2020 Democratic Nominee

[GSU&UT 1799]

54 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

You would abstain in this scenario? Or vote Trump?

My primary in Georgia is late and if he picked her before then I'd vote for someone else in the primary, however I'll vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is in the general. It would show him completely paying lip service to everything he's fought for. I cannot stress enough how much Klobuchar is the anti-progressive candidate, she honestly thought releasing some policy about tax credits to help middle-class families (who have no real savings) to pay for education was a good move.

I cannot imagine any scenario Bernie would pick her as VP, he's already really strong in the mid-west and would likely pick someone to help him out in the South.

Edited January 3, 2020 by GSU&UT

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

My primary in Georgia is late and if he picked her before then I'd vote for someone else in the primary, however I'll vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is in the general. It would show him completely paying lip service to everything he's fought for. I cannot stress enough how much Klobuchar is the anti-progressive candidate, she honestly thought releasing some policy about tax credits to help middle-class families (who have no real savings) to pay for education was a good move.

I cannot imagine any scenario Bernie would pick her as VP, he's already really strong in the mid-west and would likely pick someone to help him out in the South.

Cool, gotcha. 

I've always imagined Bernie or Warren picking a southerner as well. Just not sure who that is. Beto is too white and Castro sucks. So it'd be someone outside of the primary.

[washparkhorn 9967]

5 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

I don’t see Warren as his veep pick if he wins the nomination. I see him choosing Klobuchar

Warren is a good establishment pick for Sanders. She is more to the right than most people think. She has the trust of the Establishment that runs Washington and the banks will come around to her. She balances the ticket nicely politically, as a Sanders Presidency would propose a bottom up approach. She has been caricatured by Wall Street and the Tea Party remnants as anti-capitalist. That's a Republican talking point without legs. Her work in 2008 was an olive branch to the self-described "masters of the universe" who have wreaked so much hell on this economy. She is a reformer, she knows where the bodies are buried (especially with Biden's bankruptcy bill - the most devastating legislation we have seen to the working and middle classes in 70 years). 

I think Warren would be the perfect pick for a Sanders VP. Reform will require talented folks. She is certainly that and more. 

But I get the Klobachar vibe. I think Amy will start distancing herself from her corporate sponsors if she is serious about 2020. Those betting on continued corporate control of elections are losing the battle on the left and the right. The Third Way/New Democrat and Republican-lite models are dying. 

[washparkhorn 9967]

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Bernie should select a black woman from the Midwest. A woman with powerful speaking skills who can inspire crowds.

The Bros are united: We want Nina.

 

Love Nina - but she is better suited for Senior Advisor role. Communications Director would allow her to tailor and discipline the message. She kicks all sorts of ass on the ground, where it will be needed most. And she is damn good in person and in media. She would be the de facto most powerful figure in a Sanders Administration. She knows the message and why it works. VP (except under Bush II) is a PR job. Nina knows policy. 

But if she is the VP pick, hell yes.

[Js1 86950]

$21.2m for Liz

$11.4m for Klobs

 

[heso 2848]

What is this thread’s opinion of Yang?

[Fozzz 152]

9 minutes ago, heso said:

What is this thread’s opinion of Yang?

[BradInATX 9208]

14 minutes ago, heso said:

What is this thread’s opinion of Yang?

I think he's probably a bit out of his depth and it's perhaps a bit presumptuous of him to think he's ready to be the president, but he's the only one that's giving serious attention to issues that are far, far more important to our future than 99% of what politicians talk about. I'm glad he doesn't have a real chance to win, but I'm also glad he's around and doing what he's doing.

Edited January 3, 2020 by BradInATX

[406W30th 1111]

9 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I think he's probably a bit out of his depth and it's perhaps a bit presumptuous of him to think he's ready to be the president, but he's the only one that's giving serious attention to issues that are far, far more important to our future than 99% of what politicians talk about. I'm glad he doesn't have a real chance to win, but I'm also glad he's around and doing what he's doing.

I'm confused – Yang is absolutely not the best candidate re: climate change.

 

[bad_teammate 13481]

Yang's characterization of the impact of automation isn't a serious candidate addressing a serious issue, it's a dork candidate talking about sci-fi. And as a dork who likes sci-fi, I appreciate that, but the idea that we're all on the verge of being replaced by AI is laughable.

