Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

30 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So the argument is that answering "yes" to a middle class tax hike (while still explaining why the overall costs would go down) would give Rs talking points to attack her. 

But dodging the question has ALREADY given Rs talking points to attack her. 

If both are a no-win situation, then just tell the truth and directly answer the question. It's clearly the best option. 

 

 

 

Both strategies are reasonable.   Bernie is taking the approach of saying middle class taxes will go up and then trying to explain why that isn't a bad thing.   Liz is taking the approach of calling out the very question as a Republican talking point and then reframing the discussion to total costs.  I don't know if her strategy is the best option, but her impressive campaign has earned the benefit of the doubt from me. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

Serious question. Has Warren explicitly said or stated anywhere that her healthcare plan removes private insurers and moves everyone onto the government plan (like Bernie's)?

Edited September 19, 2019 by BradInATX

[Bozo_Casanova 26,847]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Serious question. Has Warren explicitly said or stated anywhere that her healthcare plan removes private insurers and moves everyone onto the government plan (like Bernie's)?

That's what I like about Warren. She hasn't hemmed herself in the way Bernie has. But at the end of the day, it's not like this conjecture matters. the only thing that matters is where a president can get a majority in both houses to go, with 60 senate votes. Any of the top three will have about the same level of success, which will likely be some form of either opt-in to a guaranteed issue public option or auto-enroll with an opt-out and some kind of rejiggering of the tax code to partially pay for it, with debt to pay for the rest plus a huge buy-off of some key industries in return for the 55th-60th votes. 

Edited September 19, 2019 by Bozo_Casanova

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Serious question. Has Warren explicitly said or stated anywhere that her healthcare plan removes private insurers and moves everyone onto the government plan (ala Bernie's)?

She raised her hand in the first debate when asked who would get rid of private insurers, but then again, so did Harris.  I don't think she's said anything definitive. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,847]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

She raised her hand in the first debate when asked who would get rid of private insurers, but then again, so did Harris.  I don't think she's said anything definitive. 

Just scratching my nose!

[bad_teammate 13,517]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That's what I like about Warren. She hasn't hemmed herself in the way Bernie has. But at the end of the day, it's not like this conjecture matters. the only thing that matters is where a president can get a majority in both houses to go, with 51 senate votes and reconciliation/filibuster reform.

fixed

[Hank Kingsley 21,778]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

 I don't know if her strategy is the best option, but her impressive campaign has earned the benefit of the doubt from me. 

Understandable. Her campaign has been practically perfect for the last 4-5 months. It may seem trite to some, but the selfie line stuff has been brilliant. Not only engaging tens of thousands of people directly, but also showing off some stamina and energy that subconsciously puts to rest any concerns with her age. If she wins the nomination I think every candidate moving forward will adopt her selfie strategy. They probably should anyways. 

Another brilliant move (and I don't mean this facetiously) is that she's taken cover behind Bernie. He takes the brunt of criticism and she continues upward without much damage. 

Obviously that run is about to end. She is a clear front runner and the attacks are coming. How she handles it will be very important. She flubbed the Native American stuff when she tweeted out that video about her DNA records. There really hasn't been much controversy for her since. 

 

 

[BradInATX 9,208]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That's what I like about Warren. She hasn't hemmed herself in the way Bernie has. But at the end of the day, it's not like this conjecture matters. the only thing that matters is where a president can get a majority in both houses to go, with 60 senate votes. Any of the top three will have about the same level of success, which will likely be some form of either opt-in to a guaranteed issue public option or auto-enroll with an opt-out and some kind of rejiggering of the tax code to partially pay for it, with debt to pay for the rest plus a huge buy-off of some key industries in return for the 55th-60th votes. 

Right. That's sort of where my head was with that question. So far I haven't seen her actually outright say it. Mojo brings up a good point with the debate hand raise, but like him I don't really see that as anything definitive. It's not on her website and she hasn't gone there that I've seen. I think it's likely she's not answering the question because she hasn't even fully fleshed out her plan yet. Not sure if that's because she's still working on it/deciding, or something more cynical like a future far-left to center-left lane change, but it doesn't really matter to me. It's just interesting that she hasn't really committed to one side or the other when every single other candidate seems to have clearly stated whether they're for M4A or M4A who want it. 

