Buttigieg 2020

[bad_teammate 13131]

45 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Those who remember Buttigieg’s outreach at the 2010 forum say he wasn’t a tea party follower or sympathizer. One of the event’s organizers recently called him a “socialist.” Rather, they saw someone eager to be on equal footing with the Republican incumbent, Richard Mourdock, in front of any audience that would have him.

“He certainly wasn’t going to let his opponent come to his hometown and not be there,” Jeff Harris, who managed Buttigieg’s 2010 campaign, said in a recent telephone interview with BuzzFeed News. “I think it was an opportunity to be on the same stage with the incumbent when Treasurer Mourdock was ducking and dodging at every opportunity.”

Yep, dumb. In a totally normal Dem way, of course. Nothing weird or inappropriate here.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Pete should be like, “You’re goddamn right I flirted with the Tea Party in 2010, I was clairvoyant enough to see they were going to win. What was I supposed to do?  Pander to the losing side? In Pence’s Indiana? Lot of good that would have done.”

[Fozzz 152]

Mayor Pete wishes to build a broad, class-based rather than identity-based, movement with the breadth and scope necessary to not only defeat Trump, but to crush our class enemies and reconstitute our society on a classless basis where true harmony and togetherness may be achieved.  Sorry if reaching out to cultural moderates in pursuit of those goals offends your delicate lib sensibilities.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Interesting the other NH poll from two days ago had Warren with a 9 point lead. 

Zuckerberg doing work. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Interesting the other NH poll from two days ago had Warren with a 15 point lead over Pete.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_pubOi7tGP9BOHHNbNj3XLtMXxOUheSd/view

Zuckerberg doing work. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Zuckerberg doing work. 

Are you ok, man? 

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Nope, I’m not okay.  I live in Donald Trump’s America 

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

 

[Fozzz 152]

28 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Interesting the other NH poll from two days ago had Warren with a 15 point lead over Pete.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_pubOi7tGP9BOHHNbNj3XLtMXxOUheSd/view

Zuckerberg doing work. 

What is the point of conducting a poll with a margin of error of over 6 points?  Still, Pete has all the momentum.  

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

Yeah, that poll seems a little sloppy. I'd guess the top 4 are pretty close to each other right now in NH. 

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Now that Trump has released an actual statement about Pete, expect his negative numbers on this Russian Bot chart to rise.

And, no, I’m not shocked Biden was first and Beto was second and Tulsi is their darling.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

11 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Now that Trump has released an actual statement about Pete, expect his negative numbers on this Russian Bot chart to rise.

And, no, I’m not shocked Biden was first and Beto was second and Tulsi is their darling.

It’s hard to read anything into the Russia numbers except they like to go after perceived Trump threats (front runners) and boost Tulsi Gabbard.  Beto was very much a Trump threat in the beginning. Fox News was freaking out too. 

Which brings me to the next thing I want to see:  the Fox News vs Russia coverage breakdown of the candidates.

 

Edited November 19, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hiphopopotamos 20865]

This ain’t it Pete...

 

 

[Hank Scorpio 17720]

lol who does Pete think he is appealing to with his little millionaires and billionaires jab? 

[bad_teammate 13131]

As is usual with Pete, it's a lie.

His actual plan, which you can see by following the link, doesn't target millionaires/billionaires.

--------------------------------------------------
PROVIDE FREE COLLEGE FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT.

Pete will make public tuition free for 80% of American families, including all families earning up to $100,000 and many middle-income families with multiple children. He will also provide substantial tuition subsidies for students from families earning up to $150,000 and require that states improve affordability for all students.
--------------------------------------------------

He lies too much.

[bad_teammate 13131]

Universal fucking services, libs. 

Should the child of a millionaire be charged at the public library? No, fuckers.

To go to 4th grade? No, fuckers.

To eat the cafeteria lunch? No, fuckers.

To call the police? No, fuckers.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

It’s going to be remarkable watching this kid with no legislative experience whatsoever fix America when he’s president. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

As is usual with Pete, it's a lie.

His actual plan, which you can see by following the link, doesn't target millionaires/billionaires.

--------------------------------------------------
PROVIDE FREE COLLEGE FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT.

Pete will make public tuition free for 80% of American families, including all families earning up to $100,000 and many middle-income families with multiple children. He will also provide substantial tuition subsidies for students from families earning up to $150,000 and require that states improve affordability for all students.
--------------------------------------------------

He lies too much.

this has always been his “free college” policy. what is he lying about?

