly pockets a large amount of this sum—even as president. The president chose not to sell his businesses after taking office but instead promised to cede control to his sons Donald Jr. and Eric.
Trump is said to have had access to almost $100 million in refundable fees in 2004, these fees coming from just four of his clubs.
The president implemented a policy allowing him to keep the membership fees and spend said money on anything he wanted—a policy that Jay Karen, CEO of the National Golf Course Owners Association, deemed “definitely unusual” in 2017.
"It certainly reflects a clever and shrewd way to raise capital,” Karen continued
beside the looks, which Bernie policy don't you like?
His policy seems to be pretty inchoate to me. I prefer Warren for that reason. She has pretty clear policy plans. But I guess I prefer wonky politicians.
beside the looks, which Bernie policy don't you like?
His policy seems to be pretty inchoate to me. I prefer Warren for that reason. She has pretty clear policy plans. But I guess I prefer wonky politicians.
Warren, for my money, has had the best rollout and clearest message. She has proposed bold policy ideas. She has a history of being an advocate and fighter for the working class. She’s tough. But her family told her when she was growing up that they had Native American heritage and she’s a little awkward so to hell with her. _________________ 14-5-3-12
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:23 pm Post subject:
ringfinger wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
The only two concerns for the dem nominee are can they turn out their voters, and can they turn out independents? The GOP would try to use this as a wedge between Beto and Latinx voters (due to Catholicism), but I will take my chances on Beto vs. Trump with that demo.
None of the frontrunners for the dems, IMO, will turn out independents. There's only one, maybe two candidates who might do that, but the dems have no interest in them. (Buttigieg and Yang).
I have no idea why the Dems wouldn't trot out someone who is more centrist in their general approach. They already have the never trumpers locked up. They're not doing themselves any favors by preaching to their own friends whether that's in who they get behind as the democractic nominee or doing things like banning Fox News from their debates.
I mean no more offense than is necessary in this thought, but you should really stop pontificating about anything political as if you have a shred of credibility or honest intent in dispensing it. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
The only two concerns for the dem nominee are can they turn out their voters, and can they turn out independents? The GOP would try to use this as a wedge between Beto and Latinx voters (due to Catholicism), but I will take my chances on Beto vs. Trump with that demo.
None of the frontrunners for the dems, IMO, will turn out independents. There's only one, maybe two candidates who might do that, but the dems have no interest in them. (Buttigieg and Yang).
I have no idea why the Dems wouldn't trot out someone who is more centrist in their general approach. They already have the never trumpers locked up. They're not doing themselves any favors by preaching to their own friends whether that's in who they get behind as the democractic nominee or doing things like banning Fox News from their debates.
I mean no more offense than is necessary in this thought, but you should really stop pontificating about anything political as if you have a shred of credibility or honest intent in dispensing it.
I’ve been trying since that Kraft thread to be less ... egregious in my approach. And I think I have been pretty middle of the road since then unless you want to point out a post of mine since that time where I crossed the line.
If you are officially demanding that I not post in The Political Thread, then fine, just say so and I won’t. But I told you then I would be more cordial from then on and I have been.
So I’m not clear on what it is that you want me to do here. Are you demanding that I don’t post politically slanted anything at all in any thread? Or just in here? I’ll just do whatever it’s going to take to just be able to have discussions without resorting to the very behavior I often accused the “other side” of.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29337 Location: La La Land
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:17 am Post subject:
Still have no idea who I'll vote for from the Dem candidates. But I'm leaning towards Warren.
Alot of the candidates have a focus on wealth and income inequality. But in terms of policy, she has expertise that surpasses the competition.
Sure Trump will mock her and call her Pocahantas. But none of the Dems can out trash talk Trump. And I don't think they should try. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Still have no idea who I'll vote for from the Dem candidates. But I'm leaning towards Warren.
Alot of the candidates have a focus on wealth and income inequality. But in terms of policy, she has expertise that surpasses the competition.
Sure Trump will mock her and call her Pocahantas. But none of the Dems can out trash talk Trump. And I don't think they should try.
I want something new. Somebody that hasn't been in fed gov for too long. Younger preferrably. A Beto or a Kamala but way too early. Need to hear what everybody bring. Goal is still same, replace Trump
Still have no idea who I'll vote for from the Dem candidates. But I'm leaning towards Warren.
Alot of the candidates have a focus on wealth and income inequality. But in terms of policy, she has expertise that surpasses the competition.
Sure Trump will mock her and call her Pocahantas. But none of the Dems can out trash talk Trump. And I don't think they should try.
I want something new. Somebody that hasn't been in fed gov for too long. Younger preferrably. A Beto or a Kamala but way too early. Need to hear what everybody bring. Goal is still same, replace Trump
What is too long? Is being a senator for five years too long to you? _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Still have no idea who I'll vote for from the Dem candidates. But I'm leaning towards Warren.
Alot of the candidates have a focus on wealth and income inequality. But in terms of policy, she has expertise that surpasses the competition.
Sure Trump will mock her and call her Pocahantas. But none of the Dems can out trash talk Trump. And I don't think they should try.
I want something new. Somebody that hasn't been in fed gov for too long. Younger preferrably. A Beto or a Kamala but way too early. Need to hear what everybody bring. Goal is still same, replace Trump
What is too long? Is being a senator for five years too long to you?
The highest level of power in this country is the only position where people seem to prefer the least amount of experience possible. _________________ 14-5-3-12
The highest level of power in this country is the only position where people seem to prefer the least amount of experience possible.
well, experience can come from different field beside long term federal governing experience
General life experience, sure. And that's important. But they're running for a job where they have to operate within the structures of government. To have experience in the machinations of that seems vital. The current occupant had none and it's not going very well. _________________ 14-5-3-12
The highest level of power in this country is the only position where people seem to prefer the least amount of experience possible.
well, experience can come from different field beside long term federal governing experience
General life experience, sure. And that's important. But they're running for a job where they have to operate within the structures of government. To have experience in the machinations of that seems vital. The current occupant had none and it's not going very well.
Clinton had no federal governing experience
Obama only had 2 years
There's more than 1 way to learn
The highest level of power in this country is the only position where people seem to prefer the least amount of experience possible.
well, experience can come from different field beside long term federal governing experience
General life experience, sure. And that's important. But they're running for a job where they have to operate within the structures of government. To have experience in the machinations of that seems vital. The current occupant had none and it's not going very well.
Clinton had no federal governing experience
Obama only had 2 years
There's more than 1 way to learn
Clinton certainly had governing experience. Obama was a state senator and then a US senator. That experience mattered and was important. _________________ 14-5-3-12
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
