2020 Democratic Nominee

[Foosters 17856]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Obviously it would be foolish to say Biden is a lock, considering the wild swings that have happened over the last couple of months (let alone the last couple of days). 

But what's happened with Biden's surge is not really about Joe Biden. It's about Dems rallying together and the comfort/relief/excitement that comes with it. Biden has a lot of issues, but they're mostly baked in. Verbal gaffes and votes he made 20-30 years ago are not going to move the needle against him. 

People just wanted a candidate that could bring the base together, and in the end Joe was the only one people were willing to settle on. 

Does the base not include people on the left? 

[Bateshorn 9927]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You're not answering the question.

Let's say, hypothetically, that rent rises 4% per year and that the trend has been to raise benefits 4% per year to match that.

What happens to someone who relies on that benefit when rent rises 4% and the benefit rises 0%?

 

15 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Haven't read up on it in a while, but the last time I did a good counterargument was that those receiving SSI disproportionately make medical care related purchases which are not accurately reflected in either CPI. So going to the more accurate overall chained CPI makes sense mathematically on a large scale, but not when you consider the people who are actually using SSI.

And your last part is unfortunately correct. There aren't enough people who are willing to continue supporting social welfare programs when their take home pay is affected. It's an unfortunate reality but it's not going to change.

 

You need to capture cost growth one way or another.  The nerds tell us the current system is inaccurate and overestimates cost growth.  Chained CPI is a more accurate measure.  In theory it should capture that 4% rent increase.  But a senior in Westlake is going to have much greater costs than one in Lubbock.  But it's the best tool we have. You basically would like to see higher benefit growth.  That's a fine position.  The question is how we will pay for it, realistically.  It's easy to grow benefits, it's much hard to raise revenue to support the long term fiscal health of the program.

 

@Huckleberry  I assume you mean SSDI or just Social Security (Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a poverty reduction program and is not paid for out of the OASDI taxes that come out of your paycheck). There are many, including AARP, that argue Chained CPI does not accurately capture medical cost, but the data is shaky .  Here's a Brookings Report on chained CPI that you may find informative.

This is the last post I'm going to do on Social Security in this thread on this, because I've started thread shitting.  If somebody else wants to start a separate entitlements thread, I'm game. I don't agree that Biden is a greater threat to entitlements than Trump, and I will leave it at that.

Edited March 4, 2020 by Bateshorn

[Skipper 6135]

6 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I think you are way overstating things.

A majority of Americans (not just democrats) support medicare for all.

A majority of Americans support free public college.

A majority of Americans would support free dinners at Al Beirnet's every month.  That doesn't make it logical or feasible.

[Hank Kingsley 20937]

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

Does the base not include people on the left? 

That's probably a question for the left.

 

[Storm the Field 5294]

7 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I think you are way overstating things.

A majority of Americans (not just democrats) support medicare for all.

A majority of Americans support free public college.

A majority of Americans support higher taxes on the wealthy.

 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

Just now, Skipper said:

A majority of Americans would support free dinners at Al Beirnet's every month.

Skipper 2020

[Foosters 17856]

Just now, Skipper said:

A majority of Americans would support free dinners at Al Beirnet's every month.  That doesn't make it logical or feasible.

Huh? You said that a majority of American's roll their eyes at these candidates and their positions. And yet, when asked specific policy questions, they actually support the policies they claim to oppose.

I'm not arguing feasibility, only popularity. 

[Storm the Field 5294]

Oakland
It’s just shy of 11:00 a.m. on Super Tuesday and a pair of black 70-something sisters, Shirley and Goldy Daley, are standing outside a diner where Joe Biden is scheduled to appear leading a “WE KNOW JOE” chant, in an attempt to drown out the white, millennial Bernie Bros who were heckling him with shouts of “racist” and “retire.”

Three days ago the sisters had a Mike Bloomberg sign in their yard. That’s how fast things have moved for Biden.

