Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Biff Tannen 45,715]

15 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

If a man I was voting for wore a cardigan and slacks, I'd say the same thing.

Mr. Rogers would have been a great president you asshole.

[RomaVicta 29,993]

Asshole?  Asshole? You're the asshole!

[atomheartbevo 89,782]

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I will not vote for Elizabeth Warren until she walks out in public like this 

What sorcery did you use to get a preview of her walking into a debate with Trump?

[F250 28,817]

16 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Mr. Rogers would have been a great president you asshole.

Mr. Rogers was the first person that came to mind when I read his post. Then I thought of my 6th grade social studies teacher who dressed like Mr. Rogers.

 

[elfenix 34,331]

On 7/18/2019 at 12:17 AM, UTDD said:

  I also would like to hear this plan more specifically into why this type of tax would work better versus things like capital gains, wealth transfers, real estate transfers/income (investment properties not primary homes), higher income tax rates, etc.  Especially tying taxes to real property as it is more difficult to "offshore" investment income based on an asset that cannot be moved out of the United States. 

everything you mentioned in your first sentence is some form of income tax.  you do wealth taxes alongside income taxes.  you do wealth taxes because income taxes require a realization event.*  since you need a realization event, if you're superwealthy you can avoid taxes by choosing when to take income.  most people don't have that luxury. 

it's the 21st century.  land is only a small component of wealth anymore.

 

 

*it doesn't necessarily have to be that way, but that's the law,  commissioner v. glenshaw glass. 

[TwiceHorn 31,533]

7 minutes ago, elfenix said:

everything you mentioned in your first sentence is some form of income tax.  you do wealth taxes alongside income taxes.  you do wealth taxes because income taxes require a realization event.*  since you need a realization event, if you're superwealthy you can avoid taxes by choosing when to take income.  most people don't have that luxury. 

it's the 21st century.  land is only a small component of wealth anymore.

 

 

*it doesn't necessarily have to be that way, but that's the law,  commissioner v. glenshaw glass. 

Which raises an interesting point.  The closest we have to a wealth tax is an estate tax and it has a realization event, death.  What is the realization event for a wealth tax.  Or does it just keep getting taxed annually as long as it exists?

And now, I don't recall if Warren's 2% is a wealth tax or an income tax.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Or does it just keep getting taxed annually as long as it exists?

imgur

/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

Every billionaire is a policy failure.

[tantric superman 4,667]

Warren is goofy as fuck.

Goof factor is my 189th level tie breaker.

 

[elfenix 34,331]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Which raises an interesting point.  The closest we have to a wealth tax is an estate tax and it has a realization event, death.  What is the realization event for a wealth tax.  Or does it just keep getting taxed annually as long as it exists? 

And now, I don't recall if Warren's 2% is a wealth tax or an income tax.

it's a wealth tax and it's annually.  just like that kinda-wealth tax that real estate owners in texas pay. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/18/upshot/warren-wealth-tax.html

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Beyond real estate, I also pay a wealth tax in Virginia on my family cars.   Several hundred bucks a year to the state, based on some assessment they make of the value of the cars.   It's a great idea nationally, applied to super wealthy folks, but it may require a constitutional amendment. 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[bad_teammate 13,224]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

... but it may require a constitutional amendment. 

We probably need a few of these anyway. Throw 'er on the pile.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

This is cute. I like this

 

 

[bad_teammate 13,224]

Raul is good people

 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Looks like she's rolling out several endorsements today. 

[Longhornfan1024 1,707]

14 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Looks like she's rolling out several endorsements today. 

Along with John Delany's head.

[SquishMitten 10,425]

Frankly, I see no evidence that your mind can be changed or even reached in this matter. I also don't feel like trying to do so. 

Yes, I'm terrified of being challenged. I choose not to play a role in your play.
I said it would be wise to look the part of the role she will play. I don't think that's a cardigan and slacks. If a man I was voting for wore a cardigan and slacks, I'd say the same thing.
You're not going to force me down a road of your choosing. 
Thanks so much for the explanation about sexism. I've been so busy unconsciously persecuting women, that I clearly missed it. 
You don't know much about me, but you are very sure about me. Isn't that the essence of prejudice? Not racial or sexual prejudice, just plain prejudice.
 


