Elizabeth Warren 2020

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

[bolverk 30323]

On 9/3/2019 at 6:54 AM, EuroHorn said:

She also claimed that she was Native American 

And your handle claims you're a Euro. Are you, or are you not? If so, which country? If not, why do you claim it?

[Js1 87182]

26 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

It'll be underwater long before that after another couple Harveys. 

[triplehorn 2664]

52 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

Been wondering how much of a bluff or not Exxon Mobile has been putting on with these ads in recent years.  Time to put up or shut up 

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by triplehorn

[CooterBrown 18288]

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

So, it’s a wash then.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[triplehorn 2664]

8 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

In tonight’s town hall, Warren responded to this very question with Port Arthur as the example.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

High point of the night when Warren called out the bullshit on light bulbs, straws, and cheeseburgers. 

 

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

2 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

In tonight’s town hall, Warren responded to this very question with Port Arthur as the example.  

What was the answer?

[F250 29201]

3 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

What was the answer?

Places you should never visit.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

24 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

What was the answer?

IIRC, this was it.

Also this,

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[JohnnyRage 1617]

Is she serious about reparations? Is it a cash payout or scholarships and funding?

[Post Oak 20566]

5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

We Are Going To Win!

[triplehorn 2664]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

IIRC, this was it.

 

That’s the larger answer to questions from those petro workers living down the road from the ARAMCO owned facilities who are more concerned about dying from starvation than pollution if they lose their industry related jobs.  Workers are integral to fill a large variety of new jobs linked to green industry.  And there’s no reason an energy company like Exxon Mobil will sit there and do nothing instead of using its immense resources as an advantage for wholesale shifts into green research and innovation given the necessary incentives.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

28 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

Is she serious about reparations?

She doesn’t have a specific plan for reparations.  Her plan is in the form of creating more entrepreneurial opportunity for POC funded by the ultra millionaires tax.

Read more here:

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/leveling-the-playing-field-for-entrepreneurs-2a585aa2b6d7

or here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2019/06/14/elizabeth-warren-proposes-plan-for-minority-entrepreneurs/amp/

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

She looks marvelous 

 

[RayDog 682]

10 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

Think what it will do for Russia and the Middle East.

[bad_teammate 13523]

The corporate powers are the problem. Yes.

So she's correctly identifying who the bad guys are, but when it comes to doing something about it and avoiding getting right back into the cycle we're in the middle of, she is hesitant (putting it kindly here) to actually enact the "big, structural change" she champions as a slogan.

Tougher regulations might be big, but they certainly are not structural.

The purpose of publicly-owned utilities is to completely divorce the operation of these necessary-and-dangerous industries from any profit motivations, because it is the profit motivation that leads to the terrible corruption and environmental destruction.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

So, clearly not a crypto-communist that wants to nationalize everything. 

[bad_teammate 13523]

"Communism" is a word with a meaning, Mr. Shapiro. Publicly-owned utilities are not communism of any type. They are an extremely normal thing all across capitalist societies, including the US.

Liz deserves better than angry white libertarian guys whose arguments are indistinguishable from right-wing talking points. (putting "white guy" and "libertarian" together is a little redundant, I guess)

Can't make an actual argument? Call the other person a communist!

[Hank Kingsley 21784]

I love it when someone writes the perfect tweet. 

 

[Fozzz 152]

Cringe. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"Communism" is a word with a meaning, Mr. Shapiro. Publicly-owned utilities are not communism of any type. They are an extremely normal thing all across capitalist societies, including the US.

Liz deserves better than angry white libertarian guys whose arguments are indistinguishable from right-wing talking points. (putting "white guy" and "libertarian" together is a little redundant, I guess)

Can't make an actual argument? Call the other person a communist!

I remember a bad teammate that would embrace communism and not take it as a pejorative.  

[bad_teammate 13523]

It's not communism itself I object to, Hugo, it's your right-wing framing of public utilities as communism I object to.

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

The only problem I have w/ Warren is her insistence on wearing those god-awful sweaters.  JFC, those make her look like someone's Nana, not a presidential candidate.  

But, when the worse thing you can say about someone is their affinity to look like a grandma, she's doing pretty well.  I'm not down w/ all her ideas but i think she's, by far, the sharpest knife in the POTUS candidate drawer. 

[safe sex 12007]

Would you rather have pantsuits? 