You're definitely right about there being an intermediary step. Even if it's Bernie, we're not going straight from what we have to full M4A. That's not how we operate, for better or worse.

[Biff Tannen 46,163]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

51 senate votes and reconciliation/filibuster reform.

This is important.  Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING will get done if the filibuster remains.  Yes, there are risks.  Those are risks that must be taken if we are to fix the system.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is important.  Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING will get done if the filibuster remains.  Yes, there are risks.  Those are risks that must be taken if we are to fix the system.

Unfortunately, there are a number of Dem Senators who don't support eliminating the filibuster, plus one independant who happens to be running for president as a Democrat, so we need a lot more than 51.

[Hank Scorpio 17,924]

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So the argument is that answering "yes" to a middle class tax hike (while still explaining why the overall costs would go down) would give Rs talking points to attack her. 

But dodging the question has ALREADY given Rs talking points to attack her. 

If both are a no-win situation, then just tell the truth and directly answer the question. It's clearly the best option. 

 

 

 

Did you fall on your head or something?

[Hank Kingsley 21,778]

Maybe.

 

 

[bad_teammate 13,517]

10 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Unfortunately, there are a number of Dem Senators who don't support eliminating the filibuster, plus one independant who happens to be running for president as a Democrat, so we need a lot more than 51.

Reforming the filibuster to a standing-and-talking thing allows someone to make a scene of themselves for 15 hours and then the vote goes by simple 51 majority once they stop talking. No need to completely eliminate it if you just make sure it's a minor inconvenience that doesn't actually impede democracy in the end.

I see the value in keeping a standing filibuster.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Bernie supports reducing the filibuster to a talking filibuster?  At the last debate, his proposal was using budget reconciliation more often. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,847]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

fixed

Nah, the filibuster is fine. They just need to be real stand up filibusters. The problem is the procedural filibuster where nobody is up talking and no cloture vote is taken. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,847]

55 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Reforming the filibuster to a standing-and-talking thing allows someone to make a scene of themselves for 15 hours and then the vote goes by simple 51 majority once they stop talking. No need to completely eliminate it if you just make sure it's a minor inconvenience that doesn't actually impede democracy in the end.

I see the value in keeping a standing filibuster.

word

[bad_teammate 13,517]

32 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Bernie supports reducing the filibuster to a talking filibuster? 

Yep.

Here he is in December 2012.

 

Quote

At the last debate, his proposal was using budget reconciliation more often. 

Yes, that's an option on the table.

Edited September 19, 2019 by bad_teammate

[DixonHur 11,959]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Reforming the filibuster to a standing-and-talking thing allows someone to make a scene of themselves for 15 hours and then the vote goes by simple 51 majority once they stop talking. No need to completely eliminate it if you just make sure it's a minor inconvenience that doesn't actually impede democracy in the end.

I see the value in keeping a standing filibuster.

I do so like green eggs and ham. Thank you. Thank you, Sam-I-am

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

I should have known better than to bother asking, much less waste my time watching the video.  Not only is 2012 a political lifetime ago, nothing in that video goes beyond mere generalities concerning the right of the minority to speak and the right of the majority to legislate.   Bernie was directly asked at the last debate whether he supported eliminating the filibuster, and he said no, and then offered up budget reconciliation as a way to proceed.  Whether or not he does truly support stripping the filibuster down to a 15 hour speech too, he sure missed a golden opportunity to say so, and is at best ambivalent.   Back on ignore you go. 

[Dbeasy 15,593]

When Warren wins the nomination who is her most likely running mate?

[bad_teammate 13,517]

The level of hurt feelings Mojo is constantly on is unhealthy. Bernie in 2012 is on video talking about the need for filibuster reform. Here is him again in 2013 talking more specifically about the need for the talking filibuster/41 votes reform and decrying as toothless other "reforms" that wouldn't do anything. (It's exactly the same position he had in 2012 and has today, because... that's how Bernie is.)

But Mojo isn't interested in learning about any of this. His feelings are hurt because Bernie is right and has been right for years and he's tired of hearing about it.

#sad

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

(Note: if Elizabeth Warren calls you, it will come up as “Unknown”)

[pyrohornIII 4,846]

19 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

When Warren wins the nomination who is her most likely running mate?