It was a shocking surge for a party that was on the cusp of nominating a socialist outsider. It was almost certainly a shock to the candidate, who just 11 days ago was staring at a third consecutive presidential primary embarrassment.

If you look at the exit polls, Biden’s surge of support on Super Tuesday came a broad, if late-deciding, coalition: older Democrats, blue-collar workers, suburban women, and African-Americans like Shirley and Goldy. The Daleys told me that they liked Joe all along, shopped for candidates, and landed on someone that they felt they knew and trusted—to govern, but more importantly to beat Donald Trump.

In conversations at Biden’s photo op in downtown Oakland and outside my precinct in the gentrifying neighborhood to its west, the refrain from Biden voters of all demographic stripes was the same.

A multi-ethnic, early-40s gay couple, Ben and Romaldo, had switched from Bloomberg to Biden on Saturday. (Bloomberg had been their “back-up” if nobody electable emerged in the early states.) Manny, a middle-aged white guy who runs a construction company in Oakland, had been just discussing with his wife “who can win” early Tuesday morning (!!) and landed tentatively on Biden before stumbling into Biden’s campaign appearance across the street from his office. Steven, a white millennial carrying a Mayor Pete sign, landed on Biden following Buttigieg’s exit.

None of the voters I spoke to had been with Joe from the start. Most of them weren’t with him last week. They didn’t feel as if they were part of a big movement or a cult of personality. All of them had been weighing other candidates. In the end, they decided they just wanted someone who can win. And after this past Saturday, they decided that their man was Uncle Joe..

https://thebulwark.com/joe-bidens-silent-majority/

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, Foosters said:

Are there a number of Dem senators who have proposed cutting entitlements? Serious question.

Not in 2016 or 2018 or 2020 because they're running against Trump/GOP so that doesn't fit the messaging. But if Biden wins, keeps the house, and doesn't control the Senate (or hell, even if he DOES) then he will want to Get Things Done and the Grand Bargain is something he failed to get.

He will want to show up Trump. He will want to show himself to be a bold leader who transcends partisan lines to do the reasonable and moderate thing. A balanced budget is something that he wants and that he thinks is real and important, so victory will empower him to pursue it.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope Joe Biden 2020 version is different than Joe Biden 1975-2019 version.

It would be amazing if he went in and used his power to expand SS, give universal healthcare to every single person regardless of ability (or even willingness) to pay. I'd love it. I love it when my pessimism or cynicism are shown to be false.

Just now, Bateshorn said:

The question is how we will pay for it, realistically.  It's easy to grow benefits, it's much hard to raise revenue to support the long term fiscal health of the program.

"Realistically" is the word I am not going to respect here, because the scope of what is realistic or possible is only limited by the courage we have in our advocacy. Because if we take the "realistically" of the coward what we get is what we have now, which is the product of Reaganite GOP and Clintonite Dems.

A much better way to handle the particular question of rents would be national rent control and robust public housing. Cost controls are important, and we just let the rent-seekers tell us what happens right now and it's insane.

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Obviously it would be foolish to say Biden is a lock, considering the wild swings that have happened over the last couple of months (let alone the last couple of days). 

But what's happened with Biden's surge is not really about Joe Biden. It's about Dems rallying together and the comfort/relief/excitement that comes with it. Biden has a lot of issues, but they're mostly baked in. Verbal gaffes and votes he made 20-30 years ago are not going to move the needle against him. 

People just wanted a candidate that could bring the base together, and in the end Joe was the only one people were willing to settle on.

You're very confident that this specific narrative is reality and you might very well be wrong.

We shall see.

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

That's probably a question for the left.

Do you think it interesting at all that people in this thread are holding two competing realities in their heads:

1 - Bernie is an idiot for not building a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.
2 - Biden doesn't need to build a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.

It's interesting to see how quickly the forums' collective wisdom did a 180 on this question. Not sure why you're so certain that what Biden has now is all he needs to win. The Blue Wall states haven't even voted yet.