Edited September 5, 2019 by trauma babe

[bad_teammate 13523]

I am 100% in support of grandmas in government yelling at the jerks to cut it out.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

only problem I have w/ Warren is her insistence on wearing those god-awful sweaters.  JFC, those make her look like someone's Nana, not a presidential candidate

I love the cardigans.  For me I see it as Warren’s big fuck you to the patriarchal political structure.  Female politicians aren’t supposed to be sporting the same boring attire everyday. They should be wearing nice dresses and colorful pants suits.  Warren going with the plain black pants, shirt, and cardigan is her way of saying “Fuck your rules, I’ll make my own. Deal with it.”

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's not communism itself I object to, Hugo, it's your right-wing framing of public utilities as communism I object to.

And that’s fair, I guess I get irritated when you echo the same Bernie Bros talking points against Warren I see on twitter.  That’s on me. 

[DixonHur 11959]

18 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

Sounds like an improvement to me.

[bad_teammate 13523]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

And that’s fair, I guess I get irritated when you echo the same Bernie Bros talking points against Warren I see on twitter.

The concept of public utilities as an answer to abusive/neglectful private utility practice isn't new and it isn't a Bernie Bro thing. It's not even a particularly left or liberal thing. In fact, it is generally the only way to get reliable utilities to areas that a capitalist operation would have no interest in. These areas are often poor, rural, and white. (See: MUDs in Texas)

It's only a "talking point" to you because you have no understanding of progressive/left economic politics. You've raised yourself an economic libertarian and while you understand the conceptions and rhetoric of social liberalism (see: Your... rather strong... interpretation of Warren's wardrobe choices), you're so steeped in economic libertarianism that you genuinely don't know how to engage with the conversation outside of (1) just falling back on your right-wing priors ("COMMUNIST!") and (2) reducing it to some social media battle ("Twitter").

[DixonHur 11959]

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I am 100% in support of grandmas in government yelling at the jerks to cut it out.

No shit...beats the "get off my lawn" crowd we currently have.

[bad_teammate 13523]

Grandpa yells at you then goes off to drink alone and watch football.

Grandma yells at you then makes you some fry bread and tells you that you've got so much potential.

Advantage: Grandma

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

The concept of public utilities as an answer to abusive/neglectful private utility practice isn't new and it isn't a Bernie Bro thing. It's not even a particularly left or liberal thing. In fact, it is generally the only way to get reliable utilities to areas that a capitalist operation would have no interest in. These areas are often poor, rural, and white. (See: MUDs in Texas)

It's only a "talking point" to you because you have no understanding of progressive/left economic politics. You've raised yourself an economic libertarian and while you understand the conceptions and rhetoric of social liberalism (see: Your... rather strong... interpretation of Warren's wardrobe choices), you're so steeped in economic libertarianism that you genuinely don't know how to engage with the conversation outside of (1) just falling back on your right-wing priors ("COMMUNIST!") and (2) reducing it to some social media battle ("Twitter").

Energy utilities are already the most tightly regulated and Soviet style sector of our economy.  

But please go on about how the capitalistic profit motive is the real problem in the utilities industry with regard to climate change.

The nitpicking and try-harding by the Berners to establish some perception of a competitive advantage or failed purity test of Warren is fascinating tho.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

How long was he workshopping that tweet before he settled on akimbo.  

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

10 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

IIRC, this was it.

 

 

seriously though, i like her the best because she seems more thoughtful than anyone else, howeva, as texans this has a big cheetah's eating peoples faces aspect for all of us.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Energy utilities are already the most tightly regulated and Soviet style sector of our economy.  

But please go on about how the capitalistic profit motive is the real problem in the utilities industry with regard to climate change.

The nitpicking and try-harding by the Berners to establish some perception of a competitive advantage or fail purity test of Warren is fascinating tho.

I realize I’m taking the bait into another Bernie vs Warren debate here but...

I perceive the fundamental difference between Bernie and Warren is their approach to solving the corruption problem.  

Bernie takes a robust government approach to undermining the corruptive profit motives by nationalizing sectors of the economy he perceives the private sector has failed and largely exploited the population.  He’s not wrong.  The concern I have is without some strong good faith enforcement and accountability mechanism you will always have a bigger corruption vulnerability problem.  In my view, this has always been the biggest weakness of Socialism.  Power gets so centralized and once it gets corrupted by a few bad actors everything goes to hell.

