Beto 2020

[bad_teammate 13136]

14 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Just gave $100 more and signed up for just about every volunteer opportunity on his website.

Forgot to respond to this...

Good work. Democracy is cool and everyone should follow your lead. We're working for the right team you're helping the country and you're doing what millions and millions of people don't. This is the difference between human social democracy and fascism. Every single person Beto's campaign activated to the right side helps us. Every single person Bernie's campaign activated to the right side helps us.

 

[bad_teammate 13136]

8 minutes ago, scottsins said:

Flipping trump voters isn’t necessarily the endgame required to win the general. People always ignore the factors of getting Trump voters to stay home because they don’t hate the opponent as much and getting voters who say out 2016 to come back and vote Dem.

Sure, but it's much easier to get your voters to turn out than get their voters to stay home. I'd be interested to know of examples of a rival campaign convincing its opponents' base not to turn out.

I agree that the strategy isn't the flip Trump voters. You have to flip some of them, not many, though. You go after the Obama->Obama->Trump voters. You ignore the McCain->Romney->Trump voters.

Most importantly, you go after the non-voters. The young people, the racial/ethnic minorities.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

Last few pages of this thread are pathetic.  Between the Bernie Bros, Warren haters, and usual trolls I think this bodes well for Beto.  

Anyone saying someone should get out now because they’re not polling well is clearly a fucking moron and has no understanding of politics.  I will assume those posters are just trolling because there are no morons on this forum.

[Biff Tannen 45502]

1 hour ago, Larry T. Spider said:

“Beto underperformed in rural/exurb and overperformed in urban/suburban.”

It seems like a lot of that could be chalked up to increased polarization between rural and urban/suburban since 2004.

Not to mention it was a midterm where the Rs were scared shitless of Beto flipping the state so the olds showed up en masse.

[horncyclist 1386]

He was the first Senate endorsement by ECU of the the 2018 cycle. In July 2017.

 

https://endcitizensunited.org/press-releases/end-citizens-united-endorses-beto-orourke-u-s-senate/

 

I knew that because I was at the rally in DC for Beto where the head of ECU said it while introducing him. He's as strong as anyone on campaign finance reform. It's one of the big reasons I've supported him.

 

[F250 28702]

4 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

He's trying way too hard.  Who the hell eats ice cream for breakfast?  Real Americans have coffee and tacos for breakfast in their car on their way to work.

Fify.

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

I expect this to hit wide soon.

[cmontexas 3254]

Kinda cherry picking to go back to John Kerry and the Iraq War or No Iraq War election for numbers that make Beto look bad. 

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Anyone saying someone should get out now because they’re not polling well is clearly a fucking moron and has no understanding of politics.  

Can you show us an example of anyone on this thread saying that, or are you just being your intellectually dishonest self once again?

I'll be waiting. Wonder if we'll get a response to this or Bernie's tax returns first.

Edited March 19, 2019 by BradInATX

[bad_teammate 13136]

21 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

Kinda cherry picking to go back to John Kerry and the Iraq War or No Iraq War election for numbers that make Beto look bad. 

Everything that isn't praise of Beto is a dishonest attack. All criticism is violence. Data is a war crime.

[JimmyJames 12271]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I'm not saying it isn't there, but...

Beto underperformed in rural/exurb and overperformed in urban/suburban.

For some demographic reference, the Midwest and South are both below the national urbanization average. All 3 Blue Wall states are below the average. He'll need to avoid "running up the score" in the cities and having another popular vote win/electoral vote loss.

Yeah what this tells me is that it doesn’t matter what state you live in the urban and suburban areas are getting more and more democratic and the rural areas are getting more and more republican. In addition to the obvious big Texas cities, just look at east Texas and west Texas rural areas and mid size towns for proof of that. 

[Biff Tannen 45502]

24 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Yeah what this tells me is that it doesn’t matter what state you live in the urban and suburban areas are getting more and more democratic and the rural areas are getting more and more republican. In addition to the obvious big Texas cities, just look at east Texas and west Texas rural areas and mid size towns for proof of that. 