['stache 21815]

51 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

When did I say Obama started the family separation policy? You're lying about my argument and you're emotionally unhinged. I'm losing, so why am I calmer and more reasonable than you? It's weird.

I said Obama started caging people at the border, which is true.

Did Trump make it worse? Absolutely.
Is Trump worse than Obama? Absolutely.

But that's the problem when you help build up a powerful unitary executive and think, "Ah, this is fine, because I will be in power forever!" ... You're not going to be in power forever. Poor leadership and our frontrunner is running on, "Let's do it again!"

I don't like that.

Your snide little comment wasn't about immigration policy, it was to make a direct comparison between Trump and Obama (and Biden by association). There is valid criticism of Obamas policies, primarily as it concerned unaccompanied minors, but there is no comparison whatsoever on the "caging children" issue as it relates to family separation, which was the topic being discussed. You knew that but had to throw in your pot shot. Intellectual dishonesty is also a maga trait, so congratulations.  

[HenryJames 66052]

I

[Foosters 17856]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Do you think it interesting at all that people in this thread are holding two competing realities in their heads:

1 - Bernie is an idiot for not building a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.
2 - Biden doesn't need to build a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.

It's interesting to see how quickly the forums' collective wisdom did a 180 on this question. Not sure why you're so certain that what Biden has now is all he needs to win. The Blue Wall states haven't even voted yet.

This is what I'm getting at. 

[bad_teammate 13195]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Your snide little comment wasn't about immigration policy, it was to make a direct comparison between Trump and Obama (and Biden by association).

That's how you can interpret it, I guess, but that doesn't make it true.

Obama lead to Trump. Obama enjoyed unitary executive power, utilized it, and expanded it. Biden will do the same. Who will be Biden's Trump?

If you think that's an unfair question to even ask and it causes you to overreact like this, then you might not have the emotional fortitude for these discussions.

2 minutes ago, Foosters said:

This is what I'm getting at. 

We're in a "tribalism for me, but not for thee" situation here.

Me? Go out there and fight hard for your specific ideas and values. I've never called for anyone to drop out, even if it helps my Dear Bernard. If Liz wants to PERSIST! then PERSIST! away. Fight us and beat us.

This premature coalition-building muddies too many waters.

I mean, it's obviously a great electoral strategy in this primary because it has rocketed him to 1st place, but as far as vision and leadership it's a nightmare. We have little idea what Biden even stands for at this point and where his loyalties are being divided up and the promises he's made. Who owns him now? Who does he owe?

But hey, that's not important to a lot of people. It's important to me, and it's probably important to a lot of people Joe might need in November.

(Or he might not need us. He might be able to win with his middle finger fully extended. Good luck either way.)

[Hank Kingsley 20937]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You're very confident that this specific narrative is reality and you might very well be wrong.

We shall see.

Do you think it interesting at all that people in this thread are holding two competing realities in their heads:

1 - Bernie is an idiot for not building a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.
2 - Biden doesn't need to build a coalition with people who are hostile to his ideology.

It's interesting to see how quickly the forums' collective wisdom did a 180 on this question. Not sure why you're so certain that what Biden has now is all he needs to win. The Blue Wall states haven't even voted yet.

After Nevada, Bernie world was doing victory laps and confidently sensed a primary victory. We're all playing with our own narratives as a way to predict who wins the nomination. 

 

[MonkeyDoughnut 10235]

8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

This is what I'm getting at. 

My take has always been Bernie represents the 30% that doesn't fit into what the other 70% want. Like the choice "D - None of the above" answers on a multiple choice question. Just because a majority of people pick it doesn't mean it represents what the majority of people want.

[kevwun 15788]

He's not Trump.

He's not Bernie.

That's why last night happened.

[G650 14256]

34 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I would prefer a system that covers the benefits necessary and uses wealth taken from the top 1% to ensure solvency.