[bad_teammate 13131]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

this has always been his “free college” policy. what is he lying about?

Pete: "Instead of providing free college tuition for the children of millionaires and billionaires..."

Also Pete: "...including all families earning up to $100,000..."

Are you being fatuous?

[henrygandorf 29174]

he’s saying his free college program prioritizes the families that need it more, and co-opted bernie’s language to say it. 

did you read that and literally think everyone with a net worth of $999,999 and below qualified?

[bad_teammate 13131]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

he’s saying his free college program prioritizes the families that need it more, and co-opted bernie’s language to say it. 

"Hey he's just trying to win, bro" is a defense you guys go to a lot.

Quote

did you read that and literally think everyone with a net worth of $999,999 and below qualified?

Did I trust Pete's literal words? No, henry, I know better than that. I am just pointing out the dishonesty. Characteristic dishonesty.

 

 

[henrygandorf 29174]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

"Hey he's just trying to win, bro" is a defense you guys go to a lot.

not what i said at all, but thanks. i thought using bernie’s language was a fun poke, nothing more, and certainly nothing sinister. 

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Did I trust Pete's literal words? No, henry, I know better than that. I am just pointing out the dishonesty. Characteristic dishonesty.

once again, he’s not lying. he’s condensing his plan that’s been around for a long time into something ‘catchy’ for twitter.  would it make you feel better if he used the phrase “disproportionally rich” instead?

there’s a lot to pick on, especially lately, but this is stupid. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

[bad_teammate 13131]

27 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

once again, he’s not lying. he’s condensing his plan that’s been around for a long time into something ‘catchy’ for twitter.  would it make you feel better if he used the phrase “disproportionally rich” instead?

How I feel isn't really part of it. It's about him being honest or dishonest.

And not even that, because hey politicians lie all the time, but in service of what?

What is, in your mind, the actual point of means-testing public education?

Quote

there’s a lot to pick on, especially lately, but this is stupid. 

Most of the things being focused on are very stupid. What I like to focus on is policy and integrity.

This policy is lame. His selling of it shows poor integrity.

[TexEx15 17455]

 

[henrygandorf 29174]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How I feel isn't really part of it. It's about him being honest or dishonest.

what’s he lying about?  i’m on my phone i didn’t even click the link. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

6 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

 

this is the “i hate pete” thread, please put this someplace else. 

[bad_teammate 13131]

8 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

what’s he lying about?  i’m on my phone i didn’t even click the link. 

Pete: "Instead of providing free college tuition for the children of millionaires and billionaires..."
Also Pete: "...including all families earning up to $100,000..."

The lie there should be obvious. His plan doesn't simply avoid providing free tuition to millionaires/billionaires. It's the difference between the Top 15% instead of the Top 1%. So there's a dishonest thing, but as I asked above, to what end?

What is the actual purpose behind the dishonest framing?

Fudge the truth to ensure universal social welfare programs? Not ideal, but OK I get it.

What's even the point of this lie?

(Also, he says his healthcare plan gives Americans the choice to keep their existing health coverage, which is another lie that you never deal with.)

[henrygandorf 29174]

44 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Pete: "Instead of providing free college tuition for the children of millionaires and billionaires..."
Also Pete: "...including all families earning up to $100,000..."

you must really like this to use it twice in 6 posts. 

the spirit of the plan is to help families that need help, not “attack the rich”.  much like his other plans, it’s “pre-compromised” to make it more palatable and affordable. 

i prefer loan forgiveness to free college (if i could only choose one) but if he’s structuring a plan on a sliding scale like this, then why not tell people about it. a lie would have pete say “free college for all” then have the fine print say it’s only for families that fit the income requirements. 

[Fozzz 152]

Good point. Sometimes Pete is simply too honest for his own good. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

10 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Good point. Sometimes Pete is simply too honest for his own good. 

see, this guy gets it. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

would it make you feel better if he used the phrase “disproportionally rich” instead?

>150 is “disproportionally rich”?  If they are going to fuck us over via taxes to pay for this shit, it needs to include everybody.  150k gtfo.

[Bama Chick 28596]

>150 is “disproportionally rich”?  If they are going to fuck us over via taxes to pay for this shit, it needs to include everybody.  150k gtfo.

Well, the median income in The United States is $63,336.

$150,000 is the 84th percentile of income.

Disproportionately means bigger in relation to the average.

So.......

[fattyflattie 4636]

7 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

Well, the median income in The United States is $63,336.

