Because he's not gay enough for me. I need to see him in drag before I can really support this man.
2020 Democrat hopefuls
- Thread starter UCFWayne
- Start date
hes too young. maybe in a couple more election cycles after he becomes a governor or senator for awhile
That's good. Was afraid you were eating your own.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/opinion/pete-buttigieg-joe-biden.html
I was the first one on this board to get behind Pete. He was a total unknown when I saw him speak and heard his message. I do live in Indiana you know. Back when he was throwing out really exciting ideas for structural change to our system. Then he started getting checks from lobbying groups and doing closed door fundraisers. He's a great messenger but his message has been ruined. He's a run of the mill corporate dem. He also has made many racial missteps and has no support from the black community.
This is Pete now.
Oh no! Not elite private fundraisers! Scorn him!
Much better to vote for one of the two socialists running; one of whom is somehow a multi millionaire with 3 mansions to his name having never held a real job in his life, and the other being a wealthy white woman who faked being a Native American to get ahead at elite Ivy League universities when she commanded huge salaries to do little to nothing. Oh and the best part? They're really old and really white!
Much better!
He should just do the not-so-eltie-and-out-in-the-open types that the alcoholic John Morgan used to do for Obama at his home in Heathrow.
And before you come at me with whataboutism, save it.
Obamas fundraising wouldn't fly in the modern party either. Dems are very aware that billionaires use political influence to stay rich and get richer. We are all pretty much against the continuation of that.
Pete is a fine choice if you're just looking to beat Trump and do nothing else because he would beat the shit out of Trump. Most dem voters want more than to just beat Trump. Pete can win and he might because he'll get all the centrist vote but if he wins he better pick the perfect VP to bridge the minority and youth gap.
D's can't get out of bed in the morning if they don't have a billionaire boogeyman to constantly be looking for in their closet
You're not wrong, but I hope you recognize what's happening from the right. Trump has turned illegal immigrants and migrants into boogeymen. The Press into boogeymen. The CIA and FBI into Deep State boogeymen.
This is what populism does. It requires bad guys so your supporters can blame the ills of society and their lives on something. It's not the policies that are inherently the problem, it's the rhetoric. Sanders and Warren are far different from Trump, but all three have strong populist appeal.
An illegal immigrant is knowingly breaking our laws when they sneak into this country. There's no boogeyman there, it's a legit concern that anyone who values something as simple as having a border should be concerned about.
A billionaire is typically someone who formed a company that developed a good or service that millions of people wanted. Mark Zuckerberg is a billionaire because 230 million Americans use his product daily, some of whom use it as a platform to rant and whine about billionaires. There's nothing nefarious about how or why he's a billionaire, unless your entire aim is to get people to resent him for being successful.
Like I said in the prior post, it's not the policy, it's the rhetoric. Working to tighten immigration policy does not make you a populist demagogue. You can criticize immigration policy and work for reforms without saying of illegal immigrants 'These aren't people. These are animals." You can criticize the FBI w/o accusing them of a coup. You can criticize the press without calling them the "enemy of people."
If you think this is insignificant, then you need to dig into history here. This kind of language is not normal and it's dangerous to normalize. The founders feared a populist demagogue for a reason. Reasonable people are easily sucked in - unfortunately.
I'm not mad at billionaires if they operated in the bounds of the law. I'm mad that they were so effective in seizing control of our politics and that we allowed it. They are one person. They have one vote. Yet they have the political power of millions of people.
I'm not mad at the billionaires for not paying any taxes if they did so in the bounds of the law. I'm mad that the law is written to allow it. Any company that exists at the highest levels will operate to maximize profit. Why should Bezos and Zuck be the villains?
However just because they aren't the villains for their actions doesn't mean they aren't the opponents for a positive change. They are fighting for their own interests and they've convinced the dumbest Americans that the success of billionaires is crucial for a successful America. They have the dumbest americans thinking that If Bezos has to pay 2% on his wealth it will ruin america while the poorest pay 7%-10% for their consumption on money that was already taxed and no one questions it.
If rich people paid 2% we could offer pre-k child care for every kid in america from 0-4. We could eliminate all student debt. We could make community college free.
All that could be done for every american if we just taxed Kim Kardashian and the other 75k ultra wealthy a small 2% per year. Imagine if they gave back to the country that made them ultra wealthy. That would be awful for them I'm sure.
I'm not mad at the billionaires for not paying any taxes if they did so in the bounds of the law. I'm mad that the law is written to allow it. Any company that exists at the highest levels will operate to maximize profit. Why should Bezos and Zuck be the villains?