Fascism/authoritarianism are just around the corner.  

Capitalism has the same vulnerability when corporate power/wealth becomes so concentrated it starts to make its own exploitive government policy over the population via bought and paid for lawmakers.  This is where Elizabeth Warren comes in with a different prescription.

Warren takes a more surgical “law and order” approach by prioritizing regulating out the corruptive influences among lawmakers and the private sector in an effort to reinvigorate a healthier public/private sector to create an more egalitarian society. It’s what makes her a progressive capitalist and not a democratic socialist.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[BradInATX 9208]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Can't make an actual argument? Call the other person a communist!

"Can't make an actual argument? Call the other person a Republican/Libertarian!"

Your complete lack of self awareness and/or shame in your unabashed, constant hypocrisy is just staggering. It puts Trump to shame, even.

Edited September 5, 2019 by BradInATX

[fattyflattie 4640]

20 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

a 10 year plan for 100% clean energy would turn houston into mogadishu

Everyone head to Austin!

[bad_teammate 13523]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Energy utilities are already the most tightly regulated and Soviet style sector of our economy.  

What does "Soviet-style" mean?

Quote

But please go on about how the capitalistic profit motive is the real problem in the utilities industry with regard to climate change.

Wait, are you disagreeing with Elizabeth Warren, because she actively names profit-seeking energy producers as the real problem with regard to climate change.

This is the thing, Hugo, you're a libertarian at heart. As soon as you feel the least bit threatened ideologically you become a John Birch Society raving idiot. This dalliance with Warren is as fleeting as every other dalliance you've had with political figures.

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The concern I have is without some strong good faith enforcement and accountability mechanism you will always have a bigger corruption vulnerability problem.  In my view, this has always been the biggest weakness of Socialism.  Power gets so centralized and once it gets corrupted by a few bad actors everything goes to hell.

Libertarian drivel.

When you have a democratically controlled system you have the opposite of "a few bad actors". When you have a capitalistic monopoly, "a few bad actors" is the actual operation.

8 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

"Can't make an actual argument? Call the other person a Republican/Libertarian!"

You and Hugo literally are Republican/libertarian. That is your actual voting history and it is reflected in your economic ideology. Facts don't care about your feelings.

[bad_teammate 13523]

Nebraska: 100% public power

Quote

In Nebraska, 121 publicly owned utilities, ten cooperatives, and 30 public power districts provide electricity to a population of around 1.8 million people. Public and cooperative ownership keeps costs low for the state’s consumers. Nebraskans pay one of the lowest rates for electricity in the nation and revenues are reinvested in infrastructure to ensure reliable and cheap service for years to come.

“There are no stockholders, and thus no profit motive,” the Nebraska Power Association proudly proclaims. “Our electric prices do not include a profit. That means Nebraska’s utilities can focus exclusively on keeping electric rates low and customer service high. Our customers, not big investors in New York and Chicago, own Nebraska’s utilities.”

A public utility, properly run, serves the desires of the constituents. If the constituents desire the lowest price, that's what the utility seeks. If the constituents desire zero-carbon production, that's what the utility seeks.

A purely capital-market-driven system will only ever serve profit. You could argue that the market will adapt to what people want (which you will, because you're a libertarian), but the truth is that this capital-market system only reacts to people with enough capital to influence it. Those without sufficient capital are left outside and powerless.

This is fine when it comes to luxury goods and non-necessities and things that don't impact everyone. But environmental quality impacts everyone, rich and poor. And everyone needs electricity even if they can't afford to buy it from a capital market.

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

 

You and Hugo literally are Republican/libertarian. That is your actual voting history 

Nope

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[triplehorn 2664]

"nothing sticks to Warren"

 

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

RIP her mentions for praising Warren. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

RIP her mentions for praising Warren. 

The red roses are heavy with the demands in the mentions

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Cool website (campaign related):

http://lizpersisted.com/

[406W30th 1111]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Cool website (campaign related):

http://lizpersisted.com/

This website is v nice

[bad_teammate 13523]

These events are dumb.

Design aesthetic ranking:
1 - Harris
2 - Beto
3 - Warren
4 - Bernie
5 - Biden
6 - Pete

The bottom 3 are all ugly.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Kamala’s color scheme is hideous.  It looks like it’s out of the early 1990s.

Agree with Beto and Warren’s being top tier though. 

Edited September 7, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz