Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

16 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

"How to drive the ultra wealthy to offshore their wealth in one youtube video"  

These schemes are all great in concept form, but when the chips actually fall, the ultra wealthy will be two steps ahead.

If you want to increase revenues in a meaningful way, it will have to be broad based and it will impact all Americans. Which is the way that it should be. This notion that we can make it rain and nobody other than the "tippy top" will have to feel the pinch is foolish.   

Maybe Liz has a plan for that?  You think she’s new to how these billionaires move their money?    She’s been gunning for them her entire career and they’ve made it clear they’re no fan of hers.  Let’s give her a shot and see how it works out.  What have we got to lose? 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23481]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Maybe Liz has a plan for that?  You think she’s new to how these billionaires move their money?    She’s been gunning for them her entire career and they’ve made it clear they’re no fan of hers.  Let’s give her a shot and see how it works out.  What have we got to lose? 

Sure, let's give her a shot.  And then we can come back in 6 years and talk about the fact that revenue increases will need to be broad based in nature, hitting the meat of the income distribution (or wealth distribution if you prefer). 

[Dbeasy 15085]

A section of Elizabeth Warren’s 2016 DNC Speech on Donald Trump
 

“Donald Trump knows that the American people are angry — a fact so obvious he can see it from the top of Trump Tower. So now he’s insisting that he, and he alone, can fix the rigged system.

Last week Donald Trump spoke for more than an hour on the biggest stage he’s ever had. But other than talking about building a stupid wall, which will NEVER get built, really, did you hear any actual ideas? Did you hear even one solid proposal from Trump for increasing incomes, or improving your kids’ education, or creating even one single good-paying job?

Donald Trump has no real plans for jobs or for college kids or for seniors, no plans to make ANYTHING great for ANYONE except rich guys like Donald Trump. Just look at his ideas. Donald Trump wants to get rid of the federal minimum wage. Donald Trump wants to roll back financial regulations and turn Wall Street loose to wreck our economy again.

And Donald Trump has a tax plan to give multi-millionaires and billionaires like himself an average tax cut of $1.3 million — a year. You’re struggling to put your kids through college, and Donald Trump thinks HE needs a million-dollar tax break!

Trump’s entire campaign is just one more late-night Trump infomercial. Hand over your money, your jobs, your children’s future, and The Great Trump Hot Air Machine will reveal all the answers. And, for one low, low price, he’ll even throw in a goofy hat.

And here’s the really ugly underside to his pitch. Trump thinks he can win votes by fanning the flames of fear and hatred. By turning neighbor against neighbor. By persuading you that the real problem in America is your fellow Americans — people who don’t look like you, or don’t talk like you, or don’t worship like you. He even picked a vice president famous for trying to make it legal to openly discriminate against gays and lesbians.

That’s Donald Trump’s America. An America of fear and hate. An America where we all break apart. Whites against blacks and Latinos. Christians against Muslims and Jews. Straight against gay. Everyone against immigrants. Race, religion, heritage, gender, the more factions the better.
But ask yourself this. When white workers in Ohio are pitted against black workers in North Carolina, or Latino workers in Florida, who really benefits?

“Divide and Conquer” is an old story in America. Dr. Martin Luther King knew it. After his march from Selma to Montgomery, he spoke of how segregation was created to keep people divided. Instead of higher wages for workers, Dr. King described how poor whites in the South were fed Jim Crow, which told a poor white worker that, “No matter how bad off he was, at least he was a white man, better than the black man.” Racial hatred was part of keeping the powerful on top.

And now Trump and his campaign have embraced it all. Racial hatred. Religious bigotry. Attacks on immigrants, on women, on gays. A deceitful and ugly blame game that says, whatever worries you, the answer is to blame that other group, and don’t put any energy into making real change.

When we turn on each other, bankers can run our economy for Wall Street, oil companies can fight off clean energy, and giant corporations can ship the last good jobs overseas.

When we turn on each other, rich guys like Trump can push through more tax breaks for themselves and then we’ll never have enough money to support our schools, or rebuild our highways, or invest in our kids’ future.

When we turn on each other, we can’t unite to fight back against a rigged system.

Well, I’ve got news for Donald Trump. The American people are not falling for it! We’ve seen this ugliness before, and we’re not going to be Donald Trump’s hate-filled America. Not now, not ever!”

Wow she just nailed it.

[Dbeasy 15085]

Very well done. I hope she does more of these.

I’ve always thought an extreme wealth tax was an interesting idea, but 2-3% per year means the govt could end up taking most of a person’s wealth in 33-50 years.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The NYT getting in on the concern trolling 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

 

I’ve always thought an extreme wealth tax was an interesting idea, but 2-3% per year means the govt could end up taking most of a person’s wealth in 33-50 years.