What happens when you run out of their money, which would happen pretty rapidly?

[FWD 297]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

After Nevada, Bernie world was doing victory laps and confidently sensed a primary victory. We're all playing with our own narratives as a way to predict who wins the nomination. 

 

I'll never understand why the instinct after Nevada wasn't to project unity and try to bring broader groups of Dems on board. Instead, Bernie railed against the Democratic establishment and defended Fidel Castro. 

[kevwun 15788]

Because that's who Bernie Sanders is.  You either agree 100% with him or you are part of the problem.  He doesn't know how to compromise.

Edited March 4, 2020 by kevwun

[HenryJames 66052]

1 minute ago, kevwun said:

Because that's who Bernie Sanders is.  You either agree 100% with him or you are part of the problem.  He doesn't know how to compromise.

I think that's more his supporters than him.

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

After Nevada, Bernie world was doing victory laps and confidently sensed a primary victory. We're all playing with our own narratives as a way to predict who wins the nomination.

And that's fair.

But it does do a pretty good job of putting a year+ of "BERNIE BROS ARE SO MEAN AND TOXIC!" into the right perspective, which is that Bernie Bros are not actually any different than fans of any other candidate or ideology. It's just about who feels like they're winning and who feels like they're losing.

Even in my most hubristic I liked my narrative because I liked the values and policy platform that was involved. (Being a smug, self-righteous asshole, I still am extremely confident in the moral superiority of my ideology. Which is why I am rightly hated.)

1 minute ago, G650 said:

What happens when you run out of their money, which would happen pretty rapidly?

Well that would be their own fault for skyrocketing rents, wouldn't it?

The actual answer, as I already mentioned, is cost control. National rent controls and robust public housing solves the problem and adds a tremendous amount of stability to the housing market for those in financially insecure positions.

[Dbeasy 15051]

I think you are way overstating things.
A majority of Americans (not just democrats) support medicare for all.
A majority of Americans support free public college.
A majority of Americans support higher taxes on the wealthy.
 
 

Polls show this because of how the questions have been asked. Free things are always wanted. Nothing is free though. Ask these questions while clarifying where exactly the money comes from and you will get different poll results.

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 minute ago, Dbeasy said:

Polls show this because of how the questions have been asked. Free things are always wanted. Nothing is free though. Ask these questions while clarifying where exactly the money comes from and you will get different poll results.

Why didn't Bernie work even harder to ally himself with people like this with the ultimate goal of accomplishing nothing!?

[Skipper 6135]

Just now, Foosters said:

Huh? You said that a majority of American's roll their eyes at these candidates and their positions. And yet, when asked specific policy questions, they actually support the policies they claim to oppose.

I'm not arguing feasibility, only popularity. 

It's like those policy positions at the end of the ballot in Texas last night.   Sure, they all sound great in in a vacuum without any basis for how it can possibly be paid for or the negative consequences of excessive taxation (recession, loss of jobs, etc).  There's no such thing as a free lunch.

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

3 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

 

Polls show this because of how the questions have been asked. Free things are always wanted. Nothing is free though. Ask these questions while clarifying where exactly the money comes from and you will get different poll results.

 

Agreed. If you ask different questions I bet you get a different answer. Therefore, my assumptions are correct. Checkmate. 

[Huckleberry 32859]

3 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Polls show this because of how the questions have been asked. Free things are always wanted. Nothing is free though. Ask these questions while clarifying where exactly the money comes from and you will get different poll results.

 

This is why the Democrats lose, because they get tricked into caring about this kind of thing when the other side absolutely doesn't.

"Taking care of the sick costs a lot of money! Educating our populace also costs money! Where do you think you're going to get all that money?!?!?"
"Oh well, I guess you're right, there's no way to take care of our people."

"We are spending $1,500,000,000,000 on a fighter jet that doesn't work. I wonder where that money came from?"
"Who gives a shit? Just cut the check."