I would be interested to see the change in population in those "more republican" areas as well.  

[formermav43 4599]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Anyone saying someone should get out now because they’re not polling well is clearly a fucking moron and has no understanding of politics.  I will assume those posters are just trolling because there are no morons on this forum.

This is like the surly version of Epimenides’ paradox.

[horncyclist 1386]

Everything that isn't praise of Beto is a dishonest attack. All criticism is violence. Data is a war crime.

Just today you've (1) posted a misleading tweet on Beto's launch fundraising total ans (2) said I was lying about ECU's endorsement of Beto. You're being dishonest. We should absolutely vet Beto. It should be done in an honest way.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

5 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

 

When do candidates start getting protective details? With the hate dialed up to 11 and the Cheeto throwing gas on the fire I have a sick feeling that something could happen to a candidate this cycle.

[Hank Scorpio 17723]

Beto's protective detail is just 20 wine moms lit up on Chardonnay all carrying mace and just waiting for some punk kid to look at them sideways. 

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[BradInATX 9208]

Can you show us an example of anyone on this thread saying that, or are you just being your intellectually dishonest self once again?

I'll be waiting. Wonder if we'll get a response to this or Bernie's tax returns first.

 

Still waiting, Hugo

 

[mchookem 16231]

50 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

This is like the surly version of Epimenides’ paradox.

more like surly version of American Idol 🙄

[Message Board User 12389]

IN case you're wondering, there's 10 counties in New Hampshire.

Ten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counties_in_New_Hampshire

Edited March 19, 2019 by Message Board User

[Dahobbs 17451]

3 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

IN case you're wondering, there's 10 counties in New Hampshire.

Ten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counties_in_New_Hampshire

Is that supposed to be a criticism? Does visiting 10 counties in 48 hours not sound like a lot of work to you? Would you prefer a candidate not visit every county? What a fucking stupid post, just like all your posts as far as I can tell. 

[horncyclist 1386]

[/url] IN case you're wondering, there's 10 counties in New Hampshire.
Ten.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counties_in_New_Hampshire

Nonzero chance Beto visits every county in America. Will definitely hit up all the ones in early contest states.

[Message Board User 12389]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Is that supposed to be a criticism? Does visiting 10 counties in 48 hours not sound like a lot of work to you? Would you prefer a candidate not visit every county? What a fucking stupid post, just like all your posts as far as I can tell.  

Relax and have a beer or take some midol - whatever works for you.  Just pointing out that NH had 10 counties - I certainly didn't know that.  And it's not a criticism of Beto and I've long said that he would be the smartest nominee for the Dems, but let's not pretend it's some Herculean task to make 10 stops in the 3rd or 4th smallest state in the country.

I've done BBQ crawls more challenging than that.

[bad_teammate 13136]

9 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Would you prefer a candidate not visit every county?

It's fine, but it's a gimmick.

[Celery Man 20888]

we should have a candidate who doesn't engage in any impure gimmickry go against donald trump

[Js1 85138]

51 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Beto's protective detail is just 20 wine moms lit up on Chardonnay all carrying mace and just waiting for some punk kid to look at them sideways. 

@Bama Chick confirmed. 

[Guest Lobo]

33 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

IN case you're wondering, there's 10 counties in New Hampshire.

Ten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counties_in_New_Hampshire

Jesus Christ, Jonah!   You’re fucking from here, how the fuck do you not know this shit?        Richard!

[NowThis 931]

31 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Nonzero chance Beto visits every county in America. Will definitely hit up all the ones in early contest states.

the US has over 3000 counties and Louisiana has parishes. Coincidentally, Robert Parrish is from Louisiana. 

[Dahobbs 17451]

21 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

Relax and have a beer or take some midol - whatever works for you.  Just pointing out that NH had 10 counties - I certainly didn't know that.  And it's not a criticism of Beto and I've long said that he would be the smartest nominee for the Dems, but let's not pretend it's some Herculean task to make 10 stops in the 3rd or 4th smallest state in the country.