$150,000 is the 84th percentile of income.

Disproportionately means bigger in relation to the average.

So.......

 

So what does “rich” mean?  
 

That would submarine it, imo.  Nobody really gaf when you pick on billionaires, there’s like 1500 of them.  Compare that to families that make over 150k, to which there are millions. 
 

edited to add, maybe its my perspective that’s skewed as I live in a state that’s an economic positive.  Not so much the case with Bama, Miss, WV. 

Edited November 20, 2019 by fattyflattie
ETA: bama

[Bama Chick 28596]

There are millions who make $150,000.

There are also millions more (84% of wage earners) who make less.

The posters here have a HUGE blind spot about the reality of most Americans.

This is a group of highly educated professionals for the most part. And I would bet most of us are of the age where we’re in a place career wise that we’ve moved up the ladder quite a bit.

Our perspective is completely skewed. $150,000 a year is A LOT OF MONEY to the majority of most Americans.

It’s not rich when you’re paying the mortgage on a 4,500 square foot house and two car notes and three big vacations per year and private school tuition and $200 haircuts and weekly mani-pedis.

But it is most definitely considered “rich” by a large majority of Americans.

[Fozzz 152]

2 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

There are millions who make $150,000.

There are also millions more (84% of wage earners) who make less.

The posters here have a HUGE blind spot about the reality of most Americans.

This is a group of highly educated professionals for the most part. And I would bet most of us are of the age where we’re in a place career wise that we’ve moved up the ladder quite a bit.

Our perspective is completely skewed. $150,000 a year is A LOT OF MONEY to the majority of most Americans.

It’s not rich when you’re paying the mortgage on a 4,500 square foot house and two car notes and three big vacations per year and private school tuition and $200 haircuts and weekly mani-pedis.

But it is most definitely considered “rich” by a large majority of Americans.

Thank you. Now vote Pete. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

10 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

It’s not rich when you’re paying the mortgage on a 4,500 square foot house and two car notes and three big vacations per year and private school tuition and $200 haircuts and weekly mani-pedis.

Yeah. 150k/yr in Cali and you can’t even get out of an apartment. But they should definitely subsidize Cletus from Beatrice, so that he can come back home after college and make 40k and not help perpetuate the giving. Seems kinda fucked to me but doesn’t surprise me. Maybe he’ll even see his 7.5m/year head coach hoist a trophy while I pay for his education.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

 

Well, the median income in The United States is $63,336.

$150,000 is the 84th percentile of income.

Disproportionately means bigger in relation to the average.

So.......

 

The cost of living is drastically different in different parts of the country.  Honestly, that's part of the problem.  Look at it this way.  In your state, the minimum wage is $7.25 an hour.  In NYC, its $15.  In Bama, you could probably do alright at $15 an hour.  Hell, you could probably do alright at $7.25 in most parts of Bama if you got 40 hours a week.  In NYC, you can't even really put a roof over your head and food on the table for $15 and 40.  Really, you could live in a very decent hotel in Mississippi for the cost to rent a shitty room in a shared apartment in the Bronx.  But you can't make the same level of money in Mississippi.

Trump was elected because the US is unequal in this manner.  Obviously, he never intended to fix it.  fattyflattie isn't right.  But he also isn't completely wrong.  The problem that you both have is that you have to allow for regional variances.  The federal government is already taxing the fuck out of blue states and returning nothing to them.  I pay a ton of taxes and would pay more if I saw any improvement locally.  I'd also pay more if I saw improvement for the impoverished in taker states like yours.  Instead, I think I bought a few rounds for some Saudis at a Trump golf course and maybe a couple humvees with my taxes.  Maybe some of it even subsidized a train down in your area that nobody uses while my heavily used elevated train line is literally falling down.  All brought to you by people who think land matters more than people.  Yet you live on the "land" and is it getting any better down there in "land" territory?  It isn't.  And frankly, I don't trust your state government or the representatives your state sends to the federal government to effectively spend my state's excess tax dollars to benefit those who need it in your state.  So why not let us fix our trains?  Or fund homeless shelters here?

Also, Trump raised my federal taxes with the fake tax cuts.  My state and city taxes are lower.  Sucks because the state and city taxes are the only ones that fund anything at all here.  As far as I can tell, my state, the impoverished in my state, and the American impoverished in general, are getting even less a return on the tax dollar.

Finally, your 63k median number is household income.  Individual is in the high 30s.  We are poorer than you think.