[wildcat09 29561]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Yang's characterization of the impact of automation isn't a serious candidate addressing a serious issue, it's a dork candidate talking about sci-fi. And as a dork who likes sci-fi, I appreciate that, but the idea that we're all on the verge of being replaced by AI is laughable.

Yeah. It'd be nice to hear someone talking about it as one of many things that impact the labor force and maybe we should do something to help those who will be impacted by it, but the idea that automation is going to eliminate all jobs in the near future is ridiculous. People were saying similar shit in the 1950s and predicting that automation would enable everyone to enjoy a life of recreation and luxury while working 15-20 hours a week by now. That, uh, didn't happen.

[henrygandorf 29223]

29 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

the idea that we're all on the verge of being replaced by AI is laughable.

that’s how it starts. 

[bad_teammate 13481]

Jesus Christ, Pete is absolutely terrible.

7000 words into his remarks, half of which are there to remind us that he pushed papers for a few months in Afghanistan, he gets around to "uh... oh yeah we shouldn't do more war I guess?"

Fuck this kid.

Edited January 3, 2020 by bad_teammate

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Yang's characterization of the impact of automation isn't a serious candidate addressing a serious issue, it's a dork candidate talking about sci-fi. And as a dork who likes sci-fi, I appreciate that, but the idea that we're all on the verge of being replaced by AI is laughable.

Laugh all you want. It's already happening. The smart move is to get out in front of it. 

Not just in low wage fields either.

Already, I'd say a good half to two thirds of current office jobs are unnecessary. The only thing saving them is that employers aren't as evil as we like to think. 

And that has already come for millenials as retiring olds are having their positions eliminated rather than refilled.  There are also some entrenched fields where boomers and X's like human interaction. I think millennials and Z's are far less likely to feel that a human sales rep provides a benefit though. 

We will always need nurses. Maybe everyone should just be a nurse. 

[bad_teammate 13481]

The automation alarmists are heavy on rhetoric but light on reasoning and evidence.

- How many jobs have actually been lost to automation?
- Is that rate higher than the norm of job losses due to historical technological change?

Largest employment fields. Most of these won't even be touched by AI, much less dramatically reduced. I can't even see one of them were AI is going to take over in any meaningful way.

People prefer people. Even the dreaded young people prefer human checkout to automated kiosks 80-20.

Job automation is something forced on us. We don't want it. All we have to do to stop it is prevent big business from doing it. It's why the regulatory state exists.

The play isn't to just pay everyone a starvation wage to allow the corporate demons to rape them eternally.

[BradInATX 9208]

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Laugh all you want. It's already happening. The smart move is to get out in front of it. 

Not just in low wage fields either.

Already, I'd say a good half to two thirds of current office jobs are unnecessary. The only thing saving them is that employers aren't as evil as we like to think. 

And that has already come for millenials as retiring olds are having their positions eliminated rather than refilled.  There are also some entrenched fields where boomers and X's like human interaction. I think millennials and Z's are far less likely to feel that a human sales rep provides a benefit though. 

We will always need nurses. Maybe everyone should just be a nurse. 

This is a boomer talking about things they don't understand. Should have just ok boomer'ed him and moved on.

Edited January 3, 2020 by BradInATX

[BradInATX 9208]

2 hours ago, 406W30th said:

I'm confused – Yang is absolutely not the best candidate re: climate change.

 

Wealth inequality will get us before climate change does. 

[Biff Tannen 46063]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Wealth inequality will get us before climate change does. 

whynotboth.gif

[henrygandorf 29223]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Jesus Christ, Pete is absolutely terrible.

7000 words into his remarks, half of which are there to remind us that he pushed papers for a few months in Afghanistan, he gets around to "uh... oh yeah we shouldn't do more war I guess?"

Fuck this kid.

it's like you're not even trying anymore.

[bad_teammate 13481]

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

it's like you're not even trying anymore.

Sorry that you're unable to defend your shit candidate and can only ever play the man instead of the ball. Must suck for you.

[henrygandorf 29223]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Sorry that you're unable to defend your shit candidate and can only ever play the man instead of the ball. Must suck for you.

sorry that you feel the need to purposely post false interpretations from a candidate you have a personal problem with in hopes that someone won't take the time to actually read 13 sentences.  or maybe you just can't tell the difference anymore.  this isn't twitter.

now do warren's.

[Rougarou 594]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

The automation alarmists are heavy on rhetoric but light on reasoning and evidence.