[G650 14256]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Well that would be their own fault for skyrocketing rents, wouldn't it?

As a group? Uh, no.

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, G650 said:

As a group? Uh, no.

Yes, as a group.

Let's not white-knight the plutocrats and oligarchs, my friend. There are better uses of our souls.

[Pig Bellmont 8718]

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Being a smug, self-righteous asshole, I still am extremely confident in the moral superiority of my ideology. Which is why I am rightly hated.)

That and your incessant crying all over the political boards

[Foosters 17856]

2 minutes ago, Skipper said:

It's like those policy positions at the end of the ballot in Texas last night.   Sure, they all sound great in in a vacuum without any basis for how it can possibly be paid for or the negative consequences of excessive taxation (recession, loss of jobs, etc).  There's no such thing as a free lunch.

Fair enough. I wholeheartedly disagree that those things cannot be accomplished without destroying the economy, but we're not going to agree, so no point in belaboring the point.

Overall, I still think it's dumb to dismiss the left as a small group of naive Twitter personalities out of touch with what Americans want. That group just decidedly took California, the world's 5th largest economy and 1/8 of the country's population.

[G650 14256]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Yes, as a group.

Let's not white-knight the plutocrats and oligarchs, my friend. There are better uses of our souls.

I'm not white-knighting anyone. You seem to be referencing the .000001% and not the 1%

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 minute ago, G650 said:

I'm not white-knighting anyone. You seem to be referencing the .000001% and not the 1%

Top 1% income is $420k+ (nice). It's EXTREMELY common for that group to seek rents (either literally via property or "passive income" where other people do the actual labor). The Top 1% isn't average Joe workers.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

42 minutes ago, Skipper said:

A majority of Americans would support free dinners at Al Beirnet's every month.  That doesn't make it logical or feasible.

Honest question -- you seem to shoot down any sort of move that would raise taxes and increase benefits. Why the hell are you hanging out on a thread about the Democratic candidate for the presidency. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean you get to move the Democratic party even farther to the right than Reagan, Clinton, Newt, Biden, and Hillary already did.

Go deficit hawk with the Gary Johnson voters. 

[G650 14256]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Top 1% income is $420k+ (nice). It's EXTREMELY common for that group to seek rents (either literally via property or "passive income" where other people do the actual labor). The Top 1% isn't average Joe workers.

No one is calling it average Joe, but 420k is just as likely to be a mid level professional with a wife and two kids in a nice suburb as someone seeking rents.

[David Dennison 18860]

14 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Polls show this because of how the questions have been asked. Free things are always wanted. Nothing is free though. Ask these questions while clarifying where exactly the money comes from and you will get different poll results.

 

Corporate subsidies and handouts to the rich don't pay for themselves.

[Rougarou 594]

54 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I think you are way overstating things.

A majority of Americans (not just democrats) support medicare for all.

A majority of Americans support free public college.

A majority of Americans support higher taxes on the wealthy.

 

 

Do they, though? 

When: MFA means killing the private option

When: Free public college means affecting the tax home pay of the "wealthy", which leads to the next point,

When: wealthy is defined as someone making more than $137k a year

[bad_teammate 13195]

 

1 minute ago, G650 said:

No one is calling it average Joe, but 420k is just as likely to be a mid level professional with a wife and two kids in a nice suburb as someone seeking rents.

The username is doing a lot of work here.

$420k/year is an absolutely insane amount of money. It's beyond the comprehension of 90+% of Americans. If you're making that much money, you are an elite. You might not feel like it (thanks capitalism, a system that makes even the elites feel insecure!), but that's what it is.

Class consciousness, my friend. Does a body good.

[David Dennison 18860]

When this country finally does enact MFA, it will look like Medicare. That means it will include Medicare Advantage. Private insurance companies will be part of the equation. Employers will not.

[G650 14256]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The username is doing a lot of work here.