 

That would only be true if a super-rich person keeps literally all of their wealth in cash or things that depreciate in value.  And if that's the case, there's even less value to society in letting them sit on those assets for 50 years, so yeah, tax the hell out of such a person. 

In reality, the assets themselves grow in value over time, much more than the 2-3% tax.  

[Anastasis 23481]

Regarding Warren's plan, is there a mechanism by which all of us non-billionaires are exempted from reporting to the federal government a comprehensive accounting of our investments, real estate, and personal property?  Or do all Americans get to play that fun game to prove up that they are not multi-millionaires.    

[Mojo Hand 4580]

16 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Regarding Warren's plan, is there a mechanism by which all of us non-billionaires are exempted from reporting to the federal government a comprehensive accounting of our investments, real estate, and personal property?  Or do all Americans get to play that fun game to prove up that they are not multi-millionaires.    

Good question.   I don't know what she proposes, but I can't imagine it would be difficult to drastically narrow down the pool.   You can't amass more than $50 million without earning or inheriting a significant chunk of change, so the IRS could probably review past income tax filing data and send out a notice to like 95% of Americans that they don't have to file a wealth tax form. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This was a good read from today on Elizabeth Warren’s profile and strategy:

“Arguing the World”

https://newrepublic.com/article/154659/elizabeth-warren-profile-2020-presidential-election-ideas

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Strong endorsement from a former Illinois state senator.

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This was a CSB from 2011

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

New plan for Natives. 

The media’s coverage of this plan is exactly how you would expect it to go.  CNN went straight to the DNA test/breakfast club interview. 

It’s inadvertently serving as a dog whistle from Warren to the media (right and left).  Whether intentional or not, this is some political jujitsu, leaning into the Native American issue again while she’s on the rise. 

/end

 

The periodic reading of the letters: 

 

Edited August 16, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

CONTINUED:

Warren: "The Lord calls us to act. To feed the hungry, to give water to the thirsty, to visit those in prison."

Daughtry asks why black people should trust Warren with their vote. Warren says releasing all of her plans shows her values and allows voters to hold her accountable.

McBride asks what Warren will do to counteract voter suppression, particularly that that affects black people. Warren says she wants to “roll back every one of those racist voter suppression laws that has been past, and I think we can do it at a federal level.”

Daughtry asks what Warren's plan is for student debt. She says the first step is a wealth tax. Revenues from that tax would fund universal childcare and preK, increased childcare wages, tuition-free college, Pell grants, $50M in HBCU funding and canceling 95% of student loan debt

McBride asks Warren to address gun violence, police violence and the lack of safety black people feel due to rising white nationalism. Warren says white nationalism "should be treated like the terrorist threat that it is" by the Department of Justice.

Warren says gun violence is an everyday occurrence, "particularly in communities of color," &says she wants to reduce gun violence by 80% following a similar model used to reduce fatal car crashes. "We need to treat it like a crisis in each and every one of our families."

Daughtry asks Warren how we can reduce black maternal mortality rate.

Warren: "Something bad is going on ... I want to see something real happen. For me, that means money," 

Says we should fund more doctors and fund studies to determine the root causes.

/end

Edited August 17, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Now that Liz is the odds on favorite to win the nomination according to multiple betting lines—> 

Troll narratives currently being pushed by other campaigns:

“Elizabeth Warren has a black people problem.” 

“All her supporters are rich white people.”

“If elected, she couldn’t get any of her plans passed.”

”I’m not voting for anyone over 65.”

”Her wealth tax is unconstitutional.”

”Moderates won’t turn out for a leftist radical and Trump will win.”

“If nominated, she will pick Bernie as her VP, therefore I can’t vote for her.”

“She needs to apologize for...xyz.”

This list will continue to be updated.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile, she is having overflow issues at her public events.  This is South Carolina today.

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[NWBuck 8584]

Sure, but what did Elton John draw in those locations? 

[Anastasis 23481]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Now that Liz is the odds on favorite to win the nomination according to multiple betting lines—> 

Troll narratives currently being pushed by other campaigns:

“Elizabeth Warren has a black people problem.” 

“All her supporters are rich white people.”

“If elected, she couldn’t get any of her plans passed.”

”I’m not voting for anyone over 65.”

”Her wealth tax is unconstitutional.”

”Moderates won’t turn out for a leftist radical and Trump will win.”

“If nominated, she will pick Bernie as her VP, therefore I can’t vote for her.”

 

This list will continue to be updated.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile, she is having overflow issues at her public events.  This is South Carolina today.

 

Wait until they find out that she is pumping Christian dogma that is not in sync with the heretics. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This is the kind of campaigning people love to see.  

 

She is going to win. 