I've done BBQ crawls more challenging than that.

10 counties isn't the same as doing a pub crawl in the same city. New Hampshire is a small state, but is still a state. Some quick google map work shows that visiting all 10 counties is going to take around 300 miles of driving or more.  So let's conservatively say 7 hours of driving (you ain't going 60 the whole time in New Hampshire), 1.5 hour visits in each county, gets you 22 hours out of 48 hours. I assume there would also be prep sessions of some sort for each stop. That isn't an easy couple of days. Anyone who has worked on the road knows how exhausting that shit is. 

You can be flippant about me "taking some midol" if it makes you feel better. But it is just distraction from the fact that your post was really stupid. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

3 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

From purely the horse race perspective, I like his chances a lot more now that I know he’s a prolific bullshit artist and not just a vacuous flower child.   Telling Texans in a Congressional race that we need to reign in the debt right after the 2010 Tea Party wipeout of Congress means he can read a room.

You would think that would be in a common trait in politics, but we just witnessed the 2016 GOP primary in which 17 candidates talked about abolishing the government or some specific vote nobody knew or cared about, while Trump said, “Hey, you know those jobs you liked that aren’t hear anymore?  I’ll bring them back for you.  And I’ll do other stuff for you, too, and make libs cry.”  Amazingly, they voted for him.

People like Beto.  Beto knows what they want to hear, and he will say that. Whatever it is.  That tends to work in politics, for better or worse.

He’s like Bill Clinton without the skanks and Hillary.   

[Message Board User 12389]

21 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

10 counties isn't the same as doing a pub crawl in the same city. New Hampshire is a small state, but is still a state. Some quick google map work shows that visiting all 10 counties is going to take around 300 miles of driving or more.  So let's conservatively say 7 hours of driving (you ain't going 60 the whole time in New Hampshire), 1.5 hour visits in each county, gets you 22 hours out of 48 hours. I assume there would also be prep sessions of some sort for each stop. That isn't an easy couple of days. Anyone who has worked on the road knows how exhausting that shit is. 

You can be flippant about me "taking some midol" if it makes you feel better. But it is just distraction from the fact that your post was really stupid. 

My sincerest apologies.

Forgive me.

I'll try to do better.

[bad_teammate 13136]

"Social Security, the people who paid into social security and who are earning their checks back from investment in social security, that needs to be protected. That's inviolable. But going forward for future generations, for my kids' generation, five, three, and one year old. Right now, we need to look at things like means testing," O'Rourke said.

He continued, "We need to look at perhaps a longer a later age at which my kids are going to retire. That's a tough decision. It's not easy to say it's going to be politicized by my opponent, but those are the tough things that you're going to want me to weigh in on when I'm in Washington, DC."

It's fucking hilarious to watch you guys defend this. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing.

"Are cuts important over the long term?" O'Rourke said. "Absolutely. You have kids, I have kids, as we have, uh, as our kids have kids, um, their ability and options and opportunities in life are going to be significantly curtailed if we don't get our national debt under control because every dollar they pay in, in taxes is going to go right out to China or to someone else who's financing our extravagant government."

Fuck.

You pieces of shit don't believe in anything and I'm glad to be fighting you.

Edited March 19, 2019 by bad_teammate

[bad_teammate 13136]

Bernie in 2012: Social Security is Strong

"I strongly disagree with some of my colleagues who want to balance the budget by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other programs that are of enormous importance to seniors and the working families of our country. There are ways to address the deficit crisis without attacking some of the most vulnerable members of our society. As chairman of the Defending Social Security Caucus, I will do everything in my power to make sure that the promises made to seniors will be kept."