$420k/year is an absolutely insane amount of money. It's beyond the comprehension of 90+% of Americans. If you're making that much money, you are an elite. You might not feel like it (thanks capitalism, a system that makes even the elites feel insecure!), but that's what it is.

Class consciousness, my friend. Does a body good.

I'm a life long construction worker who started with a shovel at 14 years old. I spend every day with the literally poorest people in the country.

 

You are inadvertently pointing out something I have tried to explain to people for years. The average American truly has no idea who the rich are and how much they have. The guy making 420k a year still lives a regular life. A cozy one, but he is paying bills and mortgages, putting his kids  through school, all the things. He has almost everything in common with the person making 55k a year, culturally, structurally, and otherwise. He just has nicer shit. The guy making 10 million a year has nothing in common with this whatsoever. We draw the line way too low on who we perceive as "rich" or "elite". It's all relative, and people can only know what they see, but that is the reality.

[Skipper 6135]

10 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Honest question -- you seem to shoot down any sort of move that would raise taxes and increase benefits. Why the hell are you hanging out on a thread about the Democratic candidate for the presidency. Just because you hate Trump doesn't mean you get to move the Democratic party even farther to the right than Reagan, Clinton, Newt, Biden, and Hillary already did.

Go deficit hawk with the Gary Johnson voters. 

I don't shoot down "ANY" move that would raise taxes and increase benefits.  It's just that I think the ones primarily discussed by the Bernie Bro's (that dominate this thread) are not feasible in the real world.   Sorry rational discussion isn't allowed.   And 'taxes and free shit' aren't the only issues on the Democratic platform.  I am an Independent and voted for Gary last election (regrettably at this point).  But I know many that have solely voted D their entire lives that I'm pretty politically aligned with.  P.S.  That is why Biden is wining.  The party isn't near as left as Twitter leads you to believe.

[G650 14256]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

When this country finally does enact MFA, it will look like Medicare. That means it will include Medicare Advantage. Private insurance companies will be part of the equation. Employers will not.

I await the day.

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

23 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Literally never heard of Matt Stoller in my life.

[henrygandorf 29191]

27 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

(Being a smug, self-righteous asshole, I still am extremely confident in the moral superiority of my ideology. Which is why I am rightly hated.)

no, that's inaccurate.

you've spent the last 9-12 months on this board spraying diarrhea on every candidate except yours.  that's why you are rightly hated.

i'm not sure you and i have had more than 2-3 interactions involving bernie. 

[Storm the Field 5294]

A tweet I saw that seemed to sup it up fairly well.

"Last night happened because rank and file Democrats decided they would prefer to remain the Democratic Party and not the Party of Democratic Socialists."

[Michael Knight 12977]

Seems like Warren will be dropping out soon

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

30 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Top 1% income is $420k+ (nice). It's EXTREMELY common for that group to seek rents (either literally via property or "passive income" where other people do the actual labor). The Top 1% isn't average Joe workers.

$420K doesn't last as easily as you think it does.  Between my Mercedes payments, mortgage, country club dues, etc... I struggle just like everybody else to make ends meet.

[Pig Bellmont 8718]

2 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Seems like Warren will be dropping out soon

She has no viable path forward. The big question is whether she will endorse before the convention. 

[washparkhorn 9939]

1 hour ago, Skipper said:

Most Americans (and yes, even most Democrats) don't want Socialism 

Sure thing skippy - people hate fire departments. 

[henrygandorf 29191]

6 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

$420K doesn't last as easily as you think it does.  Between my Mercedes payments, mortgage, country club dues, etc... I struggle just like everybody else to make ends meet.

don't forget all the nannies, private island maintenance fees, and helicopter upkeep.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

8 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

She has no viable path forward. The big question is whether she will endorse before the convention. 

Some of her supporters, including some people who are otherwise very smart, still think she is going to endorse Bernie. One of them challenged me to a bet, which I reluctantly accepted. Reluctantly only because I like the guy and I kind of like Warren and she is about to break his heart.