- How many jobs have actually been lost to automation?
- Is that rate higher than the norm of job losses due to historical technological change?

Largest employment fields. Most of these won't even be touched by AI, much less dramatically reduced. I can't even see one of them were AI is going to take over in any meaningful way.

People prefer people. Even the dreaded young people prefer human checkout to automated kiosks 80-20.

Job automation is something forced on us. We don't want it. All we have to do to stop it is prevent big business from doing it. It's why the regulatory state exists.

The play isn't to just pay everyone a starvation wage to allow the corporate demons to rape them eternally.

Automation of business (not factories) is still so new that the data has yet to be really crystallized. I think in 5 years it will be alarming.

[bad_teammate 13481]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

sorry that you feel the need to purposely post false interpretations from a candidate you have a personal problem with in hopes that someone won't take the time to actually read 13 sentences.  or maybe you just can't tell the difference anymore.  this isn't twitter.

What's the "false interpretation"?

Paragraph 1: The FIRST TWO SENTENCES are the moral justifications for both Trump's action and a forthcoming war. Then there's a bureaucratic process objection (not moral, ethical, or even strategic).
Paragraph 2: I WAS IN AFGHANISTAN! I'M A TROOP!
Paragraph 3: A continuation of the bureaucratic process objection. (Not moral, ethical, or even strategic.)
Paragraph 4: Strategic objection
Paragraph 5: Continuation of strategic objection. Reiteration of I WAS IN AFGHANISTAN! I'M A TROOP!

He fucking sucks. He's dogshit. He'll be a complete war hawk leader because his only real concern about war is whether or not i's are dotted and t's are crossed. Fuck this kid.

Quote

now do warren's.

She had a shitty one last night then a good one this morning.

She's a foreign policy lightweight.

[Rougarou 594]

Kid?

[bad_teammate 13481]

11 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Automation of business (not factories) is still so new that the data has yet to be really crystallized. I think in 5 years it will be alarming.

*America's working classes as AI decimates the middle managerial, accounting, and attorney classes*

[bad_teammate 13481]

1 minute ago, Rougarou said:

Kid?

Pete Buttigieg

The 38-year-old guy running for president. I use "kid" to refer to him in the diminutive because I don't like him.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Nah, fuck Pete

 

[Rougarou 594]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

*America's working classes as AI decimates the middle managerial, accounting, and attorney classes*

That’s not accurate; automation decimates the high-headcount-lower-skill-repetitive and manual processes (pronounced Process-eeze through my Larchmont/Locust Valley Lockjaw for effect of course).

Edited January 3, 2020 by Rougarou

[BradInATX 9208]

2 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

That’s not accurate; automation decimates the high-headcount-loser-skill-repetitive and manual processes (pronounced Process-eeze through my Larchmont Lockjaw for effect of course).

Automation in trucking alone is going to cause one of the most serious economic issues in American history. Millions and millions of jobs gone poof, almost overnight. The overwhelming majority of whom are not qualified to do any sort of other skilled or technical job.

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by BradInATX

[Rougarou 594]

Just now, BradInATX said:

Automation in trucking alone is going to cause one of the most serious economic issues in American history. Millions and millions of jobs gone poof.

I didn’t mean loser skilled but my phone autocorrects from lower skilled to that. It knows. AI is already sentient.

[henrygandorf 29223]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What's the "false interpretation"?

Paragraph 1: The FIRST TWO SENTENCES are the moral justifications for both Trump's action and a forthcoming war. Then there's a bureaucratic process objection (not moral, ethical, or even strategic).
Paragraph 2: I WAS IN AFGHANISTAN! I'M A TROOP!
Paragraph 3: A continuation of the bureaucratic process objection. (Not moral, ethical, or even strategic.)
Paragraph 4: Strategic objection
Paragraph 5: Continuation of strategic objection. Reiteration of I WAS IN AFGHANISTAN! I'M A TROOP!

He fucking sucks. He's dogshit. He'll be a complete war hawk leader because his only real concern about war is whether or not i's are dotted and t's are crossed. Fuck this kid.

yikes, that's what you read?

the whole thing is an attack on trump and how even though (1) the president is cic and (2) dude was bad and killed americans, there is a process that not only ensures the correct people were in the loop, but that it's not a short sighted action - that it takes into account effects on the region and how it impacts america and americans.

then he starts one sentence with the same shit he's been using to contrast the difference between himself and trump, implying that trump and those close to him often don't consider anything but what's best for them politically.  yep, almost a whole sentence (out of 13) about how he was in afghanistan, because it grinds a lot of republicans' gears that trump dodged.