Edited August 18, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[horncyclist 1391]

Yep. Here's her with my youngest about 4 years ago at Scholz. Would love him to have his photo with the first female president and a true progressive reformer.






Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[RomaVicta 29992]

Okay. I'm now fanatic about a candidate for the first time in my life. I think we're looking at a the first great president in a long, long time. 

At the basest levels, she's hard to hate. The other side can ridicule her, find details to harp on, and lie about her, but they can't really make her an object of hate for anyone other than the GOP's worst elements. I don't see the hate engine doing to Warren what they've done to the Clintons, Kerry, Obama, and Gore. The ammunition just isn't there.

Sure, as far as issues she can be attacked and people can have a legitimate objection to her plans. That would be a refreshing battlefield on which to fight. However, I don't see hate politics working really well against her with undecideds or traditional GOPs who haven't been able to let go of the party even if it means supporting all that is bad about Trump.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The GOP getting their messaging out there, and I gotta say it’s pretty weak. 

 

[horncyclist 1391]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The GOP getting their messaging out there, and I gotta say it’s pretty weak. 

 

I saw a moron on Facebook today posting about her conservative views early in her career.

[BradInATX 9208]

Okay. I'm now fanatic about a candidate for the first time in my life. I think we're looking at a the first great president in a long, long time. 

At the basest levels, she's hard to hate. The other side can ridicule her, find details to harp on, and lie about her, but they can't really make her an object of hate for anyone other than the GOP's worst elements. I don't see the hate engine doing to Warren what they've done to the Clintons, Kerry, Obama, and Gore. The ammunition just isn't there.

Sure, as far as issues she can be attacked and people can have a legitimate objection to her plans. That would be a refreshing battlefield on which to fight. However, I don't see hate politics working really well against her with undecideds or traditional GOPs who haven't been able to let go of the party even if it means supporting all that is bad about Trump.

 

She's a coastal white liberal woman who isn't proud of her white heritage. I bet she doesn't even like bud light or Dale Earnhardt

[TornACL 7722]

I would love to see these so called vile attacks she made on law enforcement... 

[Hawndoh 2386]

16 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

5 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Okay. I'm now fanatic about a candidate for the first time in my life. I think we're looking at a the first great president in a long, long time. 

At the basest levels, she's hard to hate. The other side can ridicule her, find details to harp on, and lie about her, but they can't really make her an object of hate for anyone other than the GOP's worst elements. I don't see the hate engine doing to Warren what they've done to the Clintons, Kerry, Obama, and Gore. The ammunition just isn't there.

Sure, as far as issues she can be attacked and people can have a legitimate objection to her plans. That would be a refreshing battlefield on which to fight. However, I don't see hate politics working really well against her with undecideds or traditional GOPs who haven't been able to let go of the party even if it means supporting all that is bad about Trump.

 

 

Read more  

She's a coastal white liberal woman who isn't proud of her white heritage. I bet she doesn't even like bud light or Dale Earnhardt

Wasn't she drinking a Michelob Ultra in a recent picture? That's like Bud Light for women. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, TornACL said:

I would love to see these so called vile attacks she made on law enforcement... 

Here’s what that is referring to:

 

[TornACL 7722]

When someone refers to that statement as vile, it's clear why they're trying to deceive. 

[kevwun 15859]

Ronna is pretty high of the list of vile Trump bootlickers.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This aged...poorly 

Liz’s eye-roll at the 11 second mark is priceless 

Edited August 18, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Doc Sam Beckett 5797]

8 hours ago, horncyclist said:

Yep. Here's her with my youngest about 4 years ago at Scholz. Would love him to have his photo with the first female president and a true progressive reformer.






Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

 

Is that you behind your youngest, wearing the shades? We might need to talk about your youngest.... 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5797]

On 8/14/2019 at 8:27 PM, Anastasis said:

"How to drive the ultra wealthy to offshore their wealth in one youtube video"  

 

I've been hearing this about California for as long as I can remember. Still waiting for the collapse of California due to the high libtard taxes.... 

[Anastasis 23481]

21 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I've been hearing this about California for as long as I can remember. Still waiting for the collapse of California due to the high libtard taxes.... 

California won’t collapse but there sure as shit are a lot of Californians migrating to Texas. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Lol

[Doc Sam Beckett 5797]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

California won’t collapse but there sure as shit are a lot of Californians migrating to Texas. 

Well, bye. There's a shit ton of people migrating to California as well. Bottom line is that the high taxes have not had a negative impact on California, even with fuck face Donald's SALT deduction limits. California is still experiencing growth. 

[Anastasis 23481]

Just now, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Well, bye. There's a shit ton of people migrating to California as well. Bottom line is that the high taxes have not had a negative impact on California, even with fuck face Donald's SALT deduction limits. California is still experiencing growth. 