Is there a glitch in tapa? Because it looks like you just quoted/responded to your own statement, and in so doing, called your own actions the essence of prejudice.

[RomaVicta 29,993]

30 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

Yes, I'm terrified of being challenged. I choose not to play a role in your play.
I said it would be wise to look the part of the role she will play. I don't think that's a cardigan and slacks. If a man I was voting for wore a cardigan and slacks, I'd say the same thing.
You're not going to force me down a road of your choosing. 
Thanks so much for the explanation about sexism. I've been so busy unconsciously persecuting women, that I clearly missed it. 
You don't know much about me, but you are very sure about me. Isn't that the essence of prejudice? Not racial or sexual prejudice, just plain prejudice.
 


Is there a glitch in tapa? Because it looks like you just quoted/responded to your own statement, and in so doing, called your own actions the essence of prejudice.

I thought the post would be below my friend, BamaChick's, and would restate my position as to answering. Sadly, I was too slow and it probably does look as you describe.

I can't speak for tapa. I don't use it.

[Anastasis 23,481]

I am chuckling at the notion that BamaChick is getting worked up about somebody making a comment on a political figure's dress and appearance. I mean seriously. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Yeah, how funny that a woman would get upset by sexism.  Little lady needs to calm down, amirite? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[RomaVicta 29,993]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

She's completely won me over. Has she spoken much about foreign policy?

[Rougarou 594]

Yep. I am more on the E-Warren train myself. She was great last night, but I think my first choice Pete is dead in the water and Warren is gonna go the distance. I think as this thing drags on you will see more like me who go from Pete -> Warren.

[Anastasis 23,481]

46 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Yeah, how funny that a woman would get upset by sexism.  Little lady needs to calm down, amirite? 

No.  I just think its funny that a poster who comments more than any other poster on the politics board about choice of dress and physical appearance of political figures is going hard on Roma over a comment related to choice of dress.  

Edited July 31, 2019 by Anastasis

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Biff Tannen 45,715]

I think she is going to destroy the dotard if she gets the chance.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Zavala 1,384]

Warren:

"We can't choose a candidate we don't believe in, just because we're too scared to do anything else!"

Trump

"We're gonna win!"

[F250 28,817]

1 hour ago, Zavala said:

Warren:

"We can't choose a candidate we don't believe in, just because we're too scared to do anything else!"

Trump

"We're gonna win!"

[Thetexashammer 1,062]

8 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Yeah, how funny that a woman would get upset by sexism.  Little lady needs to calm down, amirite? 

If you're saying she needs to get her ass back in the kitchen, then yes.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

[RomaVicta 29,993]

First ever Presidential Forum on Native Issues.

My guess about what Trump sees when he hears the word native:

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Biff Tannen 45,715]

I feel like she is going to run away with this thing in the end.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Hope so... things are heating up.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,533]

18 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Hope so... things are heating up.

 

Make America Gunty Again!

Edited August 2, 2019 by TwiceHorn
Sorry Bama.

[bolverk 29,717]

For those concerned about how Warren might play in the Midwest, go to pages 177-178 of this poll asking who's their first choice in the primary.

Warren 26%

Biden 16%

Buttigieg 14%

Sanders 10%

Harris 7%

Biden does best in the Northeast (30%) and the South (33%). The West slightly favors Sanders (21%) over Warren (19%) with Biden (15%) and Harris (13%.) further behind.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n0eqovafro/econTabReport.pdf

[BradInATX 9,208]

9 minutes ago, bolverk said:

For those concerned about how Warren might play in the Midwest, go to pages 177-178 of this poll asking who's their first choice in the primary.