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

he gets around to "uh... oh yeah we shouldn't do more war I guess?"

not sure if you know how quotation marks work, but he actually said, "one thing is clear : this must not be the start of another endless war."

this is the kind of disingenuous bullshit you used to rail against.  if you want to shitpost and troll, get better at it, or get funnier with it.

[workswithseed 2201]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

This is a boomer talking about things they don't understand. Should have just ok boomer'ed him and moved on.

No, the old commie is right.

[BradInATX 9208]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

No, the old commie is right.

You and b_t should definitely form a power team of the baby boomer O&G lifer and the fucking farmer, and tell all of us about technology and automation. Please do share with all of us everything you've got. 

😂😂😂

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by BradInATX

[F250 29178]

[workswithseed 2201]

Just now, BradInATX said:

You and b_t should definitely form a power team of the baby boomer O&G lifer and the fucking farmer, and tell all of us about technology and automation. Please do share with all of us everything you've got. 

😂😂😂

 

All technology has done has made life easier. Are you still wondering what those whalers are gonna do when O&G comes out? 

All those truckers will still be in the trucks so they can manually drive if systems malfunction. 

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

All those truckers will still be in the trucks so they can manually drive if systems malfunction. 

😂😂😂

[bad_teammate 13481]

Brad's obsession with talking about me while ignoring me (or pretending to) is unhealthy and someone should intervene.

30 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the whole thing is an attack on trump

The first two sentences are just a gleeful parroting of the Trump administration's rationale for killing a top foreign official. An uncritical and full-throated moral justification. Those first two sentences could be the opening of a Trump WH press release on the matter.

Quote

and how even though (1) the president is cic and (2) dude was bad and killed americans, there is a process that not only ensures the correct people were in the loop, but that it's not a short sighted action - that it takes into account effects on the region and how it impacts america and americans.

Yes, like I said multiple times, "a bureaucratic process objection"

You don't even really argue with me on substance, you just argue at me about your hurt feelings that I say obviously valid things that you don't like.

Process objections are meaningless. Process doesn't actually matter, because we can cross i's and dot t's all the way to genocide if we smile hard enough and agree to make the Hard Choices together.

Quote

then he starts one sentence with the same shit he's been using to contrast the difference between himself and trump, implying that trump and those close to him often don't consider anything but what's best for them politically.  yep, almost a whole sentence (out of 13) about how he was in afghanistan, because it grinds a lot of republicans' gears that trump dodged.

How many sentences did he dedicate to the moral and ethical ramifications of our forever war and this escalation of it?

Zero.

He fucking sucks, henry. 

[workswithseed 2201]

Just now, BradInATX said:

😂😂😂

You can laugh all you want, I see you no different than Tucker Carlson.

[RDCanecutter 26855]

41 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Automation in trucking alone is going to cause one of the most serious economic issues in American history. Millions and millions of jobs gone poof, almost overnight. The overwhelming majority of whom are not qualified to do any sort of other skilled or technical job.

 

I think they'd be perfectly skilled at hijacking robot trucks.

[BradInATX 9208]

3 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

You can laugh all you want, I see you no different than Tucker Carlson.

You think that Uber, a company that has never turned a profit, has a $53 billion market cap because the endgame is self-driving cars where they still have to pay drivers to babysit the self driving cars?

 😂😂  😂😂 

Edited January 3, 2020 by BradInATX

[Rougarou 594]

Just now, BradInATX said:

You think that Uber, a company that has never turned a profit, has a $53 billion market cap because the endgame is self-driving cars where they still have to pay drivers?

 😂😂  😂😂 

Yang is awesome and right in that capital automation is better in that you can dispense with the soul killing apparatchik work and bring your whole person to work and be upskilled and a value-add to an organization in a commercial excellence model (while tacitly participating in cost-takeout). Or you get $1000 a month or whatever, if you have personal limitiations that don't allow for you to be a valuable contributor to an organization in 2028 or whenever this tipping point happens.

Also, Pete rules because he used to be a consultant and we have to stick together so the strong can continue to treat us common folks poorly with a simple "pls fix" or "thx". 

[bad_teammate 13481]

8 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

I think they'd be perfectly skilled at hijacking robot trucks.

