Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

Js1

Js1 85449

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

My guess: he wears a bolo tie. 

 

 

If you had told me someone else would wear a bolo tie before Bullock (Montana) or Hickenlooper (Colorado), I would have called you a god damn liar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1391

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

EENB3hnXkAEeSvQ?format=jpg&name=medium

How the media takes Biden’s bullshit and attacks Warren without Biden doing it himself. He’s just asking for it now.

Pretty insulting to suggest Liz is only offering plans. Good luck with that one, Joe. Setting up a home run response for her in the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13220

Posted
Posted

As an annoyingly rabid supporter of the candidate with the best, boldest, and most clearly-spelled-out plans to tackle the major issues facing us -- all of which you can read about in detail on his website and in the Senate bills he has sponsored/co-sponsored -- it is ABSOLUTELY true that plans alone aren't enough.

Buttigieg and Williamson make the same point.

A candidate has to be able to answer a general "How do we pass it?" AND they have to answer the front-runner's challenge, "Why should anyone think your position is stronger for getting results than mine?"

Biden is the frontrunner. A few hopeful polls show either Liz or Bernie ahead of him, and I adore those polls with all of my black heart, but he's not really falling away. I want it to happen soon, but it's not happening yet.

I think Bernie has a clear and convincing answer to both of the above questions. I think Liz is developing hers. I don't think Harris or Pete have an answer to either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20991

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The trend and long term trend are the only things of value in these polls.  Where the numbers are right now are not nearly as important as where they’re going. 

Biden is falling, Warren is rising, Bernie is hanging in there. Biden losing the nomination is going according to plan. 

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Even you have to admit she committed political malpractice by taking Wisconsin and Michigan for granted. 

Against Donald Trump?  I’m pretty sure the people that chose him are far more to blame than Hillary.  

The Wisconsin narrative is weak shit and just a talking point excuse to scapegoat Hillary.  Yeah she should have gone there, she probably could have done a dozen other things too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23560

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

This week warren passed Biden on my sportsbook as the favorite. Great sign.

Warren's been leading the Dem candidates for awhile on predictit. I bought contracts for her to win the presidential election at .14 and she's been hovering around .23/.24 for a couple of weeks. Trump is at .42, but as the other Dem candidates drop out the odds will continue to increase for Warren, Biden, and Sanders. Dotard should stay around .40-.45 for the foreseeable future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Message Board User

Message Board User 12395

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If you assholes get trump re-elected because someone not palatable to the Arizonas and Wisconsins of world is put up there I won’t forgive you.  

Just wait until the convention when AOC gets a prime time speaking spot and she leads the crowd in a Shout Your Abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Storm the Field

Storm the Field 5297

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If you assholes get trump re-elected because someone not palatable to the Arizonas and Wisconsins of world is put up there I won’t forgive you.  

Get ready for it. The far-left progressive wing of the party would rather lose with the"right" candidate than win with the "wrong" candidate. Never mind they are actually a small minority of people that actually vote Democratic. Shit, with Warren's pledge to completely shut down the O&G industry on Day 1, my left-leaning ass will probably end up having to vote third party. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

Warren's pledge to completely shut down the O&G industry on Day 1,

Link?  She planned to ban fracking but that also can be interpreted in different ways such as a ban on new fracking and/or setting a future date where all fracking will be prohibited. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Storm the Field

Storm the Field 5297

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Bernie does better against Trump than anyone who isn't Biden. Bernie always wins the head-to-heads.

We can win with the right candidate.

From latest NPR/Marist poll:

LfRw0yJ.jpg

55% of voters say they have an unfavorable impression of Sanders, while just 38% have a positive one.

Trump is at 41% approve/54% approve. Hey remember when Donald Trump won in 2016 because his opponent was one of the few people on the planet viewed as poorly as him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Storm the Field

Storm the Field 5297

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Link?  She planned to ban fracking but that also can be interpreted in different ways such as a ban on new fracking and/or setting a future date where all fracking will be prohibited. 

She said she would institute a freeze on development offshore and on federal lands and would ban fracking, nationwide, on Day 1. 

That would be a massive blow to O&G, which is the point. It's essentially the most a President could possibly do to cripple the industry. 

Call me no better than a Republican or whatever you want, but I have trouble seeing myself really rooting for the person that wants to pro-actively end my career.

Edited by Storm the Field
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted (edited)

She said she would institute a freeze on development offshore and on federal lands and would ban fracking, nationwide, on Day 1. 

That would be a massive blow to O&G, which is the point. It's essentially the most a President could possibly do to cripple the industry. 

Call me no better than a Republican or whatever you want, but I have trouble seeing myself really rooting for the person that wants to pro-actively end my career.

Okay cool.  Vote for the Nazi party that wants to destroy the earth.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted

Well, we didn't capture every German man, woman and child and execute them after the war, so I guess we really didn't hate Nazis.

For the same reason, you are going to lose votes if you want to blow shit up, rather than come up with more nuances attacks.

I realize she wants to win the nomination but just about everyone I know is a suburban conservative/moderate who hates Trump and gave us some wins in 2016.

 

Red meat is bad for the environment.  Should a candidate seek to ban all red meat or should a candidate prior to being elected discuss ways to discourage the consumption without banning red meat?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jhawk

Jhawk 1075

Posted
Posted

Warren’s tactic is very clear. Any issue that is a core concern for a left of moderate dem is going to be addressed not by making sensible goals but by absolutely attacking the connected industries. 

Climate change: destroy fossil fuel industry and companies regardless of what it does to the economy. No time to transition. Just destroy ASAP. 

Bankers didn’t go to jail: destroy banking industry regardless of the harm it will cause every citizen with even a modest amount in the stock market. Cause havoc with inflation because the ends justify the means day one. 

When you look at her approach to getting what she wants you have to wonder why we even have congress or senate. Of course, you have to wonder the same for about 18 of the last 20 years. I mean at least the worst legislation in the last 50 years went through all chambers. She wants to take “pen and phone” to a level beyond what anyone else has. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ryskey

ryskey 447

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

She said she would institute a freeze on development offshore and on federal lands and would ban fracking, nationwide, on Day 1. 

That would be a massive blow to O&G, which is the point. It's essentially the most a President could possibly do to cripple the industry. 

Call me no better than a Republican or whatever you want, but I have trouble seeing myself really rooting for the person that wants to pro-actively end my career.

It would also result in $100/bbl oil, $7/mmbtu natural gas, which will crater the economy.  It would also increase our use of coal, thereby increasing CO2 emissions.  Just a truly awful, counterproductive position to take, especially one that will ensure Texas stays out of play for the foreseeable future.  It was likely, at the very least, that the Rs would need to spend resources in TX to make sure it stays red in 2020.  If Warren is nominated, that no longer happens.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Storm the Field

Storm the Field 5297

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, ryskey said:

It would also result in $100/bbl oil, $7/mmbtu natural gas, which will crater the economy.  It would also increase our use of coal, thereby increasing CO2 emissions.  Just a truly awful, counterproductive position to take, especially one that will ensure Texas stays out of play for the foreseeable future.  It was likely, at the very least, that the Rs would need to spend resources in TX to make sure it stays red in 2020.  If Warren is nominated, that no longer happens.

Whatever,  Nazi. Get on the Bernie or Warren train or GFY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...