Who stopped Obama from cutting Social Security? Bernie Mother Fucking Sanders

Obama’s backtracking set off a furious reaction from seniors groups and progressive activists, who for the next few months mobilized their members to pressure Congress to reject the proposed change. By April 2013, 2.3 million Americans had signed petitions calling on the president to back off of chained CPI. The signatures were presented at a White House rally that featured Sanders, who vowed to “do everything in my power to block President Obama’s proposal to cut benefits for Social Security recipients through a chained consumer price index.”

The senator mobilized a wide coalition or organizations, including veterans, women’s rights groups, and labor unions to oppose chained CPI.

Under this intense activist pressure, the White House was unable to convince its own allies in Congress that this change was worth the political costs. The next year, the chained CPI was quietly dropped from Obama’s budget proposal.

Edited March 19, 2019 by bad_teammate

[horncyclist 1386]

"
Fuck.
You pieces of shit don't believe in anything and I'm glad to be fighting you.

We'll, that escalated quickly.

[bad_teammate 13136]

Just now, horncyclist said:

We'll, that escalated quickly.

 

In the posts above yours you have people openly celebrating this kind of politician double-talk where they're happy to knife the benefits of the poor. Anyone who thinks that way is an ideological and moral enemy of mine. I don't think that's an escalation, I think it's an acknowledgement of reality.

If you think it's wrong to cut the benefits of the poor and elderly, then you're on my side.

Just now, longhornmatt said:

Learn to love taking the Presidency and both branches of Congress in 2020, and that resulting in a liberal Supreme Court Justice to replace RBG and strengthening Obamacare - and most of the voters who said they wanted all the same things you did for the past decade being totally ok with that and attacking anyone who doesn't support Beto at all times.

It's not about Beto, it's about cutting the benefits of the poor and elderly at the first sign of disapproval from Republicans. It's about not having "leaders" who will sacrifice the most vulnerable.

[Dahobbs 17451]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"Social Security, the people who paid into social security and who are earning their checks back from investment in social security, that needs to be protected. That's inviolable. But going forward for future generations, for my kids' generation, five, three, and one year old. Right now, we need to look at things like means testing," O'Rourke said.

He continued, "We need to look at perhaps a longer a later age at which my kids are going to retire. That's a tough decision. It's not easy to say it's going to be politicized by my opponent, but those are the tough things that you're going to want me to weigh in on when I'm in Washington, DC."

It's fucking hilarious to watch you guys defend this. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing.

"Are cuts important over the long term?" O'Rourke said. "Absolutely. You have kids, I have kids, as we have, uh, as our kids have kids, um, their ability and options and opportunities in life are going to be significantly curtailed if we don't get our national debt under control because every dollar they pay in, in taxes is going to go right out to China or to someone else who's financing our extravagant government."

Fuck.

You pieces of shit don't believe in anything and I'm glad to be fighting you.

What? None of those statements seem terrible to me. Yes, realistically we need to consider whether we push off the social security retirement date. It isn't wrong to discuss that. It isn't wrong to concede that our government is bloated. It isn't wrong to concede that our national debt is ballooning at an unsustainable rate. And isn't wrong to consider ways to cut expenses. That doesn't mean cut everything willy nilly.

[Dahobbs 17451]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

In the posts above yours you have people openly celebrating this kind of politician double-talk where they're happy to knife the benefits of the poor.

Where did he say that? Certainly not in what you quoted. 

[bad_teammate 13136]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

What? None of those statements seem terrible to me. Yes, realistically we need to consider whether we push off the social security retirement date. It isn't wrong to discuss that.

No, we don't. Yes, it is.

We are an insanely rich nation with insanely rich people and you think cutting benefits to the poor and elderly are a path to fixing the problem of debt? No. We've been doing that for decades. Think. Read. Learn. Open your eyes.

Quote

It isn't wrong to concede that our government is bloated. It isn't wrong to concede that our national debt is ballooning at an unsustainable rate. And isn't wrong to consider ways to cut expenses. That doesn't mean cut everything willy nilly.

Putting Social Security on the table is 100% unacceptable.

[bad_teammate 13136]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Where did he say that? Certainly not in what you quoted. 