Sounds fucking awesome.

Fast & Furious 11: Hijackin' in the Holler

[henrygandorf 29223]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

He fucking sucks, henry. 

if he sucks so bad, then all you would need to do is post things he's said or done.  if you're feeling up to it, you can throw an "offered without comment" on top.  but you don't do that.  nobody does.  not here, and certainly not on twitter.  you felt the need to twist and mischaracterize, as per usual.  it's an obvious tell, my man.

oh, and let me know about that quotation mark tutorial.  it's for a good cause, and i can find the time.

[bad_teammate 13481]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

if he sucks so bad, then all you would need to do is post things he's said or done.  if you're feeling up to it, you can throw an "offered without comment" on top.  but you don't do that.  nobody does.  not here, and certainly not on twitter. 

You're on social media. What the fuck do you think is going to happen on social media?

[bad_teammate 13481]

*logs into multiple social media platforms*

"WHY ARE ALL THESE PEOPLE SHARING THEIR OPINIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS!?!?"

[henrygandorf 29223]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You're on social media. What the fuck do you think is going to happen on social media?

i'm allowed to mischaracterize because social media!!!

also i'm only on instagram.

[bad_teammate 13481]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i'm allowed to mischaracterize because social media!!!

What did I mischaracterize? My 5-paragraph summary is perfectly fair, and in your attempt to critique it you actually just agreed.

- His first two sentences are justifications for the action straight out of the Trump admin's talking points
- The majority of his objection is about process (and a bit of strategy)
- He takes multiple opportunities to pointlessly remind us of his overseas service
- He makes zero moral or ethical objections

There's no mischaracterization there. It sucks. He sucks.

[henrygandorf 29223]

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What did I mischaracterize? My 5-paragraph summary is perfectly fair, and in your attempt to critique it you actually just agreed.

- His first two sentences are justifications for the action straight out of the Trump admin's talking points
- The majority of his objection is about process (and a bit of strategy)
- He takes multiple opportunities to pointlessly remind us of his overseas service
- He makes zero moral or ethical objections

There's no mischaracterization there. It sucks. He sucks.

-his first two sentences are laying out facts, because some people don't know who this guy is.

-the majority of his objection is that americans deserve to live in an actual democracy, and democracies aren't run by fascists.  that's not who we're supposed to be.

-he took one opportunity to give his perspective from actually being over there.  not sure why you have such an issue with this, but it's been about 8 months now of you whining.  

-you are correct that he made no moral or ethical objection in this statement.  his concern is about the future of the region and how it affects america and americans and our allies.

-he makes a very clear statement about getting involved in another endless war.  something you intentionally mischaracterized.  that's not even up for debate.

 

just admit that your first attempt was obvious shitposting, which you somewhat cleaned up with a more opinion-based summary after you got called out.  as much as "he's garbage, folks" is a compelling argument, at this point, it's just white noise considering the source.

[bad_teammate 13481]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

-his first two sentences are laying out facts, because some people don't know who this guy is.

Is it a fact that this guy was "a threat to safety and security"? Is it a fact that he "mastermind(ed) threats"? Is it a fact that he "mastermind(ed) attacks"?

These are "facts"?

There is not a snowball's chance in hell that this guy was a threat to any American at home. This guy was a threat to our "interests" abroad, a purposefully vague categorization that presumes that it is our imperial right to have whatever we want wherever we want whenever we want. 

Little Lord Fauntleroy takes every opportunity to make international politics seem dangerous in order to butch himself up. That's going to get a lot of people killed; male insecurity in military leadership usually does.

Quote

-the majority of his objection is that americans deserve to live in an actual democracy, and democracies aren't run by fascists.  that's not who we're supposed to be.

Yes. This is my problem with it. This a tertiary concern, not a primary concern.

Quote

-he took one opportunity to give his perspective from actually being over there.  not sure why you have such an issue with this, but it's been about 8 months now of you whining. 

He brought it up twice, not once. (2nd paragraph, end of the entire statement)

Beyond that, he has no perspective on this from being over there. He neither took part in missions like this nor did he orchestrate or lead them. His big decisions were about the best lightning for his photographs and which weight paper to print the TPS reports on. Don't act like he was over there making real calls, save that shit for a sap.

Quote

-he makes a very clear statement about getting involved in another endless war.

"endless"

A regular one? Well, hell, that's why democracy is here for!!

[Rougarou 594]

Oy vey