Good for them I guess. California is great. None of that has anything to do with the fact that the ultra wealthy will makes moves to minimize their exposure to a wealth tax. If it can even pass court challenge. 

[bad_teammate 13224]

34 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

... the ultra wealthy will makes moves to minimize their exposure to a wealth tax.

imgur

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

[bad_teammate 13224]

Liz on the Breakfast Club when asked why she was a Republican for so long, "I wasn't that political"

hmm

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Bernie Bros in attack mode again I see.  Sooo desperate and pathetic. You are your own worst enemy.

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

It’s not great but this is a blip on the radar. She has enough of a track record over the last 20 year to where people know what she is all about. Also, about 1% of the population even knows about stuff like the conservative groups warren spoke to 25 years ago. Hell, 75% of the population probably doesn’t even know who she is yet.

[horncyclist 1391]

I saw a moron post this on Facebook earliertoday. You think Elizabeth Fuckin Warren is a secret Manchurian conservative? Holy shit.

Her conservative republican background is well known. She's talked and written about it. And who better to put these small government con artist fucks in their place than someone who once fell for the con?

If this is the best they've got, let's crown her the nominee and get on with getting rid of the real conartist sitting in the Whitehouse. Holy fuck.

Edited August 19, 2019 by horncyclist

[bad_teammate 13224]

Nice meltdown, boys. 

Pointing out objective reality is not an attack. Liz told The Breakfast Club she wasn't very politically during her time as a Republican, and that's not true. She lied. You can say it doesn't matter, but pointing it out isn't an attack. You should show a little more confidence in both her and your own allegiance to her by engaging without setting yourself on fire and rolling around screaming. Or by not engaging at all.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Whatever you disingenuous piece of shit.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Nice meltdown, boys. 

Pointing out objective reality is not an attack. Liz told The Breakfast Club she wasn't very politically during her time as a Republican, and that's not true. She lied. You can say it doesn't matter, but pointing it out isn't an attack. You should show a little more confidence in both her and your own allegiance to her by engaging without setting yourself on fire and rolling around screaming. Or by not engaging at all.

 

Because she gave a speech to the federalist society in the 80s or 90s? 

[bad_teammate 13224]

There is nothing disingenuous about what I'm saying.

Elizabeth Warren was an active and vocal Republican until the 1990s. All throughout Willie Horton and the Reagan era of destroying South/Central America and ignoring the AIDS epidemic. That's the truth.

Recently, while running for president in a field in which she is perceived as very progressive, she claimed she wasn't politically active when confronted. That's the truth.

Is it disqualifying? Not to me. She's #2 in this race in my estimation and multiple laps ahead of whoever might be #3. 

Is it dishonest? Of course it is. I can't crawl into her brain, but either she's embarrassed by her political past or she hasn't really confronted/rejected it. Or something else, I guess.

A disingenuous piece of shit is someone who just names a candidate's associates and leaves it to insinuation what the problem might be.

[bad_teammate 13224]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Because she gave a speech to the federalist society in the 80s or 90s? 

You left out the dependent clause, I have no idea what the causational link is here.

Is it, "You think she was a Republican because..."?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The Berners are out for blood right now.  Just look at the replies to any of Liz’s recent tweets. They’re trying so hard to tear her down because Bernie is crashing and burning and they can’t do anything except take Liz with him.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

You left out the dependent clause, I have no idea what the causational link is here.

Is it, "You think she was a Republican because..."?

You think she was lying about being polically active because... 

[bad_teammate 13224]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The Berners are out for blood right now.  Just look at the replies to any of Liz’s recent tweets. They trying so hard to tear her down because Bernie is crashing and burning and they can’t do anything except take Liz with him.

You need a mint julep and a nap.

[bad_teammate 13224]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

You think she was lying about being polically active because... 

Lots of possible reasons she would lie in that context. We can speculate, but we can't know.

What's your theory?

[horncyclist 1391]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Nice meltdown, boys. 

Pointing out objective reality is not an attack. Liz told The Breakfast Club she wasn't very politically during her time as a Republican, and that's not true. She lied. You can say it doesn't matter, but pointing it out isn't an attack. You should show a little more confidence in both her and your own allegiance to her by engaging without setting yourself on fire and rolling around screaming. Or by not engaging at all.

 

Bullshit. "Wasn't very political" is entirely consistent with that reporting, which was nothing new. She was an academic with an expertise in bankruptcy that leaned to the right. Of course she talked to the Federalist Society. This was in the same article:

 

I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore," Warren told the Daily Beast in 2011. "I was a Republican at a time when I felt like there was a problem that the markets were under a lot more strain. It worried me whether or not the government played too activist a role."

Bernie Bros l,like you, take old news and brand her a liar. Jesus fucking Christ. You really want to fuck this up huh?