""We need to look at perhaps a longer a later age at which my kids are going to retire."

Who benefits from the SS check most, the poor or the rich?

[Celery Man 20888]

here comes the bernie bro

[bad_teammate 13136]

Guys why can't we just be reasonable moderates and slash entitlement programs for the most vulnerable Americans!?!?!?

[troph 24577]

It's not about Beto, it's about cutting the benefits of the poor and elderly at the first sign of disapproval from Republicans. It's about not having "leaders" who will sacrifice the most vulnerable.

Means testing isn’t cutting for the poor and if you think means testing isn’t coming or more accurately isn’t required then you’re smoking crack. Right now the poor can’t pay for their meds or rent but a rich retiree gets full freight on SS making a lot more than the poor - and for several decades. That’s horseshit. Not social security.

 

The rich should have SS benefits cut - aka means testing - so the poor get more - aka enough to live on - and our country isn’t bankrupted.

[troph 24577]

Guys why can't we just be reasonable moderates and slash entitlement programs for the most vulnerable Americans!?!?!?

You are off the reservation dude. No one is saying that.

[bad_teammate 13136]

Just now, troph said:

You are off the reservation dude. No one is saying that.

"We need to look at perhaps a longer a later age at which my kids are going to retire."

This isn't means testing. Stop making excuses. Just be honest.

[cmontexas 3254]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Guys why can't we just be reasonable moderates and slash entitlement programs for the most vulnerable Americans!?!?!?

I agree with you. I just want to beat Trump.

We need you and Bernie and the Berniebros to keep pushing the conversation to the left so the centrist seeming candidate Beto can get away with more leftist shit if/when he gains power

[Dahobbs 17451]

4 minutes ago, troph said:

Means testing isn’t cutting for the poor and if you think means testing isn’t coming or more accurately isn’t required then you’re smoking crack. Right now the poor can’t pay for their meds or rent but a rich retiree gets full freight on SS making a lot more than the poor - and for several decades. That’s horseshit. Not social security.

 

The rich should have SS benefits cut - aka means testing - so the poor get more - aka enough to live on - and our country isn’t bankrupted.

Seriously, this.

 I don't disagree with Bad_teammate's ideal: let's not cut benefits to those that need it. But it just isn't a logical implication of what Beto was saying. 

[horncyclist 1386]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Guys why can't we just be reasonable moderates and slash entitlement programs for the most vulnerable Americans!?!?!?

Should we start an issue thread for entitlements?

A few things to think about: (1) people are living longer (except in recent years cause opioids, fatness and guns) (2) some people are working longer, (3) we don't want elderly people to be poor; (4) rich people don't necessarily rely on social security; (5) fertility rates are much lower today than in previous generations. Those realities could inform a reasonable policy debate on if social security can be improved to preserve benefits for future generations, including the most vulnerable populations. Means testing and raising the retirement age are possibilities. That shouldn't make someone your "moral enemy."

Jesus fucking crisis. How old are you? How's the basement?

[F250 28702]

Just checking in on the Beto talk.

[bad_teammate 13136]

So for you guys who feel very attacked by my insane purity politics, which Beto do you agree with? 2012 Beto who says we need to raise the retirement age and implement means testing or 2019 Beto who says we need to actually expand Social Security?

Choose one. (Or don't lol who cares nothing matters when my wife looks into his dreamy eyes)

@longhornmatt

2019 Beto wants to ensure its solvency by raising taxes. That's the correct route if you're actually concerned about the actuarial tables.

Edited March 20, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Dahobbs 17451]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"We need to look at perhaps a longer a later age at which my kids are going to retire."

This isn't means testing. Stop making excuses. Just be honest.

Looking at it doesn't mean adopting it. Let's look at all our options and choose the best one. And, even if this were adopted, it doesn't seem that bad to me. People are living longer and are more active at older ages. If we can provide better benefits by extending the eligible age for SS to 68, why isn't that a reasonable option to discuss?