However just because they aren't the villains for their actions doesn't mean they aren't the opponents for a positive change. They are fighting for their own interests and they've convinced the dumbest Americans that the success of billionaires is crucial for a successful America. They have the dumbest americans thinking that If Bezos has to pay 2% on his wealth it will ruin america while the poorest pay 7%-10% for their consumption on money that was already taxed and no one questions it.
If rich people paid 2% we could offer pre-k child care for every kid in america from 0-4. We could eliminate all student debt. We could make community college free.
All that could be done for every american if we just taxed Kim Kardashian and the other 75k ultra wealthy a small 2% per year. Imagine if they gave back to the country that made them ultra wealthy. That would be awful for them I'm sure.
Is this the point In which people with brains must again explain to you why a wealth tax is stupid and hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been implemented?
And it wouldn’t even pay for the crap you just listed. Just because Warren lies to everyone about what will be paid for by this tax doesn’t make it true
damn all those racist democratic primary voters! looks like another person of color is out of the race!
good bye julian castro.
good bye julian castro.
Booker will be next. Buttigieg will do well in Iowa but by March 1 will be out. It all comes down to rich old white people.
Well, those are the folks with disposable income that is needed to donate to campaigns.
Who are the ones making the big campaign donations.
BTW, Buttigieg, Bernie, and Biden will be in it through the end of the primary season.
Lol, so are you saying that the Democrat nomination is dependent more on money than on votes? I'm not sure that I can disagree because that's why hillary won, but its pretty messed up if true. So much for the grassroots party of the people.
Yep. Whoever has more money will win. However, they'll be in for another rude awakening when minorities don't show up again at the polls in November.
How weird is that? Minority voters were always just considered to be a given for the democrats, and of all people Trump is the one to break the cycle. It's almost impossible to believe but it looks to be true.
Just looking at the field of democrat candidates, both current ones and those that have dropped out, who would minorities have rallied behind?
Minorities aren't voting for Trump, they are just staying home.
That’s not entirely true. I’ve seen polls showing Trump will get a larger percentage of minorities than last election and than the last several Republican candidates.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/477970-cory-booker-ends-presidential-bid
Cory Booker ends presidential bid
"I will carry this fight forward — I just won’t be doing it as a candidate for president this year," Booker said in an email to supporters.
"It’s with a full heart that I share this news — I’ve made the decision to suspend my campaign for president."
those damn racists dnc primary voters....
Cory Booker ends presidential bid
"I will carry this fight forward — I just won’t be doing it as a candidate for president this year," Booker said in an email to supporters.
"It’s with a full heart that I share this news — I’ve made the decision to suspend my campaign for president."
those damn racists dnc primary voters....
Boy, you just teed yourself up. Pretty sure democrats are the only party that nominated a black man.
Clearly you haven't been paying attention. Obama is so 2008 and liberals are now took Woke even for him. Old Barry sounds downright Boomer'ish in some of his recent comments, up to and including his old campaign staff actively lobbying against Sanders.
It's 2020 and the left wing in America demands Wokeness beyond and above what anyone did in the past. Except for when they're voting for President.
Until the GOP nominates a person of color, there's probably no room for criticizing the DNC over it.
Uh oh. Is our senile Socialist Champion of the People also a sexist anti-woman pig? Team Warren sure thinks so by leaking this ahead of the debate! War on women!
The two agreed that if they ultimately faced each other as presidential candidates, they should remain civil and avoid attacking one another, so as not to hurt the progressive movement. They also discussed how to best take on President Donald Trump, and Warren laid out two main reasons she believed she would be a strong candidate: She could make a robust argument about the economy and earn broad support from female voters.
Sanders responded that he did not believe a woman could win.
The description of that meeting is based on the accounts of four people: two people Warren spoke with directly soon after the encounter, and two people familiar with the meeting.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html
The two agreed that if they ultimately faced each other as presidential candidates, they should remain civil and avoid attacking one another, so as not to hurt the progressive movement. They also discussed how to best take on President Donald Trump, and Warren laid out two main reasons she believed she would be a strong candidate: She could make a robust argument about the economy and earn broad support from female voters.
Sanders responded that he did not believe a woman could win.
The description of that meeting is based on the accounts of four people: two people Warren spoke with directly soon after the encounter, and two people familiar with the meeting.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html
what a sexist?!?!! doesnt he know its the current year!!!111
id like to see him pause his campaign and reflect on this.
It is CNN, so it’s probably a good idea to be skeptical. But then again, this reporter has a good history so...
I don’t care about the news station, the notable thing is that the Warren camp is leaking this deliberately to paint Sanders as a Sexist! and part of the PATRIARCHY!
The two socialists are now dueling to see who is most Woke. It’ll be fun to watch.
Warren has probably been the nastiest of all the Dems this cycle. Has really turned me off her. I’m still a Buttigieg supporter but think it will be Biden or Sanders.