Edited November 20, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[Fozzz 152]

I’ve found that a good 45 minutes of performing Mayor Pete’s High High Hopes dance 💃 routine to be an excellent and enjoy full morning workout routine.  I’d recommend everyone on the board give it a try. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

fattyflattie isn't right.

Because I don’t agree with the arbitrary 150k mark, or because I believe it will disproportionately affect me?  The poor guy who makes 151k is realllllly getting fucked. I’m not anti-education, I’m largely against singling out small groups and burdening them, though. 

8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

But he also isn't completely wrong

?

I was trying my best to not label states as makers and takers but since you were kind enough to, that was most of my point.    I don’t like living in Houston, or any big city for that matter, but I do so that I can pay for my kids’ college.  I had them, with a plan to take care of them.  
 

The burden on someone with a low-middle family income of 150k is already too much. Bama you call it car notes (I have none) and vacations (Frio cabin once a year) and I call bullshit. It goes to 401k’s and 529’s, at least for those that don’t expect a handout. I don’t want to delve into specifics but even at substantially more than 150 it can get tight.  If you lived somewhere that the entire economy wasn’t based on dirty recruiting, racism, and Orange Beach, it might be easier to see?  

Not to mention, there’s a good chance Jimbob dumbfuck will return back home with his shiny new degree and still work down the street at the mill, for a whopping 50k. Now, he will have received an education on the backs of the “makers”, and is still far under the threshold to contribute to future graduates. A 100% taker, purely due to where he chooses to live, or even degree path. 
 

There needs to be something built in for those who take advantage of the program but don’t meet the 150k salary to give back, imo.  I don’t have a problem paying as apparently I have enough, I have a problem with only the top 15% paying.  There may not be a lot of people who make that money (14%?), but there are a lot that believe they will. I just think it’s a bad spot to draw the line. 
 

8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Instead, I think I bought a few rounds for some Saudis at a Trump golf course

Also this ^

8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Also, Trump raised my federal taxes with the fake tax cuts.

And ^.   Unfortunately I know more people who are pissed about ^ than all his other dumb shit combined.  

Edited November 20, 2019 by fattyflattie

[bad_teammate 13131]

This argument about what it means to be "rich" is hilarious because it perfectly epitomizes how garbage these centrists are.

This is a fight we have to do for universal programs like free tuition for all. But we have to fight JUST AS HARD for worse centrist compromises. It saves zero conflict, it is zero percent more likely to get Republican support, and WE GET LESS AT THE END OF THE SAME WAR.

Absolute morons.

[bad_teammate 13131]

Pete's class hostility only exists when it won't actually hurt the rich.

If you support Pete because you're a cynical conservative who sees the current political mood? Cool, you're smart.

If you support Pete because you think he's a practical progressive who will enact structural change? You have the brain of a cockatiel.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[bad_teammate 13131]

15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

imagine getting owned by Cory Booker

[Js1 85085]

Welp, that's $10 donation worthy.  Hilarious. 

[Fozzz 152]

Imagine being a United States Senator and getting fucking crushed in the polls by some kid who, in the biggest electoral victory of his life, received fewer than 10,000 votes.

[Js1 85085]

8 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Imagine being a United States Senator and getting fucking crushed in the polls by some kid who, in the biggest electoral victory of his life, received fewer than 10,000 votes.

if Booker was gay and black, he might be leading.  Just sayin' 

[bad_teammate 13131]

I'm actually impressed with Pete's overall poise in this difficult situation. Not that it was exceptional on his part, and he didn't really do anything above and beyond what you'd expect of a Democratic mayor, but hey credit for the wins you're supposed to get. Those are important.

The little kid standing right in front of him absent-mindedly shoving "COPS AND KLAN GO HAND-IN-HAND" in his face is just magnificent, though.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Booker isn’t gay?

[Hank Kingsley 20673]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

I'm actually impressed with Pete's overall poise in this difficult situation. Not that it was exceptional on his part, and he didn't really do anything above and beyond what you'd expect of a Democratic mayor, but hey credit for the wins you're supposed to get. Those are important.

The little kid standing right in front of him absent-mindedly shoving "COPS AND KLAN GO HAND-IN-HAND" in his face is just magnificent, though.

 

I know context doesn't matter to people anymore (not talking to you here, BT), but he was reading from a list of demands from the protesters and when he said "I'm not asking for your vote", he was speaking in the context of being there as mayor and not a presidential candidate.

Terrible optics, obviously, that still hurts him months later.