Beto.   I think he would deliver on what youth vote she is missing.  Also he's a good orator and a firebrand people can rally around.  Only thing is would that team appear too radical?  But if there ever was a time to push in a progressive team,  now would  be it.   A fear though would be the need to keep the house and senate more conservative (R) to keep them in check.

[Dbeasy 15,593]

Would warren make Bernie her running mate and would Bernie accept it?

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,871]

9 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

Only thing is would that team appear too radical?

I think gravitas and traditionalism would be the features they would look for to help the appeal to the boring middle. 

[Hank Kingsley 21,778]

3 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Would warren make Bernie her running mate and would Bernie accept it?

No and no.

IMO. 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Bernie talk not going away

[Biff Tannen 46,163]

Beto is also the perfect running mate because he is not currently in public office, so the Ds wouldn't be giving up a Senate seat or anything for him to be VP.

[Dbeasy 15,593]

Beto still comes across as a bit junior, and his national name recognition still isn’t great. Of course many VP’s aren’t well. known before being selected. I’m still thinking Harris or Booker gets it. They complement her in many ways.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Another Billionaire hedge fund manager clutching his pearls over Elizabeth Warren 

[DixonHur 11,959]

15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Another Billionaire hedge fund manager clutching his pearls over Elizabeth Warren 

Exactly, I love all the headlines talking about how much money Warren's wealth tax would cost billionaires.  I saw one talking about Bezos (calculated using pre-divorce numbers) would lose $73+ billion, meaning he would have been down to $87 billion...time to start clipping coupons!  

[6th Street 6,689]

Found pic of Warren with her son 

[David Dennison 19,536]

4 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

Would warren make Bernie her running mate and would Bernie accept it?

No.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[BradInATX 9,208]

6 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

When Warren wins the nomination who is her most likely running mate?

Is there anyone decent who is young, not white, and not from New England or a West Coast liberal state? Abrams? Castro (hope not, he sucks so bad)? Someone not in the race? Beto, Pete, and Klobuchar all fit two of the three, but any of those are some lilly white ass tickets. Harris fits two of the three as well, and doesn't jeopardize a senate seat.

Sherrod Brown is a slam dunk but I don't know if he or the DNC wants that.

Edited September 20, 2019 by BradInATX

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Maurice is a bad ass advocate.

Here event tonight.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[berlinerbaer 692]

8 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

When Warren wins the nomination who is her most likely running mate?

Booker.

That's a ticket that checks every single box.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

34 minutes ago, berlinerbaer said:

Booker.

That's a ticket that checks every single box.

Except regional.  Unless you consider Liz to be an Oklahoman. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Good stuff. 

[bad_teammate 13,517]

sorry for doxxing you, Hugo

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Please take my picture down

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Liz went on a bit of a rant this afternoon about Wells Fargo.  

 

[Biff Tannen 46,163]

I really don't know if there's anything that could get me to vote for anyone else at this point.  She just dunks on everyone, all the time.

[bad_teammate 13,517]

I do not mean this as a slight in any way, but Elizabeth Warren as Fed Chair or Treasury Secretary would absolutely fucking own.

[horncyclist 1,391]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

I do not mean this as a slight in any way, but Elizabeth Warren as Fed Chair or Treasury Secretary would absolutely fucking own.

So will President Warren's Fed Chair appointee, Treasury Secretary, CFPB head, FTC chair, SEC Chair, FCC Chair, etc, etc.

 

[berlinerbaer 692]

1 hour ago, horncyclist said:

So will President Warren's Fed Chair appointee, Treasury Secretary, CFPB head, FTC chair, SEC Chair, FCC Chair, etc, etc.

 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Those are some super cute shoes.

~Off to Twitter to find out where to find them as I’m sure her fans sourced them within 20 minutes~

[horncyclist 1,391]

This is really blowing up on Twitter. As usual, she's right. Nov 2020 can't get here soon enough.

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1175192494734266369?s=19

Edited September 21, 2019 by horncyclist
Any idea why tweet isn't imbedding?

[ChiTownDoc 21,345]

14 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I really don't know if there's anything that could get me to vote for anyone else at this point.  She just dunks on everyone, all the time.

She’s really good.  She will have Trump eating shit debate after debate if the media will ease up on their hard on for demented grandpa II.