Warren 26%

Biden 16%

Buttigieg 14%

Sanders 10%

Harris 7%

Biden does best in the Northeast (30%) and the South (33%). The West slightly favors Sanders (21%) over Warren (19%) with Biden (15%) and Harris (13%.) further behind.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n0eqovafro/econTabReport.pdf

"Asked of those who say they will vote in the Democratic Presidential primary or caucus in 2020"

Here's your problem. I really want to find some confidence in her ability to win the general, because I think she's by far the best candidate in the field right now. But I'm concerned about her ability to win that area amongst general election voters. Wish this poll had a similar question, but for all voters. Is there a favorability amongst all voters by dem candidate in there? No way I'm looking through hundreds of pages right now.. I'm trying to drink bourbon. 

Edited August 3, 2019 by BradInATX

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

11 minutes ago, bolverk said:

For those concerned about how Warren might play in the Midwest, go to pages 177-178 of this poll asking who's their first choice in the primary.

Warren 26%

Biden 16%

Buttigieg 14%

Sanders 10%

Harris 7%

Biden does best in the Northeast (30%) and the South (33%). The West slightly favors Sanders (21%) over Warren (19%) with Biden (15%) and Harris (13%.) further behind.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n0eqovafro/econTabReport.pdf

Good stuff.  Also page 180... 40% of voters age 18-29 would be disappointed if Biden is the nominee.  That’s the highest number across the board for all candidates.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[bolverk 29,717]

6 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

"Asked of those who say they will vote in the Democratic Presidential primary or caucus in 2020"

Here's your problem. I really want to find some confidence in her ability to win the general, because I think she's by far the best candidate in the field right now. But I'm concerned about her ability to win that area amongst general election voters. Wish this poll had a similar question, but for all voters. Is there a favorability amongst all voters by dem candidate in there?

I'm fully aware that it was regarding primary voters - hence my phrasing in the post. But, to your question, I haven't made it all the way through yet. As of that page, no comparison in the head-to-head against teh Dolan.

Edit: Went back to the Table of Contents and it doesn't look like they address that in this poll. Also, sorry if that came out a bit terse - it's been a long week and I'm pretty worn out.

Edited August 3, 2019 by bolverk

[BradInATX 9,208]

6 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm fully aware that it was regarding primary voters - hence my phrasing in the post. But, to your question, I haven't made it all the way through yet. As of that page, no comparison in the head-to-head against teh Dolan.

Edit: Went back to the Table of Contents and it doesn't look like they address that in this poll. Also, sorry if that came out a bit terse - it's been a long week and I'm pretty worn out.

All good - no offense taken. Had a crazy week myself, and I do this stuff 8-10 hours a day (not polling, but data) and no way I want to look at any more on a Friday night.

It's annoying that we get decent head-to-head vs. Trump polling nationally, and decent state-by-state polling but that's only amongst dem voters, etc. I like two candidates the most on an actual "I want them to be president" level, and they're the two of the top five that I have the most concerns with on electability. I really want to see some state by state head to head vs. Trump data. I'm assuming we'll get some as we get closer to go time.

Edited August 3, 2019 by BradInATX

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

6 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

But I'm concerned about her ability to win that area amongst general election voters.

People had the same concerns with Obama in 2008 and Trump in 2016.  There were always serious doubts in their ability to win the general... We are still in the early part of this process.  Warren has six months left to keep her movement growing until the first votes are cast. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

People had the same concerns with Obama in 2008 and Trump in 2016.  There were always serious doubts in their ability to win the general... We are still in the early part of this process.  Warren has six months left to keep her movement growing until the first votes are cast. 

Nobody in this field has even a fraction of the charisma that Obama or Trump have. The good guys are going to have to find a different way to win. Warren isn't going to enjoy a meteoric rise that nobody saw coming (and BTW, lots of people saw Obama coming). She's going to have to do it the old fashioned way. And she's doing a great job so far. But it's an uphill battle for her in the states that matter.

[bolverk 29,717]

4 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

All good - no offense taken. Had a crazy week myself, and I do this stuff 8-10 hours a day (not polling, but data) and no way I want to look at any more on a Friday night.

It's annoying that we get decent head-to-head vs. Trump polling nationally, and decent state-by-state polling but that's only amongst dem voters, etc. I like two candidates the most on an actual "I want them to be president" level, and they're the two of the top five that I have the most concerns with on electability. I really want to see some state by state head to head vs. Trump data. I'm assuming we'll get some as we get closer to go time.

I imagine it's too early to put each Dem candidate up against Trump on a regional level in these polls, because realistically once the primaries are in full swing the field will narrow from state to state  across the country. That said, I too would like to see some regional numbers against him. I personally believe that it'll come down to either Warren or Biden at the end of the primary process and we should have a much better idea about their regional support by then.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

5 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Nobody in this field has even a fraction of the charisma that Obama or Trump have. The good guys are going to have to find a different way to win. Warren isn't going to enjoy a meteoric rise that nobody saw coming (and BTW, lots of people saw Obama coming). She's going to have to do it the old fashioned way. And she's doing a great job so far. But it's an uphill battle for her in the states that matter.

I don't know, I think her charisma is underrated.   There's a reason she was a Dr. Phil and Daily Show guest before she was that famous — she can be pretty entertaining in a nerdy way, like Neil Degrasse Tyson.   People forget that about her.    She's the only major candidate who is steadily growing in support as more people see her in action rather than either treading or having big bumps and dips.   And her events are starting to have a lot of excitement, with the selfie lines and everything.

She's not like Obama, who is cool, or Trump, who can charm shitheads.   But she's really gifted at communicating actual policy in an interesting way.  And if she does take the nomination, I don't think that many people will have really seen it coming.   She's always been viewed as a niche liberal who could never actually win nationwide.   I know I never expected her to be this good at campaigning for president. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

12 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I don't know, I think her charisma is underrated.   There's a reason she was a Dr. Phil and Daily Show guest before she was that famous — she can be pretty entertaining in a nerdy way, like Neil Degrasse Tyson.   People forget that about her.    She's the only major candidate who is steadily growing in support as more people see her in action rather than either treading or having big bumps and dips.   And her events are starting to have a lot of excitement, with the selfie lines and everything.

She's not like Obama, who is cool, or Trump, who can charm shitheads.   But she's really gifted at communicating actual policy in an interesting way.  And if she does take the nomination, I don't think that many people will have really seen it coming.   She's always been viewed as a niche liberal who could never actually win nationwide.   I know I never expected her to be this good at campaigning for president. 

Completely agree on all counts, particularly that I didn't give her enough credit. She's a beast and has impressed the hell out of me with her savvy and marketing ability. 

I'm just not sure "communicating actual policy in an interesting way" matters in the rust belt. Hope I'm wrong.

[TwiceHorn 31,533]

23 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Completely agree on all counts, particularly that I didn't give her enough credit. She's a beast and has impressed the hell out of me with her savvy and marketing ability. 

I'm just not sure "communicating actual policy in an interesting way" matters in the rust belt. Hope I'm wrong.

I'm thinking that as long as she talks to them at all, she'll make some headway.  That was part of Trump's appeal:  he talked to people that coastal elites ignored.  The question is whether you have to tell them implausible lies or not.  She has a few things for them and a "pro middle class" story that should work.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

A thing I like about Warren is she can educate without coming off too preachy or condescending.  Unlike other candidates, she doesn’t insult my intelligence.  

[TwiceHorn 31,533]

13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

A thing I like about Warren is she can educate without coming off too preachy or condescending.  Unlike other candidates, she doesn’t insult my intelligence.  

Agreed.  You don't win teaching awards everywhere you go, even at law schools, and even at fancy ones, by being a pedantic wonk.

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

I'm def for Warren from what I've seen so far.

[TwiceHorn 31,533]

Ugh, fuck.  Thinking about her vs. Trump reminds me of Pocahontas.  I don't think it amounts to a hill of beans, but it's rotten red meat for the shitgibbon base.

At some point I'd like to know what she was thinking when she did that.